S4D - What to do about runs

[Guest]

So OK, nobody likes my secondary prog method of handling runs. Everyone is completely ignoring that solution. I'm guessing that either nobody understands it or you are concerned about the possibility of high bets. Whichever.

Fine, here is a better solution that does not involve high bets:

In fact you could stick with a 1,2 or a 112 or simply flat bet at 1 since our goal is only +5.

So O.K. we know that mathematically, the lowest spread MUST have the most Opposites. So we know that betting Opposites against the lowest spread is high value bets (better than 50/50 odds) I think that is a given whether you grasp the math supporting it or not. If not, just take our word for it. - The lower a spread is the more Opposites it must contain. It is Opposites that create a low spread. I'm talking a spread of 6 or less.

But, here is another absolute mathematical fact:

Just as the lowest spread must contain the most Opposites, The highest count must contain rhe most Repeats. It is Repeats that created the high count.

For instance: What does a count of + or - 8 actually mean? Think about it. It means that count had 8 more Repeats than Opposites thus far - the most Repeats of all 4 counts.

It is just as good an indicator as the low count. It is telling us what to bet.

So, why the hell are we fighting runs??? Let's just ignore them altogether.

So OK, we are thinking that either 2 or 3 losing bets is a signal to go OTR.

It is a signal all right. BUT betting a Repeat on the lowest count is betting AGAINST the odds. It is less than a 50/50 bet.

So why are we arguing about how much to bet on a bet with less than 50/50 odds?

Look, The 4 counts tell us exactly which bets have the best odds.

So why are we making bets against the odds? - Especially after going to the trouble of keeping all 4 counts. Why did we bother doing all that just to ignore that information right when we need it the most?

Here is a better and far more practical solution that ALWAYS bets WITH the odds:

So OK, there we are betting Opposites against the low count and we lose 2 bets. That is inevitable.

Fine, thats our signal to bet Repeats on the highest count.

And, when we eventually inevitably lose 2 bets on Repeats, that is our signal to go back to betting Opposites on the low spread.

This way we are always betting WITH the odds.

Although I'm no fan of flat betting, this method creates the best use of flat betting so I think we should try that first.

To achieve our goal of +5 all we need do is win 5 more bets than we lose.

And if we are always betting WITH the odds, it is just a question of time.

But also any method that wins flat betting wins more with a progression.

Therefore, once we prove this is working, we might look at U1D2 - and we might not. We might just find that we can average +5 merely flat betting at 1.

How's that for a solution???

[Guest]

Think about it this way:

When we lose 2 bets betting Opposites against the lowest spread that usually means the higest count is going higher.

Likewise, when we lose 2 bets betting Repeats on the highest count that usually means the lowest spread is favoring Opposites.

That is pure math. Shouldn't we be paying attention to these clues?

[Quizzical1]

Great idea Ellis! I'll give it a try - hopefully others will too. We can compare notes...

Here it is. What am I doing wrong?

test shoe 3-19-14.pdf

[Guest]

BTW, I passed this by John B. for seceral hours yesterday. He is in FULL agreement with me and quite excited about it. He listed these observations:

We are ALWAYS betting WITH the odds.

We don't care if the cards are regular or preshuffled.

We don't require table selection.

Anybody can learn to do this.

Everybody can afford to flat bet.

Look at it this way:

We are always betting our Opposites on the count MOST favorable to Opposites.

We are always betting Repeats on the count MOST favorable to repeats.

The question is: can we get to +5 more often than we get to -5 ???

My answer is this:

Since we are ALWAYS betting WITH the odds, +5 is just a question of time. It might take 10 bets and it might take a hundred but eventually we can always get to +5 betting WITH the odds.

We might even try doing both at the same time.The beauty of this is when you are losing 2 bets on one count, you are usually winning the same 2 bets on the other count. But you can just as easily win BOTH bets. Again, just a question of time.

So could we get to +5 faster betting both?

I have no idea.

THAT is what we need to find out.

Would it be more expensive to bet both ends at the same time?

Hmm. I'm thinking it might be less expensive. About half the time both ends would be telling you to bet opposite sides so you would have no bet.

But when both ends say to make the same bet, you are betting a total of 2 with maximum odds.

So you never get a 1 bet. You are flat betting at 2 units.

All you need do is win 3 more bets that you lose. You are at +6. Mission accomplished!

