Thread: different kinds of systems to profit on bacarrat

Hi All,

I just started being a professional baccarat punter., I will like all guys to share all kinds of system to play baccarat here. At the same time, looking for companions to analysis live in casinos...I frequent cruise in Singapore/malaysia. Feel free to Pm me or email me at julianyeow@yahoo.com.sg

The system I am more comfortable are:

1) the double up system....10, 20, 40, 80,160, 320, etc.....u need capital in this system...I suggest to take a break if the system fail on the 8th bet......I ever lost 9 times in a row....even by punting on many different shoes

2) the banker system....i will elaborate more if anyone pm me....as from analogy...Banker usually had slight advantage.....when i use this system, i punt on 90% banker....

3) the tie system...odds is 1-8...but it can go to 20-30 rounds without any tie game....even 35 rounds i ever see....start from a low bankroll of $5,....double up after 4 rounds.....

4) Asians believe in trends such as "DRAGON" , "2nd liner" etc...many shoes u can make money if the trend follows...but some shoe are killer shoes whereby dealer refuse to pay u...haha...I always believe some dealers & your chemistry don match & u cannot make money from that shoe....I ever had dealers who pay me 1-4 even if the odds is 1-2 insurance....Have anyone ever wonder why casinos change dealers in 30 mins...some in an hour?

****Discipline play a big part in casinos...of this shoe cant make money, pls move on.....

I will like punters or professionals to share on my views

Cheers

Good luck on your professional bac endeavour chinesechess.

I would re-evaluate relying on your winnings paying the mortgage if you are using the martingale as your betting system. Even with high bac table limits you will be risking an absurd amount of money for a simple one unit profit.

Perhaps the Star system would be a better place to start if you wanted to make the move into full time professional bac.

Good luck,

TheArchitect

Originally Posted by TheArchitect

Good luck on your professional bac endeavour chinesechess.

I would re-evaluate relying on your winnings paying the mortgage if you are using the martingale as your betting system. Even with high bac table limits you will be risking an absurd amount of money for a simple one unit profit.

Perhaps the Star system would be a better place to start if you wanted to make the move into full time professional bac.

Good luck,

TheArchitect

Sorry I am new to this forum...Do explain the "Star system"

tks & Cheers

Someone email me to use this website www.dragonbaccarat.com

I reply this person & She has yet to reply me.

look more like a scam to me as they are looking for super huge amount of money for their various systems...........

Originally Posted by TheArchitect

Good luck on your professional bac endeavour chinesechess.

I would re-evaluate relying on your winnings paying the mortgage if you are using the martingale as your betting system. Even with high bac table limits you will be risking an absurd amount of money for a simple one unit profit.

Perhaps the Star system would be a better place to start if you wanted to make the move into full time professional bac.

Good luck,

TheArchitect

martingale is indeed a risky system....it can go as high as the 16th bet to break the duck.....& u need at least 4-5 figures of capital.....

believe or not....I ever had a funny encounter during my cruise visit....
I left with $47....I step into one shoe & gained $2k from that shoe.....
I eventually went home with a slight profit of $200 instead of losing 2.8k....I met a lady...she lost everythiing she had( i mean cash)...She borrwed 2k from loan shark....she turn it over by winning another $9.7k at least....

i am going for my next cruise visit...do wish me luck

Originally Posted by chinesechess

martingale is indeed a risky system....it can go as high as the 16th bet to break the duck.....& u need at least 4-5 figures of capital.....

believe or not....I ever had a funny encounter during my cruise visit....
I left with $47....I step into one shoe & gained $2k from that shoe.....
I eventually went home with a slight profit of $200 instead of losing 2.8k....I met a lady...she lost everythiing she had( i mean cash)...She borrwed 2k from loan shark....she turn it over by winning another $9.7k at least....

i am going for my next cruise visit...do wish me luck

16 Step Martingale? I would urge you to NOT use this under any circumstance.

Even if the table limits were extremely liberal and it was a $1 game; your progression would look like this:

