Thread: TB4L system

I have used this system for quite sometime with some success I play a variation of systems with it. I have been testing a system that instead of going 2 back I go back 4 I have tested it and it is very successful but I would like to make sure I not fooling myself can someone else test this and see if they have any success with it. Normally the chop is my down fall but it seems this catchs the chop pretty early.

thanks

Hello Texas,

I found tb4l converting to otb4l after four consequtive losses, and reverting back to tb4l after 3 consequtive losses with otb4l to be a more effective, and generally more stable approach. Still I consider it work in progress, give it a try.

Uhmm. Very intresting Profbac. I think I will mess with your timing on switching. Anybody see a light bulb go on?

Switching is doing ok so far. Its basically holding on. Im going to go back and use the following the trend theroy and see how it hold up. Good luck yo all

Here is where I am with this one.
I am only testing actual shoes.
This method is doing better than tb4l by itself.
Not showing a positive return, but reducing the house take pretty well.
Also not going through the volatility of tb4l alone.

Here is what is next for those who are experimenting with this.

A. For those who like bank only systems. Use this for bet selection,
but sit out when a player bet is indicated.

B. Do your bet progressions on bank side only vs progressing all bets.

Just ideas to work with.
I am interested to hear what people find.

Originally Posted by Profbac

I am interested to hear what people find.

Nothing earth shaking. Wrote a quick program and ran it against my own set of 175 shoes, plus zumma 600 and zumma 1000. Also run 100k random shuffled shoes.

TB4BL/OB4BL switching:
me=+0.72% z600=-0.89% z1k=-1.41% random100k=-1.28%
TB4L with no switching:
me=+0.22% z600=-1.27% z1k=-0.90% random100k=-1.28%

Statistically I'd say either way does no harm nor good.

Thank you. That was helpful.

A couple of tricks I use that usually work where I play:

First I note whether the table is mostly favoring T or O and play whichever for my base.

Suppose O: I play O until I lose 2 plays and switch to T until I lose 1 play.

If the table is T favorable, I do the exact opposite.

But I monitor whether I would have won or lost the third bet more often and go with the outcome either switching after 2 or after 3 losses. I usually start out with 3 losses until and if the shoe proves otherwise.

If the shoe is strongly favoring the base, say OTB4L, I'll switch back to O after a win or loss on T.

For instance, say I'm playing OTB4L switching after 3 losses because the table is strongly favoring OTB4L. OK I lose 3 OTB4L bets in a row. The table has produced a 5 in a row straight or ZZ. Lets say the table produces a 6 so I win my single TB4L bet. I immediately switch right back to OTB4L. That way the table must produce a run of more than 9 to do me any harm.

On the rare occassions T and O keep running neck and neck. I net bet the 2 suspending a prog after 3 losses while the winning prog continues betting unopposed. I resume the losing prog after a paper win. This way surprise long runs help you whether straight or ZZ.

I bet U1D2 M2 unless I hit a really hot table. Then I bet U1D1 M3 basing at 2 instead of 1. M2 means a mandatory 2 bet after all 1 bets.

In Single Side betting if your base prog continues to be the strongest you always win. But even if the other prog proves to be a little stronger, you usually win quite nicely anyway. We call that "overlap".

In other words you are playing "off balance" always favoring the stronger prog.

Considering what Fulkg has given us, it is obvious this needs more
to make it interesting. I am examining my own collection of shoes, and
I will say that the Ellis approach often looks appealing.
My only concern is the rapid switching ie after one or two losses.
You may have it right. It just sounds prone to getting whipsawed.
On the other hand, I really don't like going against 2, 3 or more banks
which this sometimes does.

Your input is appreciated.

UMHHH, Thank you Mr Ellis. Your inputs are always something to look into.

Well, the difference is that we have many players playing this besides my own 3 years of playing OTB4L almost exclusively so we have much experience to draw many ideas from. For instance while Architect was playing AC recently my own student was also playing AC. Both reported it streaky. Yet my student won 12 out or 12 playing OTB4L exactly as I have described it. He never switched to TB4L.

The whipsaw effect is real but fairly easy to combat since you can adjust the length of your primary prog to the shoe at hand.

Another option is to adjust your primary prog to only one bet against either ZZs or straights. I frequently do this on ZZs when I'm seeing a lot of them. It puts you ON ZZs earlier. Whenever I do this I ALWAYS stay ON the ZZs until I lose.

You CAN do this with straights too but I usually simply switch my base to TB4L or RD1 when I'm seeing that many straights esp with straight runs following runs.

Another trick is monitor wins in a row with both you primary and secondary progs. When you see consistency such as: "I'm never winning more than 3 in a row with this prog" fine, switch after 3 wins, ie., use anticipation when you see consistency but don't attempt it when you don't.

Another trick is I always cap my bets according to the ease of the shoe. Easy shoes I give more room but tough shoes I cap early at 4 or 5 betting U1D2 M2.

Another trick is to bet U1D2 M2 with half units. For instance at a $10 table you can opt to make your prog $10, 15, 20, 25, 30. You'd think you'd only win half as much on avg. But that isn't how it turns out. You win almost as much as you do with full units. BUT when you lose, you lose a whole lot less. You can do the same with green by basing at 2 units.

The greatest advantage of this system is its moldability to the shoe or table at hand. I'm guessing some of you think it pointless to attempt this since all is SUPPOSED to be random. But look at it this way: If you don't adjust you are simply playing a mechanical system and ALL mechanical systems eventually break even. If you DON't adjust you CAN'T win but if you DO adjust you'll find that you get better and better at it. There has NEVER been a shoe dealt that can't be beat by a variation of this system or at the very least they are extremely rare and that's what cash mgt. is for.

Look, I don't pretend to know all the tricks deployable with this system. I'm just trying to get you up to the speed we have discovered thus far, From there, ten heads are better than one.

BTW, I don't mean to imply that all my students use this approach. We have others just as good if not better. But I personally won every trip for 3 years playing this way and had a 100% win rate on several. Several of my students have also had 100% win rates playing what they like to call OTB4L+. The most important thing is DON't FIGHT IT. If it isn't working DON'T CHALLENGE - get out of there. There are plenty of tables where it DOES work and you can keep getting better at it forever. The casino has no defense for this system because you AREN'T playing mechanically. They never know WHAT you are going to do. Neither do you until the time comes.

Its certainly a much safer way to play than that purely mechanical 50/50 system I posted.

Very Very intresting Mr. Ellis. You are a very smart person. Now im going to be on a mission and start doing some testings. I have not figured out on how to beat Baccarat. But I know I will get there soon. I think anything is possible if you look hard enough. I am looking and I will find. I want to be able to afford my wife.