[Quizzical1]

Ellis,

I agree totally. This could be a tremendous leap forward if it works out.

Please critique my shoe I posted when you have a chance. What am I doing wrong?

[Jim Files]

Ellis,

I agree totally. This could be a tremendous leap forward if it works out.

Please critique my shoe I posted when you have a chance. What am I doing wrong?

Here is an attempt to post Quizzical1's shoe as a jpg so we can view it in the thread:

Hope this helps. Ellis, it would be great if you could comment on this shoe as an example...

Best Regards,

Jim

[Dazza]

Can u please explain the Colums 0-1-2-3

Thanks

[walterto]

Hi Dazza,

This post explains the numbers in the Column

http://www.beatthecasino.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7923&p=42199#post42199

[Quizzical1]

Here is an attempt to post Quizzical1's shoe as a jpg so we can view it in the thread:

[ATTACH]2825[/ATTACH]

Hope this helps. Ellis, it would be great if you could comment on this shoe as an example...

Best Regards,

Jim

Just to clarify - the notes "Lo-O" etc. on the far right mean I picked the lowest disparity for that row and bet the opposite what just occurred for the next hand.

[Guest]

Sorry guys, my computer crashed yesterday and I'm having to run on half screen. Every time I try to go to full screen it freezes and I half to turn it off at the main switch.

This happened when I hit Keith's link to that Vegas BJ forum. Tried to post on it but immediately got attacked rather viciously by the brain washed card counting guys. Jeez, I can't believe these guys are still pissed after 20 years. They still refuse to believe that card counters can't beat today's BJ game. They throw Don Johnson at me. For Christ sake, Don Johnson, through his own admission, does NOT count cards. That is why he wins. Complete idiots, they are all a bunch of brain washed idiots that can't point to a single card counting winner in the last 20 years.

[jerryczy]

Hi Ellis! Can you explain more about "The highest count must contain the most Repeats"?

E.g we have shoe like P2121212121212, PvB is +8 but I see more Opposites than repeats.

[Chili]

Hi Ellis! Can you explain more about "The highest count must contain the most Repeats"?

E.g we have shoe like P2121212121212, PvB is +8 but I see more Opposites than repeats.

The Highest count is actually OOT with -18, all repeats eg all the same as time before last .

Opposites/repeats only applies to the other three counts if looking at the PvB count you can think of player as an opposite (+) and banker as a repeat (-), so you can see that there was more + than - so you get a high count.

[Plus One]

13 opposites vs 8 repeats s40 eats this all day

[BaccDJ126]

Starting at hand 3 Brendan is correct S40 eats it up to the tune of +12

[kingfisher]

I used OO/TT and was +8 starting at hand 7 and using OTB was -14 with zero winners. Please inform me if I am doing something incorrect.

[Baccarat A]

I used OO/TT and was +8 starting at hand 7 and using OTB was -14 with zero winners. Please inform me if I am doing something incorrect.

Don't know what you are doing wrong, but you are. The OT column counts the OT events. At the start you have a P, so we don't know what that is. It is followed by a player and that is an OT event (a +). That is followed by a B, another OT event and +. Then it chops back to the P for a non OT event and thus a -, and so on. The second P and first B are all OT events while the single B is not. If you start counting at play 2 the OT count is + 8 and if you start at play 3 it is +7. You start the OOTT count at play 4. Play 4 is a P. Count up 3 events (play 1) and there is a P and thus a - count. If the space has a circle the count is - and if it is empty it is a +. The OOTT count is -18--every third space up is occupied.

[kingfisher]

Sorry for the confusion "A" but I played this shoe 3 ways. Betting S40 using P/B my score was +7. Betting OTB my score was -14 and betting OO/TT my score was +7. My final columns totals were P/B (column 1) +8 OR (column 2) +5 OTB (column 3) +6 and OO/TT (column 4) -17. Please inform me if I am correct or not now. Thanks

[Guest]

Hi Ellis! Can you explain more about "The highest count must contain the most Repeats"?

E.g we have shoe like P2121212121212, PvB is +8 but I see more Opposites than repeats.

I meant the highest count must "repeat" itself the most often of all 4 counts.

Perhaps I could have worded it better by saying:

The highest count MUST have the most hits simply betting that count. More hits (higher score) than the other 3 counts.

For instance if O/T is highest at -8 and you therefore started flat betting TB4L at -3, you would already have your +5 units. - See that?