Bet____Stake___Profit
$1______$1______$1
$2______$3______$1
$4______$7______$1
$8______$15_____$1
$16_____$31_____$1 <--Ceasars Palace HR Table ($5000-$50000; 1-10)
$32_____$63_____$1
$64_____$127____$1
$128____$255____$1
$256____$511____$1 <-- Liberal casinos BAC table limit (1-250)
$512____$523____$1 <-- Very Liberal casinos BAC Table limit (1-500)
$1024___$2047___$1
$2048___$4095___$1
$4096___$8191___$1
$8192___$16383__$1
$16384__$32767__$1
32768$__$65535__$1 <--- So at the 16th step, You're willing to lose $65K to win a $1.

Please try something like star or something more lateral...

The Architect

If you have the stomach for martingale, why not use a trend following system and if you see a 7 or 8 player streak (ignoring ites) then start betting bank and doubling up. How many streaks of 15 or more players have you seen in your lifetime?

Personally, I am afraid of Martingales, but there are people doing this sort of thing and making money.

Originally Posted by Profbac

If you have the stomach for martingale, why not use a trend following system and if you see a 7 or 8 player streak (ignoring ites) then start betting bank and doubling up. How many streaks of 15 or more players have you seen in your lifetime?

Personally, I am afraid of Martingales, but there are people doing this sort of thing and making money.

I've personally seen a player streak of 23 in an 8 deck shoe.

Originally Posted by TheArchitect

I've personally seen a player streak of 23 in an 8 deck shoe.

This is from the Wizard of Odds site on streaks in Bac (6 deck shoe)

Runs in Baccarat - Six Decks
Run Banker Player Random
0 0.49316293 0.50683707 0.5
1 0.24995325 0.24995325 0.25
2 0.12668557 0.12326768 0.125
3 0.06420894 0.06079105 0.0625
4 0.03254347 0.02997989 0.03125
5 0.01649424 0.01478497 0.015625
6 0.00835989 0.0072914 0.0078125
7 0.0042371 0.00359585 0.00390625
8 0.00214752 0.00177334 0.00195313
9 0.00108844 0.00087455 0.00097656
10 0.00055166 0.00043129 0.00048828
11 0.0002796 0.0002127 0.00024414
12 0.00014171 0.00010489 0.00012207
13 0.00007183 0.00005173 0.00006104
14 0.0000364 0.00002551 0.00003052
15 0.00001845 0.00001258 0.00001526
16 0.00000935 0.0000062 0.00000763
17 0.00000474 0.00000306 0.00000381
18 0.0000024 0.00000151 0.00000191
19 0.00000122 0.00000074 0.00000095
20+ 0.00000125 0.00000072 0.00000095
Total 1 1 1

Cool!

Here is the same information reposted from MY forum. I think you will find it more useful in MY format:

Re: Which Table, Which System?

Basic Baccarat Frequency of Occurrence:
by E. Clifton Davis beatthecasino.com

You can only decipher what is abnormal about a tote board or a table if you know what normal is. Trends are abnormalities. You will never see a shoe that is normal in every respect. All shoes have abnormalities. Therefore all shoes have a strongest trend (greatest abnormality) Our job is to identify it and take advantage of it:

8 deck Baccarat shoes average 72 plays not counting ties.
Ties avg. one in ten plays and pay 8 to 1 (a very bad bet)
Shoes avg 36 events. 1 in a rows, 2s, 3s, 4's are all events.
Half of all events are 1's. Half are 2 or mores.

