SAP/Reverse SAP - Ellis

[Guest]

First, a couple abbreviations to save time

Instead of writing out Reverse Sap every time, I'll just say RSAP

And instead of writing out regular cards, I'll call them C cards and C casinos. C standing for Casino shuffled from 8 regular decks.

Likewise, for Factory preshuffled, I'll call them F cards and F casinos.

We are starting with some knowns that we can take advantage of:

We KNOW that both card types, both C and F, will eventually hit their normal frequencies of occurrence.

But C cards take MANY shoes to hit their NORMAL frequencies of Occurrence - NFOO.

Individual C shoes strongly tend to work AWAY from NFOO - hence NOR. We know this from tens of thousands of C shoes.

Individual F shoes, at least in Vegas, Tunica and Macau tend to close in on their NFOO every shoe.

So THAT is what vwe bet on in such shoes.

In both cases we can not use the word "always" because ha, there are always exceptions - fortunately, not many.

But a good example of an exception was my second shoe of the Vegas Crawl.

I forget which casino it was but I'll never forget the shoe. It had NO 2's in the entire shoe. It was, therefore, 100% biased toward TB4L.

MDB+ will lose every bet and hit its stop loss immediately in such a shoe. And, it did.

In fact in such a shoe TB4L will win EVERY 3 bet progression at either the 1 or the 2 or the 3. It CAN'T lose AND it's betting every hand!

THEY SAW US COMING! No doubt whatsoever!

I learned 2 lessons that shoe: Ha, the hard way.

1.) NEVER decide what you are going to play before you see the shoe. Let the shoe make all the decisions for you.

That fateful shoe was TB4L right from the start but I had promised to play MDB+. How stupid could I get?

2.) Never announce on the forum or anywhere else Where you are going to play and What you are going to play.

That is suicidal! Casinos read our forum too. It's somebody's job there. Casinos have told me that themselves.

So some of you are thinking, Ellis aren't you getting a little carried away.

No, not at all. Just look at the odds of having a shoe with no 2s right off the bat.

There is an average of 18 potential 2s in a shoe. Every potential 2 went to 3+. 18 freaking times in a row.

The odds are exactly the same as flipping 18 heads in a row. And NO one has EVER seen THAT happen.

THAT shoe was rigged and I fell fot it. No wonder they didn't offer us a cut! I should have realized.

I've played rigged cards before - both BJ and Bac. I should have realized.

But anyway here are the tells we are woking with.

C cards: SAP counts strongly tend to disperse further and further throughout the shoe.

So we bet the MC (Most Common) (the highest count) will go higher. We bet ON the MC.

We also bet the lowest count, the LC (Least Common) will stay the lowest count. We bet AGAINST the LC.

We are betting AGAINST random.

F cards = RSAP. We bet the exact opposite - AGAINST the MC and on the LC. We are betting ON random.

Now, what exactly do we mean by "ON" and "AGAINST".

Suppose 1's are LC playing C cards. we bet "against" 1's. This means that we bet ALL Opposites (potential 1's) will go to 2.

So after every opposite, we bet repeat when 1's are LC in a C card casino.

Now, if we lose that bet 2 or 3 times, it is very likely that 1's are no longer LC so we STOP making that bet.

THAT is what we mean by Self Adjusting Progression (SAP). Andrea's term BTW.

SAP stops us from making wrong bets while identifying the right bets. We change with the shoe. SAP makes it so.

SAP makes it hard to lose because in a bad shoe (a random shoe) SAP won't give us any bets - or very few.

BUT in a random shoe or a shoe favoring random, where everything keeps hitting its NFOO, RSAP excells.

In general,

C shoes are SAP

F shoes are RSAP

Exceptions are usually few and far between but they can and do occur on occassion.

That is why we must always stay alert to SAP count dispersement.

COUNT short cuts:

Norm, one of our most successful players who guys like to copy, always kept a SAP count, an OR count (Oppssites Vs Repeats) and an OT count (OTB4L vs TB4L).

You can do that if you want but all you really need is the SAP count because it already tells you if OR is + or - and about how much.

See, 1's are the only thing that can cause the OR count to go +!

So whenever 1's are highest or 2nd highest you MUST have a + OR count. See that?

Likewise when 1's are lowest or 2nd lowest you MUST have a - OR count.

How + and how - depends on how Hi or how Lo 1's are.

So we already have the OR count covered.

Likewise, SAP also covers the OT count.

High 2s means a + OT count. Low 2's, ha or no 2s means a - OT count. Done deal.