In your scenario, P is at +8. Opposites is at +5.

So, I'm saying you will get the most hits by simply betting P.

If you bet a 1,2 prog on P you score +14

If you bet a 1,2 prog on O you score +11

Both are good but you always score the most by betting the highest count.

The reason I bring this up is because the S4D has TWO sides, the low side and the high side.

But all the discussion thus far is re the low side. The low side can have problems no matter how you bet it. It is easier to make your +5 betting the high side. Hell, you could just do that and virtually always get to +5 sooner or later.

Our goal is only +5 units.

The highest count ALWAYS gets to 5 + or - sooner or later. ALWAYS! - No matter where you start.

If you were merely flat betting it from the beginning, there's your +5, virtually guaranteed.

Virtually guaranteed yet we are not even discussing the high side. Don't you find that strange?

If we are only going to discuss one side, it SHOULD be the high side where +5 is easier to attain.

Now, if you FLAT BET the low side toward 0, runs are of little consequence.

So what I'm trying to get you to do is flat bet BOTH sides at the same time. Isn't that obvious?

Either your 2 bets will cancel out leaving a no bet or they will be in agreement leaving you a 2 bet. Hell, make it 1 unit if you want.

But at 2, all you need to is win 3 more bets than you lose and you are at +6.

I said all this before but I was totally ignored.

Don't you guys get that? TWO SIDES! Hi and Lo.

You are paying all your attention to the hardest side.

What about the easy side??? The Hi side. Call it the NOR side if that is easier to understand.

[Guest]

BUT, nevertheless lets discuss the lo side for a minute. The high side needs no discussion. You simply bet the highest count. No further discussion needed.

But the Lo side is trickier:

If you always bet toward 0 You are guaranteed to always win half your bets.

But likewise you are also guaranteed to lose half your bets.

For instance lets say a count is at 4. That means it went away from 0 4 more times than it went toward 0. See that?

Now to get back to 0 it must go towards 0 4 more times than away from 0.

So if you started betting at 0, no matter what, when it gets back to 0 again you won half your bets.

You would have been better off to start betting at 4. That way when it gets back to 0, you won 4 bets at 3,2,1,0. But from there on every time the count hits 0 you won half your bets but there is no way you can win more than half. Get it?

Therefore at a count of 4 + or - we are better off betting toward 0.

But anywhere within a spread of 4 like +2-2 we are better off betting opposite the last play BECAUSE a tight spread MUST have more opposites than repeats. So we always win more bets betting Opposite in a tight spread - ALWAYS.

In a tight spread toward 0 can only win half the bets so we don't bet toward 0 until the count gets to 4.

So OK, how do we GUARANTEE +5 ???

Here is what I'm thinking: In no particular order:

1. At a low count of 5 or more we stop betting the Lo count altogether. But we continue betting the Hi count.

Why? Because the Lo count has become too risky BUT therefore the highest count has become less risky because a Hi Lo count pushes the highest count even higher. See that?

2. At a low count of 3 or 4 we bet toward 0.

3. At a low count of 2 or less we bet opposites.

This way I think gives us the best of all worlds.

Now my numbers may not be dead on but they are close. We can adjust as needed, IF needed, as we go. Fine tune.

But I think that gives us a hell of a good starting point.

So, you might ask, what about spreads???

We still abide by lowest spread to determine which count to bet on the Lo side.

But we use actual count to determine whether to bet Opposites or toward 0 or not at all on the Lo side. That keeps it clean and simple.

How much do we bet?

Let's try flat betting both sides first. After all we are only shooting for +5. But we can hold 2Hi in reserve.

When do we start betting the high side?

I'm thinking the first count to hit 3 + or -. From there we go with the highest numerical count.

I'm also thinking when a count comes up and ties, we go with the new count.

Why? Because that is the count with the most movement lately. We hit more runs that way.

Terminology:

Recognize that when I say Opposites I mean Opposite that count. I'm not using the term "opposite" in its normal meaning.

For instance lets sat 0/T is at +1 and has the lowest spread. If the last circle was OTB4L, we bet TB4L and vice versa.

Now what about runs?

First, when we flat bet, the runs problem pretty much dissipates.

2nd, toward 0 is often ON the run. Esp saving toward 0 for the higher counts of 3 and 4 we will likely see more runs toward 0 than away from 0.

Third, when the Lo side is betting against a run, the high side is often On that same run, canceling it out.

