Thread: System Test Thread: Summary with Statistics on Various Systems

I should better open a new thread here to post summary with statistics on various systems I read at this forum. I appreciate that people sharing their ideas and works so I am willing to contribute something as return.

Here is my suggestion. If you have any system would like to test please post your system in a new thread and give me a note under this one so that I can receive the notice email since I do not always come to the forum.

I will post some results here about some recent systems time by time. I believe there are ones can overcome the house, yes, mechanical ones. But after overcome the house, how much net win per shoe or turnover is unknown. It's up to your system.

I wish the post can be sticky, and we beat the baccarat in a more mathematical and statistical manner. Thanks.

Andy's Prediction System
My Prediction System

(1) First one is to answer Ellis' question:

Originally Posted by Ellis

Can anyone explain either mathematically or statistically how the number of cards in the prior round has any influence on the current hand? Why not go by whether the last card in the prior round was red or black? At least that would be a 50/50 outcome.

The probabilities of Player, Banker and Tie in 8-deck shoe is 44.62%, 45.86% and 9.52%.

Here is 10,000 shoes of statistics on results (P, B or T) after how many cards dealt in last hand.

LHCrdDltAmnt__________Player__________Banker______ ______Tie_______
4_______________138001(44.54%)____142185(45.89%)__ __29638(9.57%)
5_______________110683(44.89%)____112739(45.72%)__ __23152(9.39%)
6_______________115438(44.60%)____118930(45.95%)__ __24475(9.46%)

There is no any significant relationship between the current hand dealt card numbers and the next hand result, comparing to the probabilies of Player, Banker and Tie.

(2) The second one is that I want to explore the pattern of its lengths of trend (++..++, or --..--). It's similar to the streak of Player or Banker (PP...PP or BB..BB) so I can still put them as nS of streak ++..++ or --..-- here.

This is the statistics on nS from 50,000 shoes.

nS of Positive
1: 419652
2: 204888
3: 101207
4: 49485
5: 24548
6: 12099
7: 5732
8: 2928
9: 1387
10: 690
11: 352
12: 186
13: 84
14: 39
15: 19
16: 12
17: 5
18: 1
19: 2
20: 0


nS of Negative
-1: 418342
-2: 205229
-3: 101372
-4: 50050
-5: 24643
-6: 11886
-7: 5901
-8: 3079
-9: 1418
-10: 690
-11: 331
-12: 164
-13: 91
-14: 39
-15: 18
-16: 5
-17: 7
-18: 3
-19: 2
-20: 0
-21: 1

How to take advantage of these data is really up to what bet method you will take, flat bet or progressive bet? The calculation leaves to you.

Hey im posting a system

Pitboss' Bet Strategy on Streak
Pitboss: I Beat Baccarat! (Free Strategy Here)

I know many people play streak directly and some convert the PB results into a new pattern such as one that Andy does. Here I repeat the test result on Pitboss' bet strategy on PB streak, though there are so many strategies or progressions.

According to Pitboss' strategy we start to bet 1 unit after a 2S to break the streak, if lose, bet 2 unit; after that always bet 1 unit. So far we bet to break the streak but after 4S we will follow the streak. Detailed bets are like this:

1s:
2s:1 ---PP B1
3s:1 ---PP P1 B2
4s:-4 ---PP P1 P2 B(P1) <--
5s:-3 ---PP P1 P2 P1 B1
6s:-2 ---PP P1 P2 P1 P1 B1
7s:-1 ---PP P1 P2 P1 P1 P1 B1
8s:0 ---PP P1 P2 P1 P1 P1 P1 B1
9s:1 ---PP P1 P2 P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 B1
10s:2 ---PP P1 P2 P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 B1
11s:3 ---PP P1 P2 P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 B1
12s:4

Here is the 20,000 shoes test:

Total 20000 shoes and 1453374 hands.
Total Comm: 11338.50 (0.57/shoe)
Shoe Net Win: -4613.50 (-0.23/shoe)
Total Bet Amount: 896539.00 (44.83/shoe)
Turnover: -0.51%
--------------------------------
N'S Statistics
nS P B Total
--------------------------------
1s: 183783 179418 363201
2s: 91755 91891 183646
3s: 45086 46185 91271
4s: 21923 23143 45066
5s: 10529 11361 21890
6s: 5145 5809 10954
7s: 2552 2762 5314
8s: 1185 1460 2645
9s: 582 716 1298
10s: 261 363 624
11s: 137 183 320
12s: 72 81 153
13s: 35 45 80
14s: 10 23 33
15s: 6 9 15
16s: 3 8 11
17s: 2 3 5
18s: 0 1 1
19s: 0 0 0
20s: 0 0 0
21s: 0 0 0
22s: 0 0 0
23s: 0 0 0
24s: 0 0 0
25s: 0 0 0
26s: 0 0 0
27s: 0 0 0
28s: 0 0 0
29s: 0 0 0
Shoe Range Occurrence(% of total shoes)
------------------------------------------
90~ 95 - ( -%)
85~ 90 - ( -%)
80~ 85 - ( -%)
75~ 80 - ( -%)
70~ 75 - ( -%)
65~ 70 - ( -%)
60~ 65 - ( -%)
55~ 60 - ( -%)
50~ 55 - ( -%)
45~ 50 - ( -%)
40~ 45 - ( -%)
35~ 40 - ( -%)
30~ 35 - ( -%)
25~ 30 - ( -%)
20~ 25 _40 ( 0.20%)
15~ 20 _345 ( 1.73%)
10~ 15 _1517 ( 7.59%)
5~ 10 _3302 (16.51%)
0~ 5 _4804 (24.02%)
-5~ 0 _4719 (23.59%)
-10~ -5 _3114 (15.57%)
-15~ -10 _1500 ( 7.50%)
-20~ -15 _505 ( 2.53%)
-25~ -20 _126 ( 0.63%)
-30~ -25 _24 ( 0.12%)
-35~ -30 _3 ( 0.01%)
-40~ -35 _1 ( 0.00%)
-45~ -40 - ( -%)
-50~ -45 - ( -%)
-55~ -50 - ( -%)
-60~ -55 - ( -%)
-65~ -60 - ( -%)
-70~ -65 - ( -%)
-75~ -70 - ( -%)
-80~ -75 - ( -%)
-85~ -80 - ( -%)
-90~ -85 - ( -%)
-95~ -90 - ( -%)
-100~ -95 - ( -%)
Positive Shoes: 10008 (50.04%)
------------------------------------------

An interesting thing is that if we prolong betting the streak till 9S and switch to streak after that we can have tiny net win per shoe. Well, it's not an outstanding one but we overcome the house..

Total 20000 shoes and 1453613 hands.
Total Comm: 11184.10 (0.56/shoe)
Shoe Net Win: 1620.90 (0.08/shoe)
Total Bet Amount: 895029.00 (44.75/shoe)
Turnover: 0.18%
-------------------------------
N'S Statistics
nS P B Total
--------------------------------
1s: 184946 179350 364296
2s: 91684 92643 184327
3s: 44797 46033 90830
4s: 21552 22862 44414
5s: 10644 11596 22240
6s: 5123 5760 10883
7s: 2486 2862 5348
8s: 1222 1385 2607
9s: 603 727 1330
10s: 297 384 681
11s: 122 167 289
12s: 54 89 143
13s: 35 39 74
14s: 14 22 36
15s: 12 7 19
16s: 5 5 10
17s: 1 5 6
18s: 0 1 1
19s: 0 0 0
20s: 3 0 3
21s: 0 0 0
22s: 0 0 0
23s: 0 0 0
24s: 0 0 0
25s: 0 0 0
26s: 0 0 0
27s: 0 0 0
28s: 0 0 0
29s: 0 0 0
Shoe Range Occurrence(% of total shoes)
------------------------------------------
90~ 95 - ( -%)
85~ 90 - ( -%)
80~ 85 - ( -%)
75~ 80 - ( -%)
70~ 75 - ( -%)
65~ 70 - ( -%)
60~ 65 - ( -%)
55~ 60 - ( -%)
50~ 55 - ( -%)
45~ 50 - ( -%)
40~ 45 - ( -%)
35~ 40 - ( -%)
30~ 35 - ( -%)
25~ 30 - ( -%)
20~ 25 _40 ( 0.20%)
15~ 20 _373 ( 1.87%)
10~ 15 _1627 ( 8.14%)
5~ 10 _3550 (17.75%)
0~ 5 _4880 (24.40%)
-5~ 0 _4484 (22.42%)
-10~ -5 _2917 (14.59%)
-15~ -10 _1499 ( 7.49%)
-20~ -15 _477 ( 2.38%)
-25~ -20 _126 ( 0.63%)
-30~ -25 _25 ( 0.13%)
-35~ -30 _1 ( 0.00%)
-40~ -35 _1 ( 0.00%)
-45~ -40 - ( -%)
-50~ -45 - ( -%)
-55~ -50 - ( -%)
-60~ -55 - ( -%)
-65~ -60 - ( -%)
-70~ -65 - ( -%)
-75~ -70 - ( -%)
-80~ -75 - ( -%)
-85~ -80 - ( -%)
-90~ -85 - ( -%)
-95~ -90 - ( -%)
-100~ -95 - ( -%)
Positive Shoes: 10470 (52.35%)
------------------------------------------