The 50% rule: On avg a shoe contains:

18 1's - one 1 every 4 plays and 18 two or mores
9 2's - one 2 every 8 plays and 9 3 or mores
4.5 3's - one 3 every 16 plays and 4.5 4 or mores
2.25 4's - one 4 every 32 plays and 2.25 5 or mores
1 5 - one every 64 plays and 1 6 or more

On Avg.:

a 5 occurs 1 in every shoe
a 6 occurs 1 in every 2 shoes
a 7 occurs 1 in every 4 shoes
a 8 occurs 1 in every 8 shoes
a 9 occurs 1 in every 16 shoes
10s occur 1 in every 32 shoes
11s occur 1 in every 64 shoes
12s occur 1 in every 128 shoes
13s occur 1 in every 256 shoes
14s occur 1 in every 512 shoes
15s occur 1 in every 1000 shoes
16 or mores for all practical purposes no longer occur although its important to know that we used to see 20 or mores daily. The reason we don't see these 16 or mores anymore is one reason only - changes in shuffle technique.

This implies that shuffle technique controls the length of runs. Its much more than an implication. Its an absolute proven fact. The casinos have known this for 25 years. Now, YOU know it.

THEREFORE the shuffle controls the streakiness or chopiness of a shoe.

Absolutely and you can take it to the bank - which is exactly what we do.

This is the whole secret of Baccarat! This is how we get our edge, our advantage. And nobody knows it but US and the casinos. But lets keep going.

Bank has about a 1.5% advantage over player. But this advantage is far too small to be useful to us in a single shoe. It takes 1000 shoes to verify this slight advantage. For all practical purposes its ignorable.

On avg.

Opposites occur at the same frequency as Repeats.
OTB4L plays occur at the same frequency as TB4L plays.
ZZ runs when counted correctly occur at the same frequency as Straight runs in spite of all you read that says ZZ runs don't go as long as straight runs. Thats ridiculous. They just don't know how to count.

Straight runs always start with an Opposite.
ZZ runs always start with a Repeat.
TT runs (BB PP BB) occur at the same frequency as Straight or ZZ runs.

All patterns the same length occur at the same frequency.

Therefore a 2,2 occurs with equal frequency as a 4 or 2.25 times per shoe or once every 32 plays.

A 3,3 occurs equal to a 6 or once every 2 shoes.

Now, events never all occur at their normal frequency. One or more events will occur more than normal meaning that other event(s) must occur less than normal to make up for it. That is how SAP functions.

Now, here is the most important part! Its the most important because it is what we bet on.

THE STRONGEST ABNORMALITY (TREND) TENDS TO CONTINUE THROUGHOUT THE SHOE.

WHY? Because it was created by the shuffle. Machine or hand - it makes no difference.

So, are you beginning to catch on to how we play and why we win?

Is it true EVERY shoe? No. That is why we have cash mgt. Our avg loss MUST be less than our avg. win.

BUT its USUALLY true. Therefore we USUALLY win.

THAT is the secret of Baccarat.

Originally Posted by Ellis

Cool!

Here is the same information reposted from MY forum. I think you will find it more useful in MY format:

Re: Which Table, Which System?

Basic Baccarat Frequency of Occurrence:
by E. Clifton Davis beatthecasino.com

You can only decipher what is abnormal about a tote board or a table if you know what normal is. Trends are abnormalities. You will never see a shoe that is normal in every respect. All shoes have abnormalities. Therefore all shoes have a strongest trend (greatest abnormality) Our job is to identify it and take advantage of it:

8 deck Baccarat shoes average 72 plays not counting ties.
Ties avg. one in ten plays and pay 8 to 1 (a very bad bet)
Shoes avg 36 events. 1 in a rows, 2s, 3s, 4's are all events.
Half of all events are 1's. Half are 2 or mores.

The 50% rule: On avg a shoe contains:

18 1's - one 1 every 4 plays and 18 two or mores
9 2's - one 2 every 8 plays and 9 3 or mores
4.5 3's - one 3 every 16 plays and 4.5 4 or mores
2.25 4's - one 4 every 32 plays and 2.25 5 or mores
1 5 - one every 64 plays and 1 6 or more

On Avg.:

a 5 occurs 1 in every shoe
a 6 occurs 1 in every 2 shoes
a 7 occurs 1 in every 4 shoes
a 8 occurs 1 in every 8 shoes
a 9 occurs 1 in every 16 shoes
10s occur 1 in every 32 shoes
11s occur 1 in every 64 shoes
12s occur 1 in every 128 shoes
13s occur 1 in every 256 shoes
14s occur 1 in every 512 shoes
15s occur 1 in every 1000 shoes
16 or mores for all practical purposes no longer occur although its important to know that we used to see 20 or mores daily. The reason we don't see these 16 or mores anymore is one reason only - changes in shuffle technique.