The reason I tell you this is that I'm a firm believer, from experience, that

the less busy you are and the less busy your score card is, the fewer mistakes you will make.

and the less busy you are, the more relaxed you are which not only helps prevent mistakes but also gives you more staying power.

A word about "weighting" our SAP counts. (we mulyiply 1's by 1, 2s by 2, 3s by 4, 4s by 8 and 5+ by 8).

I mention this because a group of our previous SAP players claimed that weighting isn't necessary!

There is no other way to say it - these guys were dead wrong.

Without weighting, your SAP counts are meaningless because 1's will always be MC and 4+ will always be LC. - Useless.

You MUST know what each event is doing RELATIVE to it's NFOO. THAT is what makes SAP tic.

It's hard to explain why but anyone with a Math background will tell you - weighting is EVERYTHING!

Even our competitors agree with that. They copied our weighting multipliers exactly. THEY understood.

And so did our most successful SAP players here, like Norm and Andrea and many others.

We were averaging 11 units a shoe before the casinos came up with F cards.

We were averaging 6 after the casinos came up with F cards.

And that was betting 2Hi and before the concept of RSAP was born.

So, ok, enough for now.

Hopefully tomorrow I'll show you the best way to set up your score card for SAP and how to conduct a SAP count.

BTW, whether SAP or RSAP, your SAP count is the same.

You'll soon see that SAP counts care nothing to be afraid of. ANYBODY can do it right once you see it done.

A note to way2fast: John, I'm wondering about keeping an independent SAP count of 4s rather than 4+.

I'm concerned for 2 reasons:

1.) Like MDB+, the longer an event is the less reliable it is.

2.) If we are going to bet a prog, we need time to complete it before the shoe ends???

Do you agree?

A note to Andrea: When Vegas went to preshuffled cards we should have known to react by going to RSAP.

I know what you're thinking. You're thinking NOW you tell me!

Edited April 23, 2015 by Guest

[Ntrl9]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't this a public thread on the forum that you are posting on?

[beretta28]

18 heads in a row, flipping a coin,is very rare but not impossible.

I saw 22 Blacks in a row at roulette

In other words it's an acceptable number(x time standard deviation) from a statistic point of view.

But you were right to give up.Why not to switch to TB4L,according to what you teach to your students?

Just to come back to NOR:

-stop loss should be the same that stop win in every strategy (you are not so different,so it's OK)

-why dot you n's flat bet if your bet selection is so strong?

[donald]

Mathematically, if you can not win flat betting, no progression will make it a winner. In other words, if you are a loser flat betting, no progression will make it a winner.

[ECD]

If you bet an aggressive enough progression you could win when flat betting doesn't. I was up 27 units a week ago in Parx PA. I played the shoe back and was -1 flat betting. I understand how flat betting is the more sensible/conservative way of betting but I just can't get out of my head betting, winning and still being down. I guess that is what separates me from the elite.

Mathematically, if you can not win flat betting, no progression will make it a winner. In other words, if you are a loser flat betting, no progression will make it a winner.

[beretta28]

What junior member DONALD wrote is correct.

If you don't win flat bet,you won't win with a progression.

It's not his or my opinion,it's a mathematical fact.

At 18 years old,students learn it….

Progression speed up wins(illusion) but also losses,due to max bet allowed at the tables.

[wolfat]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't this a public thread on the forum that you are posting on?

...agree with that.

I find the idea of RSAP very ineteresting. The main problem to ponder is when use standard SAP and when RSAP.

...obviously when the events are tied RSAP is called to bet, but, IMO, we should trigger it a bit before that, there is room to ponder this aspect!

[brad01]

I think this was supposed to have been on U2Hi forum not public.

There are guys who flat bet or play a 1,2 progression

Oz flat bets and only bets as high as 2 sometimes

NOR bet selection is strong

The thing is if your bet selection is strong then you can do ok flat betting but you can always do better with a mild progression so why would you flat bet when you can win more units?

The difference is whether people use a progression to do better with their strong bet selection or they use it to get themselves out of trouble with a poor bet selection

First scenario always wins with a progression, second always loses in the long run

This whole forum is really not about progressions but about picking biases, table selection and analysis, and bet selction

Progressions are a small part of it and nobody is encouraged to bet a progression they aren't comfortable with.

Many people flat bet or bet a 1,2 progression.

[Fedda]

What junior member DONALD wrote is correct.

If you don't win flat bet,you won't win with a progression.

It's not his or my opinion,it's a mathematical fact.