Dear Ayuinca

Probability and statistic donot make anyone win in gambling. ( We can justify this statement by asking any statistician and mathematician). I dont think that anyone in this world could attain 50 000 shoes in lifetime. The probability result shows above does not prove anything (sorry).

Prediction system is applied shoe per shoe. It doesnot matter 1, 2, 6 or 8 shoes. Also, human or machine shuffling is not an issue.

Every shoe is independant to other.

Our goal here is to predict the next coming hand and to catch the flow in applying different methods of MM such as conservative or progressive.

We just plan to play some certain hands in a segment of the shoe and to win an amount projected.

Moreover, the difference result of the 5 cards is still a problem for me to solve.
For example:
Bank 2 and 5 = 7
Player 3 and 0 pull 0 = 3
Bank win

Bank 2 and 5 = 7
Player 3 and 0 pull 5 = 8
Player win.


BTW, i donot mean that this system could definitively make us win the game. If it could be, I did not lose.

Originally Posted by John

ayuinca

Look at your stats, the bulk of all results occur in the 1>3 streak window. Explore ways to take advantage of these stats.

John, you are right and on the correct track. nS n=1,2,3 are the most events within the pattern. Here we can find that such pattern is somewhat different to the PB streak pattern. Such difference can overcome house and make positive net win. If you just pay a little attention to them you will find it. It's not sample bias but only presents when the sample is big like few hundreds of shoes.

Originally Posted by Andy

Probability and statistic donot make anyone win in gambling.

Andy, you are right or maybe not on this but it's absolutely right to the casino that probability and statistics make them money; it's the house there guarantee their profit.

If you think statistics equal to big samples, so what about let me produce 10 shoes per set and any number of sets for you? That will seem real to you. However I will see no difference from 10 shoes per set x 2,000 sets and 20,000 shoes in one set in term of the pattern presented.

Those statistics shown above are true, but after so many hands, unless we employ many poeple to play for us strictly to the rules, we cannot benefit from these statistics. 50% 25 12.5 6.25 3.75 1.25 0.75 are all true for long term playing. Because casinos have plenty of people playing at any session their win lose is smoothen or average out and they only profit the 5%, B6, tie, pairs

Yes, that's right edwardng, that's how statistics works. Casinos look at the whole piture and that house is making sure money for them and even more than just the house. The pattern of n=2(n+1) turns out to be even in a long term, i.e. the pattern of nS of PB can not make the casino or you win in a long term so they have to add the 5% commission not only because the probability of Banker is higher than that of Player. Thinking along this way, what about if the nS pattern presents n>2(n+1)? Look at the one of Andy's. This might give you guys some hints to find a way to play. That's why I say the house can be overcomed but is hard to obtain a decent positive net wins.

so how can we benefit when we play only a fraction of the thousands of shoes? no way, we cannot win. even if we win, tomorrow we return back the winnings.

the only way we can win is when we have huge capital to withstand the streaks of up to 22 times by martingale system. say the 1st bet is 1 unit.......last bet of 22nd times is how many?.....some wise guy please give the calculation. only bill gate will have the money to always win

I think you guys have yet again done an excellent job of proving the known - that purely mechanical systems cannot work in the long run no matter how brilliantly they are conceived. All statistics work out to their norm in the long run. no pun.

It's the next leap you are having difficulty grasping.

We KNOW that all stats work out to their norm eventually.

We also know that an individual shoe never hits all norms. It simply does not have time.

Therefore every shoe is abnormal in some way. Every table is abnormal in some way.

Rather than use stats to bet on normal as most systems do, you are far better off to use stats to determine what is most abnormal about a shoe and bet that the major abnormality continues.