This implies that shuffle technique controls the length of runs. Its much more than an implication. Its an absolute proven fact. The casinos have known this for 25 years. Now, YOU know it.

THEREFORE the shuffle controls the streakiness or chopiness of a shoe.

Absolutely and you can take it to the bank - which is exactly what we do.

This is the whole secret of Baccarat! This is how we get our edge, our advantage. And nobody knows it but US and the casinos. But lets keep going.

Bank has about a 1.5% advantage over player. But this advantage is far too small to be useful to us in a single shoe. It takes 1000 shoes to verify this slight advantage. For all practical purposes its ignorable.

On avg.

Opposites occur at the same frequency as Repeats.
OTB4L plays occur at the same frequency as TB4L plays.
ZZ runs when counted correctly occur at the same frequency as Straight runs in spite of all you read that says ZZ runs don't go as long as straight runs. Thats ridiculous. They just don't know how to count.

Straight runs always start with an Opposite.
ZZ runs always start with a Repeat.
TT runs (BB PP BB) occur at the same frequency as Straight or ZZ runs.

All patterns the same length occur at the same frequency.

Therefore a 2,2 occurs with equal frequency as a 4 or 2.25 times per shoe or once every 32 plays.

A 3,3 occurs equal to a 6 or once every 2 shoes.

Now, events never all occur at their normal frequency. One or more events will occur more than normal meaning that other event(s) must occur less than normal to make up for it. That is how SAP functions.

Now, here is the most important part! Its the most important because it is what we bet on.

THE STROGEST ABNORMALITY (TREND) TENDS TO CONTINUE THROUGHOUT THE SHOE.

WHY? Because it was created by the shuffle. Machine or hand - it makes no difference.

So, are you beginning to catch on to how we play and why we win?

Is it true EVERY shoe? No. That is why we have cash mgt. Our avg loss MUST be less than our avg. win.

BUT its USUALLY true. Therefore we USUALLY win.

THAT is the secret of Baccarat.

Ellis,

How many decks in the shoes for your figures?

Converting the Wizards numbers into odds gives us:

Runs in Baccarat - Six Decks

Run Banker Player
0 1 in 2.03 1 in 1.97
1 1 in 4 1 in 4
2 1 in 7.89 1 in 8.11
3 1 in 15.74 1 in 16.45
4 1 in 30.73 1 in 33.36
5 1 in 60.63 1 in 67.67
6 1 in 119.62 1 in 137.15
7 1 in 236.01 1 in 278.1
8 1 in 465.7 1 in 563.9
9 1 in 918.78 1 in 1,143.5
10 1 in 1,812.8 1 in 2318.6
11 1 in 3,575.5 1 in 4,701.5
12 1 in 7,056.7 1 in 9,533.8
13 1 in 13,922 1 in 19,331
14 1 in 27,473 1 in 39,200
15 1 in 54,201 1 in 79,491
16 1 in 106,915 1 in 161,290
17 1 in 210,970 1 in 326,797
18 1 in 416,666 1 in 662,252
19 1 in 819,672 1 in 1,351,351
20+ 1 in 800,000 1 in 1,388,889 <- Note, this is for ALL run 20+ combined.

TheArchitect

Right Architect, I should have clarified that better at the beginning. I'm basing on the more common 8 deck shoe, averaging 72 hands not counting ties.

Also I tend to work mostly in whole numbers and don't bother much with decimals since you really can't have a fraction of a play. So my numbers might be slightly off from the Wizzards but close enough for all practical purposes.