Lets try it out, see what happens and go from there. We don't yet have every base covered but we are close.

[uneek]

How about when two spreads tie for lowest? Which do we go with?

Also I've noticed during some testing that the lowest spread will become the high count. So I'm thinking we would just disqualify it as the low once it goes to 5 or more or don't bet it until a new high count is established since the low and high will be in conflict

[kachatz1]

I meant the highest count must "repeat" itself the most often of all 4 counts.

Perhaps I could have worded it better by saying:

The highest count MUST have the most hits simply betting that count. More hits (higher score) than the other 3 counts.

For instance if O/T is highest at -8 and you therefore started flat betting TB4L at -3, you would already have your +5 units. - See that?

In your scenario, P is at +8. Opposites is at +5.

So, I'm saying you will get the most hits by simply betting P.

If you bet a 1,2 prog on P you score +14

If you bet a 1,2 prog on O you score +11

Both are good but you always score the most by betting the highest count.

The reason I bring this up is because the S4D has TWO sides, the low side and the high side.

But all the discussion thus far is re the low side. The low side can have problems no matter how you bet it. It is easier to make your +5 betting the high side. Hell, you could just do that and virtually always get to +5 sooner or later.

Our goal is only +5 units.

The highest count ALWAYS gets to 5 + or - sooner or later. ALWAYS! - No matter where you start.

If you were merely flat betting it from the beginning, there's your +5, virtually guaranteed.

Virtually guaranteed yet we are not even discussing the high side. Don't you find that strange?

If we are only going to discuss one side, it SHOULD be the high side where +5 is easier to attain.

Now, if you FLAT BET the low side toward 0, runs are of little consequence.

So what I'm trying to get you to do is flat bet BOTH sides at the same time. Isn't that obvious?

Either your 2 bets will cancel out leaving a no bet or they will be in agreement leaving you a 2 bet. Hell, make it 1 unit if you want.

But at 2, all you need to is win 3 more bets than you lose and you are at +6.

I said all this before but I was totally ignored.

Don't you guys get that? TWO SIDES! Hi and Lo.

You are paying all your attention to the hardest side.

What about the easy side??? The Hi side. Call it the NOR side if that is easier to understand.

That's what I am talking about.

YES, let's NOT forget NOR+, likely the best " system" ever constructed to win @ Baccarat...

Let's " tweak" it, give it a makeover, a boost, whatever we want to call it, and combine it with the best elements of 4D....

Nor+/4D...NOR4....S4dNOR...SNORD......

Whatever the boss wants to call it, it'll get you 5+units, 7 -out-of-10 shoes....you understand when to go Low, when to go Hi

Throw in a twist for certain " trigger points" , or any kind of nominal progression TheGoodDoctor prescribes, and you'll likely be in the 10+ unit range.

Welcome to the winners circle...

[ztomsk]

When do we start betting the high side?

I'm thinking the first count to hit 3 + or -. From there we go with the highest numerical count.

Very interesting concept - will definately try it. I am confused about when to bet the high side. My understanding was only to bet high when the count was 5 + or -? And I thought a count of 3 was a low side bet towards 0?

[Rich333]

I like it Ellis. Im concerned about the amount of time in determining the lo bet and still getting a bet down. The high side seems fast enough. Practice practice practice

[uneek]

Very interesting concept - will definately try it. I am confused about when to bet the high side. My understanding was only to bet high when the count was 5 + or -? And I thought a count of 3 was a low side bet towards 0?

I believe it means that when starting a shoe when the 1st count hits a +/-3 then you may start betting on the high side. I would think for starting on the low we would at least wait till hand 7 and then we go by the lowest spread for the low. If the low spread you're betting on is between +/- 2 then you bet opposite the last decision. If the low spread is +/- 3 or 4 then you bet that it'll go down toward 0. I hope this makes sense.

[Guest]

I believe it means that when starting a shoe when the 1st count hits a +/-3 then you may start betting on the high side. I would think for starting on the low we would at least wait till hand 7 and then we go by the lowest spread for the low. If the low spread you're betting on is between +/- 2 then you bet opposite the last decision. If the low spread is +/- 3 or 4 then you bet that it'll go down toward 0. I hope this makes sense.

Right, 3 might be jumping the gun slightly. We'll see. But for high side betting, you can't wait until the count has already gone high. The idea is to catch it on the way up. The first count to break out of jail will likely end up being the highest count.