At 18 years old,students learn it….

Progression speed up wins(illusion) but also losses,due to max bet allowed at the tables.

It's a mathematical fact that it's all about the frequencies of the wins and losses! Let's say you're winning and losing every other bet like this..

(LWLWLLW) This is -1 flatbetting. So you are saying that no progression would make this event a winner?!

Please remove this thread Ellis to get rid of this nonsense!

[beretta28]

Your lack of basic statistic and mathematical knowledge is unbelievable.

When the discussion is about "progressions" few simple elements of math and statistic are necessary:it's not your case.

Your example about LWLWLLW is a joke,it's ridiculous.What about LLLLLWLLLWLLLLL?Compare flat bet and progression!

May I ask your education?

In addition I think that Ellis,that is a big expert agrees with me.

That's why his very clever approach is "play conservative,max 1-4 units bet",because he knows perfectly that progressions are too risky even with a strong bet selection.

I'm afraid I'm wasting time

These concepts are incomprehensible for you

[Guest]

Well, let's take a practical example to demontrate your point.

Suppose you are playing MDB+ with its normal 124 progression.

Suppose you get 10 initial bet signals in that shoe - quite normal.

Suppose you lose all 10 at the 1 bet stage, (quite normal),

win 8 at the 2 bet stage (quite normal)

and win 2 at the 4 bet stage again, all quite normal

So OK you bet a total of 22 times - 10 1 bets, 10 2 bets and and 2 4 bets.

Your score is +10 even though you only won 10 bets out of 22.

Had you been flat betting at 1 the whole time, your score would be -2.

Therefore, progressive betting gained you 12 units vs flat betting in that example.

Flat betting is a GREAT idea if you intend to lose every bet.

But the game odds dictate that you will win HALF your bets long term.

And you'll wish you had been betting a progression.

The trick is to win MORE than half your bets.

MDB+ does exactly that. Our overall hit rate is very close to 70% each bet and 95% progression hit rate.

You'll be glad you were betting a prog.

But flat betting is best if you possess no playing skills.

But if you possess no playing skills, why are you at a casino in the first place???

[beretta28]

Your explanation is clear and it kills all my theories about Casino games.

Since 40 years I thought that in a game having a negative EV,the best way to play was "the bold strategy",to try to get your goal in the fewest number of bets.

At the opposite in a game with a positive EV(your system), a lot of professors taught me that the best way was flat bet at the minimum of the table.

The time will work for you and,very important issue, you won't problem with the "VARIANCE",that kills all systems and progressions.

But because I respect your skills and experience I put your opinion at the same level of professors I quoted above.

[Fedda]

Your lack of basic statistic and mathematical knowledge is unbelievable.

When the discussion is about "progressions" few simple elements of math and statistic are necessary:it's not your case.

Your example about LWLWLLW is a joke,it's ridiculous.What about LLLLLWLLLWLLLLL?Compare flat bet and progression!

May I ask your education?

In addition I think that Ellis,that is a big expert agrees with me.

That's why his very clever approach is "play conservative,max 1-4 units bet",because he knows perfectly that progressions are too risky even with a strong bet selection.

I'm afraid I'm wasting time

These concepts are incomprehensible for you

Why is my example of LWLWLLW a joke? This is a 50/50 game, nothing strange about that.

I can see now by your example why you choose to flatbet, I would have been far away from that table after first 3 losses and so should you.

Thanks for keeping the casinos alive!

[ECD]

It's a mathematical fact that it's all about the frequencies of the wins and losses! Let's say you're winning and losing every other bet like this..

(LWLWLLW) This is -1 flatbetting. So you are saying that no progression would make this event a winner?!

Please remove this thread Ellis to get rid of this nonsense!

You have to be careful about generalisations because what is right for one is not always right for another (especially with larger units).

Take as an example the 1 2 4 progression...It is fine when you are fart arsing around with $20 units (I'm not having a dig at anybody because I started with $2 units)...but ask yourself the question..."How many BTC members do you think would be making a 4 unit bet of $20K with a potential progression loss of $35K to win 1 unit ($5K)?"

How large would your bank have to be to risk $35K? ...remembering that as sure as God made little green apples...at some point you are going to lose 2 or more successive progressions albeit in different shoes. I'm guessing at a minimum ...2 million$

Trust me...mathematics and all the supporting statistics in the universe won't mean Jack Shit when it comes to making a $20K bet...because you can damn well guarantee that the way the Baccarat Gods like to screw with us...your first $20K bet will be a loser, which won't do a lot for your confidence.