When I get a chance I'll post about the correct way to count ZZs and why. I already did that once this morning but the program flubbed.

You're right about decimals, but I like using them in smaller numbers as they add up quickly; ie. 15.74 x 4 = 63 and not 60 or 64...

The wizards are generated from actual odds and not observation... so in the shorter time frame, the odds are different... His are exact only when n approaches infinity.

I'd like to see how you count ZZ, definitely have my interest.

TheArchitect

One thing that can cause a slight variance in statistical analysis is whether or not the statistician "chopped off" at the end of a shoe. For instance you can't have an 8 in a row in the first or last seven plays of a shoe. (14 out of 72) But if you don't chop off, you can have an 8 that began in one shoe and finished in another. Was that counted as an 8 or perhaps two 4's? or whatever? Ain't Math fun?

Counting ZZ runs correctly:

Nearly all Baccarat books, players and statisticians get this entirely wrong. This will raise havoc with your statistical analysis, system design and even your play.

First, half of all 1's end up single 1's and half end up muliple 1's creating ZZ runs.

Since Opposites and Repeats occur at the same frequency, runs of either also occur at the same frequency. It just doesn't seem that ZZs occur equally to straights because you aren't counting ZZs correctly. Players tend to short change ZZ runs by one play which creates a huge statistical error which can throw you completely off track and cause you to end up scratching your head and looking in vain for your mistake.

Here's the mistake: Just as all straight runs start with an Opposite, all ZZ runs must start with a Repeat. That is the play you are negleting to count - the first Repeat play of a ZZ run.

Let's say a shoe starts with a 3113 "pattern". (PPP B P BBB) That pattern causes a ZZ run of 4 starting at play 3 - not a ZZ run of 3 starting at play 4. Once you count correctly you will see that ZZs occur with equal frequency to straight just as you knew they should to begin with. Get it? Now your stats will all work out just fine.

BTW, to verify this you need merely to look at TB4L betting. Most players think TB4L gets on ZZ runs faster than straight runs. Well think about it. How could that possibly be true? In fact it isn't. Once you are counting ZZ plays correctly you'll see that TB4L gets ON both run types at the same point - the 3rd play.

Architect I should point out one more thing. The Wizzars's stats are, of course, correct wherein he shows the geometric change in Bank vs Player run lengths.

However, I'm only interested in run lengths overall. This is because none of my systems differentiate between Player events or Bank events. All of my systems ALWAYS put you on all long runs regardless which side they are on - so avg run lengths are more suitable for my purposes.

You could reverse the P and B headings at the top of the scorecard and it wouldn't make a particle of difference on any of my systems, so why confuse the issue? For instance if a shoe started with a 4 in a row, our score would be the same regardless if the run was on Player or on Bank. Our interest is the frequency of ALL events vs norm. The side makes no difference to us.

Play Bank

Except we play in single shoes and Player is just as apt to win a shoe as Bank. Usually whichever side starts out winning the shoe ends up winning the shoe. You are better off going by that. Systems that were created to take advantage of the Bank advantage have been dismal failures. The cards can't do math.

Originally Posted by TheArchitect

Ellis,

How many decks in the shoes for your figures?

Converting the Wizards numbers into odds gives us:

Runs in Baccarat - Six Decks

Run Banker Player
0 1 in 2.03 1 in 1.97
1 1 in 4 1 in 4
2 1 in 7.89 1 in 8.11
3 1 in 15.74 1 in 16.45
4 1 in 30.73 1 in 33.36
5 1 in 60.63 1 in 67.67
6 1 in 119.62 1 in 137.15
7 1 in 236.01 1 in 278.1
8 1 in 465.7 1 in 563.9
9 1 in 918.78 1 in 1,143.5
10 1 in 1,812.8 1 in 2318.6
11 1 in 3,575.5 1 in 4,701.5
12 1 in 7,056.7 1 in 9,533.8
13 1 in 13,922 1 in 19,331
14 1 in 27,473 1 in 39,200
15 1 in 54,201 1 in 79,491
16 1 in 106,915 1 in 161,290
17 1 in 210,970 1 in 326,797
18 1 in 416,666 1 in 662,252
19 1 in 819,672 1 in 1,351,351
20+ 1 in 800,000 1 in 1,388,889 <- Note, this is for ALL run 20+ combined.