If you graph it out you'll soon see that individual shoes trend AWAY from normal. It takes multiple shoes to see all graphs eventually recoup and return to normal. This is generally true no matter what you track.

We play the game in individual shoes. You are right, long term stats are useless EXCEPT to determine short term (individual shoe) abnormalities.

Graphs show you this conclusively. Don't bet the stats will return to normal over the course of a single shoe. They won't. Instead, bet that the strongest abnormality continues. It usually does.

For instance if 1's are running low DON'T bet they will catch up. Bet that 1's will go to 2 because that is what they are doing in the shoe at hand. Whatever the shoe at hand is doing, that's what you bet. Don't fight the shoe at hand.

I see this new guy in Vegas is telling you to track everything and bet all will return to normal.

Ha, I also see that he is promoted by the casinos and is allowed to conduct his seminars right in the casino. THAT should be telling you SOMETHING!

Bill Gate can't win either!!
Casino knows their weaknesses and that's why they imposed MIN/MAX betting amount. With that rule, the max we can go probably 7 step marty. For at $50 table (min), the max allowable bet is $7K only.

you seriously think bill gates will play at 7k table? he cannot even feel $1mil, i think no casino will invite him to play. they are afraid of him because only he can overcome the casino's edge if he plays 22 stage marty.

let me tell you how to overcome, the 22 stage marty. first look for the casino with the biggest band of min and max, to fit the 22 marty, employ 3 full time players, to play round the clock, 1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256,512,1024,2048, until 2097152....you will win 1 unit at a time, because the 1 unit is so small, you need 3 full time employees to play 24hrs for you. logical? for interest sake, say bill gates has 50,000,000,000 (50bil) in order for him to play 22 marty of up to 2097152 units his 1 unit=$23.80 haha imagine bill gates playing $23.80 per hand..

I feel sorry for you. You still don't get it. The $50 analogy is just an example. If Bill Gate were to be invited, casino will ALWAYS impose a MIN and MAX bet. So, if he were to play at $100M table, do you think the casino will allow him to go 22 step marty? Of course not. The casino will probably say, he has to start a minimum bet of say 5M and he CANNOT bet exceeding 100M. Get it??
The odds still favors the casino.
So, going back to my earlier example - $50 table. I'm sure you can afford that. Do you think the casino ever allow you to go beyond 7 step marty which is $12750.00? Even if you have the money but you are NOT allow to place that bet simply because of the table max limit imposed. Your idea of 22 step of marty will never happened.

the biggest min max i have seen is in macau, min 1000hkd max 300,000hkd, this takes us to 300times about 8 marty only

Originally Posted by hlkhoo

I feel sorry for you. You still don't get it. The $50 analogy is just an example. If Bill Gate were to be invited, casino will ALWAYS impose a MIN and MAX bet. So, if he were to play at $100M table, do you think the casino will allow him to go 22 step marty? Of course not. The casino will probably say, he has to start a minimum bet of say 5M and he CANNOT bet exceeding 100M. Get it??
The odds still favors the casino.
So, going back to my earlier example - $50 table. I'm sure you can afford that. Do you think the casino ever allow you to go beyond 7 step marty which is $12750.00? Even if you have the money but you are NOT allow to place that bet simply because of the table max limit imposed. Your idea of 22 step of marty will never happened.

Correct! That is the whole casino purpose of min maxes. They know about Martingales too and have known for 300 years. At Tunica you can go to the 12th level. You've already lost $10235 at the 11th level. Now you are going to make a $10,000 table max bet. And if you win you don't even get your original $5 back. That is completely insane!

Ellis, your "follow the trend" theory is still not valid me. It's no more than 50-50 guess, 50% you are right the trend will remain yet the other 50% will go to the opposite.

Now I am running a test to test such trend that add +1 for 1S and -1 for >1S. Record the sum count at 1/3 of the shoe and the sum count at the end shoe. See how many shoes at the point of 1/3 shoe will keep the count up and how many shoes will down. Here is the statistics from 10,000 shoes. Since the table could not align well in the post so I have to just give the numbers here instead of detail distributions. First of all I give a sample to tell how to read the data.

-6____107___(29)____121 means that at the 1/3 shoe count is -6, there are 107 times(shoes) the count turn to <-6 at the end shoe and 121 times(shoes) go >-6. 29 times remain the same count.

Ok, now the data.