My go to method is flat betting all the different Bias's as taught here on BTC and Netbetting where appropriate with smaller units and using the 1 2 loop.

My hit rate is pretty high and with an exit strategy of +4 and a STOP LOSS of -4...it meant that I could start using $5K units once I hit $200K.

I use the formulae where I will risk 10% of my bank with each shoe ie: $200k divided by 10 divided by 4 units = $5K. It's not as scary as it sounds because as Norm reminded me time and time again...if you are operating on a percentage risk with your Bank...then you can still lower your unit size if you hit a string of losses. For those even more conservative than me...use a 5% of total Bank risk (which TBH is exactly how I started)...but even then, a Bank of $400K will have you betting $5K units.

My winning shoe average with Flatbetting only is just under 3 units...but my STOP LOSS averages under 2 units which means that I only have to win 50% of my shoes to be in front. I won't say what my winning ratio is but it is far in excess of that and anybody here on BTC( with half a brain) who puts in the hard yards and uses all the info available can be a winner.

BTW: Although my Bank is well over $200K...I seriously doubt that I will ever progress beyond $5K units...I don't feel the need and I'm not sure old Oz's heart could take it...LOL

Also...I have gone over my past results and certainly, I would be in front if I used a progression...but it becomes a mute point because I can't be arsed calculating how quickly I would have raised my unit size given that the potential loss of a progression is higher.

[Fedda]

Oz, I understand what you are saying and you're right, It's individual.

I think the most successfull players here have made a tweak here and there from the ground concept to fit it a personal system.

I was just reacting to some of the junior-members writing about the mathematical FACT that no progression could turn a losing shoe flatbetting into a winner. Maybe I was in a bad mood but some should not be so sure about things they know nothing about.

[ECD]

Oz, I understand what you are saying and you're right, It's individual.

I think the most successfull players here have made a tweak here and there from the ground concept to fit it a personal system.

I was just reacting to some of the junior-members writing about the mathematical FACT that no progression could turn a losing shoe flatbetting into a winner. Maybe I was in a bad mood but some should not be so sure about things they know nothing about.

You think that you were in a bad mood?...You should have a gander at my "not so subtle" reply to Packfool. LOL

[brad01]

Not sure if this will be moved to U2Hi forum or not but have a question on SAP counts for discussion:

Does anyone see point of paying attention to SAP counts on particular sides?

A general SAP count can be wrong if you apply it equally to both B or P and 1 is trending different to the other consistently

Then in that case your SAP count will only work 1 side but arguably then you are looking at SS trend so you should play that rather than general SAP?

I just found I noticed this can happen and wondered what others thought?

[ECD]

Kudos to you and your play Mr. Oz. I think that the higher you go in your unit size the easier it gets to walk away with 1 or 2 units. I think the most important thing is to walk away with 3 or 4 units. I think walking away with the 3-4 units limits the times that you will lose. Everyone knows that the longer you stay in the casinos the more you fall in to their traps.

You have to be careful about generalisations because what is right for one is not always right for another (especially with larger units).

Take as an example the 1 2 4 progression...It is fine when you are fart arsing around with $20 units (I'm not having a dig at anybody because I started with $2 units)...but ask yourself the question..."How many BTC members do you think would be making a 4 unit bet of $20K with a potential progression loss of $35K to win 1 unit ($5K)?"

How large would your bank have to be to risk $35K? ...remembering that as sure as God made little green apples...at some point you are going to lose 2 or more successive progressions albeit in different shoes. I'm guessing at a minimum ...2 million$

Trust me...mathematics and all the supporting statistics in the universe won't mean Jack Shit when it comes to making a $20K bet...because you can damn well guarantee that the way the Baccarat Gods like to screw with us...your first $20K bet will be a loser, which won't do a lot for your confidence.

My go to method is flat betting all the different Bias's as taught here on BTC and Netbetting where appropriate with smaller units and using the 1 2 loop.

My hit rate is pretty high and with an exit strategy of +4 and a STOP LOSS of -4...it meant that I could start using $5K units once I hit $200K.

I use the formulae where I will risk 10% of my bank with each shoe ie: $200k divided by 10 divided by 4 units = $5K. It's not as scary as it sounds because as Norm reminded me time and time again...if you are operating on a percentage risk with your Bank...then you can still lower your unit size if you hit a string of losses. For those even more conservative than me...use a 5% of total Bank risk (which TBH is exactly how I started)...but even then, a Bank of $400K will have you betting $5K units.