TheArchitect

Architect, I must be reading you wrong. I don't know what your starting 0 is at line 1. I think line 1 is trying to say there is 1 one every 4 plays which would be correct but what is the 0? How can you have a run of 0?

Line 3 seems to be saying there is 1 two every 16 plays. That would be wrong by a factor of 100% and all thereafter. Isn't the first digit of each line out of sequence by 1? Or am I somehow misreading it?

With that "correction" (misunderstanding?) yes, his figures agree with mine.

If you take the whole first col 01234 etc and move it up one space then the whole chart would be correct, the way I'm trying to read it?????

I certainly can't believe the Wizzard is off by a factor of 100%. But I can believe I'm not reading it right????

Originally Posted by Ellis

Architect, I must be reading you wrong. I don't know what your starting 0 is at line 1. I think line 1 is trying to say there is 1 one every 4 plays which would be correct but what is the 0? How can you have a run of 0?

Line 3 seems to be saying there is 1 two every 16 plays. That would be wrong by a factor of 100% and all thereafter. Isn't the first digit of each line out of sequence by 1? Or am I somehow misreading it?

With that "correction" (misunderstanding?) yes, his figures agree with mine.

If you take the whole first col 01234 etc and move it up one space then the whole chart would be correct, the way I'm trying to read it?????

I certainly can't believe the Wizzard is off by a factor of 100%. But I can believe I'm not reading it right????

Ellis,

I think you and the Wizard define runs differently. In his data, he lists runs of 0 meaning it's chopping.. BPBPBP, and a run of one would be PBB, where the second "B" begins the run. If you look at his "random" column, he lists a run of 1 having a 25% probability or 1 in 4.

I believe (and correct me if I'm wrong) that you define PBB and a Banker run of 2.

I think once you look at it this way it becomes clear.

TheArchitect

Can any of you tell us how to take advantage of these breakdowns?

Originally Posted by TheArchitect

Ellis,

I think you and the Wizard define runs differently. In his data, he lists runs of 0 meaning it's chopping.. BPBPBP, and a run of one would be PBB, where the second "B" begins the run. If you look at his "random" column, he lists a run of 1 having a 25% probability or 1 in 4.

I believe (and correct me if I'm wrong) that you define PBB and a Banker run of 2.

I think once you look at it this way it becomes clear.

TheArchitect

Right, I see that now and I think he may be technically correct. The same way I count ZZs correctly. But I think the average player will be misguided because players look at 4 Banks as a run of 4. But its fine for the mathematical purest like yourself. I just hope that in the long run, no pun, he isn't doing the avg. player more harm than good.

Originally Posted by gamblermadman

Can any of you tell us how to take advantage of these breakdowns?

I think the practical use of normal occurrences is to distinguish biases or trends. For instance, once you know 1's normally occur once every 4 plays, 2's once every 8 plays, 3s once every 16 plays and so forth, you know which events are occurring more than normal and which events are occurring less than normal in the shoe at hand. We have the norms preentered on our score cards for quick comparison at casino speed. The idea is to bet ON events that are occurring more than normal and against events that are occurring less than normal.

While the tendency is to bet that events will "catch up" to their normal frequency of occurrence, the fact is that they seldom do this within the confines of a single shoe. Individual shoes tend to run contrary to the normal frequency of events. So you are betting ON these short term biases instead of against them.

The avg player bets that events that are below norm will catch up. But then the avg player loses.

On my forum we use the biases to tell us which system will be most effective against the shoe at hand. If the bias of the shoe changes we change right with it but more often the biggest bias does not correct itself over the duration of a shoe. Single shoes defy norms.