-8_____14_____(6)_____14
-7_____57_____(9)_____50
-6____107____(29)____121
-5____223____(30)____225
-4____298____(52)____338
-3____387____(80)____444
-2____498____(74)____544
-1____477____(84)____556
0____505___(102)____501
1____428____(89)____497
2____398____(62)____422
3____316____(49)____348
4____212____(42)____269
5____170____(29)____187
6____110____(14)____127
7_____73____(19)_____72
8_____36_____(4)_____59

From the data I don't see following the trend of 1S will yield any advantage. Of course we can see the last digits is more than the 2nd ones but it's just because the 2nd digits are count at 1/3 shoe while the last ones count at the end (having 1/3 more shoe in count). Therefore if I do this at the 1/2 shoe and compare it to the end shoe there should be even. I may deduce that any kind of Streak trend at any where could not determine the trend in the rest shoe.

See the attached file for shoes distributions. When you open it with Notepad please uncheck "Word Wrap" under format.

Originally Posted by Ellis

We also know that an individual shoe never hits all norms. It simply does not have time.

Therefore every shoe is abnormal in some way. Every table is abnormal in some way.

We all know those Ellis. The issue is PREDICTION. How do you know the trend will keep or not? Only when the shoes are finished we can see the abnormal. No difficulies to look backward, no one can look forward and predict it correctly more than 50-50.

can someone develop a test software to test betting marty against the streak up to 4th level if lost, reverse betting once and bet against streak until the 9th level and bet against once

the sequence of betting is like this, say we have a streak of 15 B's

PPPPBPPPPBPPPPB

this will take care of long streaks, as most streaks turn around before they reach 4th level, but it will create other problems, so if we have a test software, we may try to solve it, who knows? if we can solve this, we solve everything.

Originally Posted by ayuinca

We all know those Ellis. The issue is PREDICTION. How do you know the trend will keep or not? Only when the shoes are finished we can see the abnormal. No difficulies to look backward, no one can look forward and predict it correctly more than 50-50.

Exactly. The only things left are REAL advantage bets or money management and/or shoe repeat. IMO, MM is a short term fix reducing hands played and therefore postponing the inevitable. Repeating shoes such as new cards, off the wash, etc. may also exist on a limited basis and still show a mathematical randomness overall. But then we may have to look for certain kinds of shuffle proedures at certain tmes of day, available seats, etc.

Ellis often speaks of new card play. It's not always easy to know when the cards are new. Sometimes even the dealers don't know. But this kind of thing could be at least anecdotally documented.

I will roll into Tunica pretty soon - perhaps i will make an attempt to document some shoes and post them. One would think that Ellis could do this very easily. But oh, I forgot. He recently mentined in a post that there were choppy shoes with new cards every day for 3 years but now, he said, it is too late because the casinos changed them and threw in some streaks or something - oh well.

Archer

Originally Posted by ayuinca

Ellis, your "follow the trend" theory is still not valid me. It's no more than 50-50 guess, 50% you are right the trend will remain yet the other 50% will go to the opposite.

ayuinca, I appreciate the effort you have put in to this test and yes, I understand what you did.

But, as I have said before, you cannot take shoes out of the context of the casino for test purposes and make much sense out of them. Such tests are pretty much a waste of time.

It is that very casino context you eliminated that your advantage comes from. In the casino, you are not so much looking for beatable shoes as you are looking for beatable tables. You are looking for the strongest trend in the casino. That table gives you your strongest advantage. Sometimes there are none so you don't play because it would be pointless.

But haven't you ever had a streaky table stay streaky for hours? Or had a choppy table stay choppy for hours. Or had a neutral table stay neutral for hours? And that is only ONE form of trend or bias.

Have you never noticed a morning card prep that produces a consistent shoe type?

I was just using normal 1's as an example. You are looking for the STRONGEST bias. It won't usually be the frequency of 1's or 2's or whatever but sometimes it is.

FOR INSTANCE; One of my students was playing a table at Niagara a month ago where every shoe was short in 1's. Every shoe was streaky. Then, as I previously posted, he gets a shoe that had only ONE 1 in the entire shoe. He was playing the trend at hand with a simple 1,2 prog on repeats and scored 67 in that shoe.

I think the reason inexperienced players miss these trends is because they are always playing shoes at home out of context of the casino. You have no advantage on your kitchen table because you have no idea of how the TABLE was trending.