My winning shoe average with Flatbetting only is just under 3 units...but my STOP LOSS averages under 2 units which means that I only have to win 50% of my shoes to be in front. I won't say what my winning ratio is but it is far in excess of that and anybody here on BTC( with half a brain) who puts in the hard yards and uses all the info available can be a winner.

BTW: Although my Bank is well over $200K...I seriously doubt that I will ever progress beyond $5K units...I don't feel the need and I'm not sure old Oz's heart could take it...LOL

Also...I have gone over my past results and certainly, I would be in front if I used a progression...but it becomes a mute point because I can't be arsed calculating how quickly I would have raised my unit size given that the potential loss of a progression is higher.

[MasterP]

Hi Ellis,

Thanks for the earlier explanation of SAP and Reverse SAP. What I was wondering though is does MDB+ override the SAP count when it comes to making specific bets at a specific time in a shoe?

Also, another question, is there a way of using the difference in SAP counts between neighboring events to see when a shoe might change?

Edited April 25, 2015 by MasterP

[ECD]

Hi Ellis,

Thanks for the earlier explanation of SAP and Reverse SAP. What I was wondering though is does MDB+ override the SAP count when it comes to making specific bets at a specific time in a shoe?

Also, another question, is there a way of using the difference in SAP counts between neighboring events to see when a shoe might change?

Possibly the wrong forum to be asking that specific a question...

[MasterP]

Hi Oz,

Just wondering which forum or area works for these types of questions? I would definitely like discussing this more.

Point me in the right direction as I have been looking at this for a while now.

Or should I start a new thread on this subject in a private forum area.

Edited April 26, 2015 by MasterP

[brad01]

Hi MasterP i believe this discussion us the first of many lessons by ellis on the u2hi forum. I dont know putting this on public forum was a mistake or maybe to give guests and juniors a chance to see what they can get for their $$. We have one of arguably the most succesful players on here whos done this for real. What more could anyone ask for? To answer ur question mdb+ should not conflict with sap. It is an example of perfect reverse sap. Im not sure about other question. I dont really understand it. Sap can show you when shoe is changing by events moving from lc to mc and vice versa. Thats my take. I think this should be moved to u2hi forum and continue there.

[Bobby]

Ellis, you mentioned you were going to post a score card for SAP/RSAP.

[Guest]

18 heads in a row, flipping a coin,is very rare but not impossible.

I saw 22 Blacks in a row at roulette

In other words it's an acceptable number(x time standard deviation) from a statistic point of view.

But you were right to give up.Why not to switch to TB4L,according to what you teach to your students?

Just to come back to NOR:

-stop loss should be the same that stop win in every strategy (you are not so different,so it's OK)

-why dot you n's flat bet if your bet selection is so strong?

Correct beretta, but it's a question of frequency. Normal 18iars is one in 8000 shoes or 1 in 600,000 plays. And that's not counting the fact that an 18iar can't start in the last 17 plays!

So, when you are seeing 20iars or more on a daily basis vs their random frequency of occurrence of 1 every 32000 shoes,

You KNOW for an absolute fact that the game is rigged.

So I stand by my statement that no one has actually ever seen 18 heads in a row simply because no one has ever stood around watching 600,000 coin flips - at least no one in their right mind.

[Guest]

Ellis, you mentioned you were going to post a score card for SAP/RSAP.

Correct Bobby but certainly not here on the publc forum. I'll to that in the private U2Hi forum.

I just want the general public to understand that there is a mathematical way to get your bet hit rate above 50% through skill.

Assumming a player bets about equally often on Bank and Player his flip a coin hit rate is 50% (bet win rate is 50%).

I don't think anyone argues that point.

But, just like in BJ card counting, there is a mathematical way in baccarat to identify which bets have a greater hit rate than 50 %.

In BJ we must bet every hand in most casinos. So the whole idea of card counting is to bet more on the advantage hands than on the disadvantage hands and glean out a profit. This requires about a 10 to 1 bet ratio. Even then, top card counters play to a 0.5% PA. Hell, we tip more than that.

Look! In BJ card counting you are looking for high tens in the remaining cards to be dealt. But even if you have a GREAT count like maybe +15, that is no guarantee you are going to win the hand. The dealer is just as likely to get dealt 2 tens as you are in a high count. Ha, maybe even more likely. Plus, whenever you are dealt a stiff hand, your chances of breaking are even greater in a high ten count. Plus, you only get a positive tens count less than half the time. You have a negative tens count just as often as a positive tens count. And you must either bet anyway or get out. Those are just some of vthe reasons BJ card counting has not produced a single bottom line winner in the last 25 years. Casinos introduced the cut off card to thwart card counters. And it is VERY effective. About the time you get a bettable count, the shoe is over.