From what I see on the internet, we are the only players who play this way and we are also the only group with consistent winning players.

For instance, a new N. Carolina member of my forum, beatthecasino.com, called me from Atlantic City last night reporting that he had just won 12 out of 12 shoes over three days playing our OTB4L system only. He was playing OTB4L because 2's and 3's were running consistently above normal for 3 days at his table. He was even winning the streaky shoes.

I instructed him to continue exactly what he was doing but to watch for the worm to turn and be ready to switch to RD1. I'll let you know how he finishes.

Of course all this is lost on those who choose to believe that all is perfectly random. They just haven't enough experience to know that tables have streaky days, choppy days, OTB4L days, TB4L days, RD1 days, Sys 40 days and so forth.

But note that the more experience a player has the more likely he will be found playing biases. He usually has learned to do this the hard way.

A major advantage of playing this way is that you can keep your bets very small and still win. For instance, my AC player has not bet more than 2 units yet has won as much as 16 units in a single shoe.

Another major advantage is that when you do lose, your loss is never more than your average win. You never suffer catastrophic losses because you are never found betting against the most common event.

After 30 years of play I have found this to be the BEST approach to the game, by far. But I caution you that it takes much study and much practice and much discipline. It's not for those seeking an easy out. Easy outs don't exist. Its for players, not gamblers. Baccarat is a tough game. It's not for everyone.

Of course the better we do the more complaints we get out of the garnabby and Archer types who were both kicked off our forum for misbehavior. Ours is an adult forum. But their jealous wrath is in direct proportion to our success and a good measurement thereof.

Members of my forum are free to criticize ME all they want. They just don't. But criticize a fellow player and you are gone. In the last 5 years we've only had 3 such antagonists. One we allowed back. The other two, never. All forums are far better off W/O such behavior.

Got it. I myself tend to follow the shoe of trends. If its chopping or streaking or dominating a certain side I follow the shoe and capitalize on the situation. My problem is to know when the pendulum swings the other way. Its what messes me up and I usally walk away to stay ahead instead of battling out a grind here or there. Sometimes I back off on bets and let the shoe adjust back to normal play. I find walking away can hurt just as bad as battking them out. Good post Ellis

Originally Posted by graylove

Got it. I myself tend to follow the shoe of trends. If its chopping or streaking or dominating a certain side I follow the shoe and capitalize on the situation. My problem is to know when the pendulum swings the other way. Its what messes me up and I usally walk away to stay ahead instead of battling out a grind here or there. Sometimes I back off on bets and let the shoe adjust back to normal play. I find walking away can hurt just as bad as battking them out. Good post Ellis

Right, and those are not the only trends measureable. There are nine basic trends that you can stretch to 12 by including double TB4L - going by what won 3 plays ago rather than 2 plays ago. I'm just beginning to experiment with this 4th base and results are very encouraging.

Insofaras anticipating trend changes, we are experimenting with always looking back at the last several events. Which system do they favor MOST, even if we won those events. This also looks very encouraging.

Another good form of anticipation is to note the max bets you are winning in a row with the system you are playing. For instance, if you note that you are seldom or never winning more than 2 bets in a row, think about it..... That's HIGHLY valuable information isn't it. Sometimes it pays to know when to bet AGAINST your system. A couple of that kind of successful bets will really raise the dealer's eyebrows. I don't think you can learn all there is to know on your own in one lifetime.

I also walk away from many tables both in BJ and in Bac. I try to always be found playing the easiest (most predictable) table in the casino. Its not You against THEM. Its YOU against YOU. Sometimes walking away is the best thing you can do. Look at it as another form of good discipline. I always ask myself this question: What is the very best use of my time right now? Sometimes its continue playing. Sometimes its go eat. Sometimes its go study tote boards. Sometimes its go sleep. You only want to play tip top tables and only when in tip top shape. Geez, the game is hard enough W/O making it harder.

Hi i want to try your system.. how much is it??