But if you ALWAYS play the strongest trending table you can find in the casino, AND DONT PLAY when there are none, you will do a whole lot better in the casino than you can do on your kitchen table.

I've been playing these trends successfully for 30 years. I simply laugh at people who say there are no trends. My students do very well playing that way also. You simply don't need big bets. You make your money on your hands won ratio rather than big bets. Archer is right! There is such a thing as "Advantage bets" when you are always betting the strongest trend in the casino.

I've been watching these Martingale players for 30 years. Yes, they win a lot of shoes but sooner or later they lose their farm, or their house or their restaurant. The casino just sits there and lets them do their thing. They know how its going to end. And they are always right.

But when you take your time and pick your tables wisely and only play the strongest trends, you will quickly get their attention even though you are usually the lowest bettor at the table. You are the lowest bettor but usually you are also the most consistent winner. THAT gets their attention!

Originally Posted by ayuinca

We all know those Ellis. The issue is PREDICTION. How do you know the trend will keep or not? Only when the shoes are finished we can see the abnormal. No difficulies to look backward, no one can look forward and predict it correctly more than 50-50.

Yes they can ayuinca. The STRONGEST trend usually survives. Fortunately the game is not about always, its about USUALLY.

You know, I often have high rollers at my table. They are up $70,000 one day and down $140,000 the next. They are far and away the biggest bettor at the table. I seldom see the pit boss watching over THEIR shoulder. He already KNOWS how its going to end. No, he's watching over MY shoulder and I'm only playing quarters. But he knows how THAT is going to end also.

Originally Posted by Ellis

But he knows how THAT is going to end also.

Sure sillE, everyone's watching the paranoid liar... sure.

Now you be quiet.

Didn't I teach you better manners than that?

And stop posting from my computer when I'm away at work.

You have your own in the basement next to your bed, so use that one.

Mom

I need data proof, Ellis. I can't see the whole picture if you just keeping saying the winning they had. I hope I can believe you but I can't without see solid proof. You are a teacher and teach math so you should understand what is certified fact.

WAS a Math teacher a long time ago. I don't know of anyway to certify trends. It's something you have to experience for yourself. I find it extremely difficult to believe you haven't if you spend much time in casinos.

If you want to talk to my students just go to my public forum. It's free. beatthecasino.com And post your question to the private members. Just ask them how they are doing? Just register and hit Baccarat and start a thread such as "To all Private Members" or whatever you want. You sound to me like you are really trying. You just need to be pointed in the right direction.

Great post Garnabby! That should really help everyone. Why don't you tell everyone about the night you watched me play a trend in Vegas. Ha.

No, I won't post any more there Ellis, because you people delect posts that compromise your business. I have seen my posts at your forum are delected. Admit that Ellis, your site is not a place for freely discussion; your site there is only to catch eyeballs and all about business. I had received private messages from your members saying that not all people can win in a long term, they are still there because they keep expecting one day you give them a perfact system.

What I was really unhappy about it's that you were completely irresponsible of giving people free system to let them earn the entrance fee; such system turned out to be no better than 50-50. 50% people won and earned that 500 bucks and 50% people lost money. What a business you are doing, 0 risky!

Last words, Ellis, don't post any positive sample any more please. What about those negative? People (your students) might not tell you how much they lost, how worse table you'd ever had. Do you think I believe that you'd have never had a table goes opposite your so called trend? If it's all true, I will only take you, your stories and your experence is a legend. No one can do that again.

I just could not understand a teacher with scient minding who is telling all day the subjective, no proof stories. I am not a kid.

Originally Posted by Ellis

You know, I often have high rollers at my table. They are up $70,000 one day and down $140,000 the next. They are far and away the biggest bettor at the table. I seldom see the pit boss watching over THEIR shoulder. He already KNOWS how its going to end. No, he's watching over MY shoulder and I'm only playing quarters. But he knows how THAT is going to end also.

I have been reading this forum for a while. Been playing bac full time for the past 15 years, I thought I can't really agree with you, Ellis.

You mean the pit boss is watching over you because of your play??? You must be joking unless you are Kerry Packer, who can affect the P&L of the casino with his wealth and play.

The casino is not worry about your play. They are just afraid you don't go. And if you are really good and playing for the past 30 or so years full time, I guess your fortune is big enough and seriously, you should be retired by now and won't bother about the $50 dollar monthly that you are trying to squeeze out from fellow bac player.

Just my 2 cents.