But fortunately in Bac, according to the universal rules of Baccarat, unlike BJ, we can pick and choose our bets. So if we know which bets have a mathematical advantage in the shoe at hand, we are allowed to make ONLY those bets. And unlike BJ, this can be extremely profitable in Bac.

Normally, when we are speaking in terms of advantage betting, just like in BJ card counting, we are speaking of a very small advantage like 51 to maybe as high as 55%. Certainly not 70%! Yet that is what MDB+ is generating right now in Las Vegas. Not only a 70% bet hit rate but even more importantly a 95% 3 bet progression hit rate. This is totally unheard of in the annals of gambling. Yet there it is.

For instance, using similar mathematics, our hit rate with MDB+ is a whopping 70%. Everybody on the MDB private forum knows that after hundreds of actual live casino shoes. Far more shoes than needed to prove our numbers.

And don't give me that crap about needing tens of thousands of shoe to prove anything in Baccarat. Totally untrue.

Yes, you need thousands of shoes to prove that a break even system like TB4L is, in fact, break even. And then you owe commission

But you don't need thousands of shoes to prove a 70% bet hit rate. Every bet you make proves it further.

Hell, we have plenty of shoes where we won every bet we made at the 1 bet level. THAT is a 100% bet hit rate in that shoe!

This is because we are only betting the very highest advantage bets and only making about 8 to 15 bets in a shoe. Some shoes we make no bets at all because none had an advantage.

So, if we don't bet a shoe at all, did we just waste an hour?

No, check the math.

If the shoe had no advantage bets, chances are everyone who did bet it lost. And they owe commission on top of those loses.

Meanwhile, WE didn't lose anything and we owe NO commission.

So I ask you: Who made out better???

So OK yes, I discussed a little of the theory of SAP/RSAP on the public forum.

How else does a member of the general public know if he wants to invest in learning this proven approach???

I have to tell you a little about it - just enough to get you in trouble.

But, on the private forum I'll teach you exactly how to play it to your advantage. Big difference.

Just a couple more things before I leave the public forum.

Negative expectancy - it is largely semantics but, not counting ties at all, and assuming you bet equally on P and B if you simply flippe

a coin, the table odds are such that you win half your bets. If you automatically win half your bets I do not call that a negative expectancy.

Sure we pay them to deal the cards. But to me, that has nothing to do with the game odds. They are two related but completely separate things.

So I prefer to state it this way: "the game odds are 50/50 + commission". I don't think anyone can argue with that.

Mathematicians tend to look at everything through the prism of negative expectancy. Maybe that is why they never win!

Another term they use that I hate is "acceptable risk of ruin". If you think in terms of risk of ruin, it becomes just a question of time.

You can't walk into a casino thinking you might lose. That simply means you don't know how play yet.

You must walk into a casino already knowing you are going to win.

And that is just a question of learning from the right teacher.

Rule #1 is: NEVER play a losing shoe. Get out!

Only play shoes you KNOW you can win.

If there aren't any right now, it's simple - DON'T play.

But IF you had the right teacher and you know how to use tote boards to find the easiest table to beat in the casino, all casinos become beatable - It is just a question of discipline.

While we're at it, one other point:

Somebody back there said we should bet up as you win.

Up as you win betting has its place especially in extremely streaky shoes with very long runs. Those are extremely rare. But other than that up as you win betting is to your overall disadvantage.

In 30+ years I've never heard of a successful up as you win bettor.

Always losing your highest bet is simply too big a disadvantage.

Let's take a very very practical example:

So OK you win your 1 bet so now you bet 2. You win your 2 bet so now you bet 3 and lose.

Great, you just won 2/3rds of your bets with absolutely nothing to show for it. And you still owe commission.

Do you see something wrong with that picture?

Let's look at the same scenario with up as you lose betting:

You win 1 so you bet 1 and win again. Now you bet 1 and lose. You are now at +1 after the 3 bets.

And +1 is infinitely better than 0 - commission. Get it?

So OK, I've told you as much as I'm going to tell you about SAP/RSAP on the public forum.

I'm about to teach it in detail on the priate U2Hi forum.

The question is: Do you want to learn how to become a winning player?

Or would you prefer to stay amoung the 99% losers.

It is up to you.

Edited April 27, 2015 by Ellis