Thread: Flat-Betting Banker

I think the easiest way to win several units per session is simply to flat-bet Banker every hand until you come across PPP. Then wait for the appearance of the next Banker before wagering on it once again.

Playing through the entire shoe with a -6 unit stop-loss per shoe, after recording the results of 50 random shoes I get +145 units.

At the black chip level , that's over $14,000 for one week's worth of full-time play.

you mean bet on banker after a banker appears or even if a player shows up. I have seen banker chops many times before.

Originally Posted by weddings

you mean bet on banker after a banker appears or even if a player shows up. I have seen banker chops many times before.

I mean flat-bet one unit on Banker each and every time except after PPP. Then wait until Banker reappears before starting to bet it again.

Banker wins the majority of shoes, in any case. Plus you're curtailing losses against long Player streaks by stopping at PPP.

In my experience, -6 unit shoes do not happen that often, and when they do, -6 units is negligible after many regular wins on shoes in the range of +5 - +15 units.

I think a goal of 10 units per day would be highly achievable ($1000/day).

can you give a visual example thanks

Originally Posted by steve6969

can you give a visual example thanks

BBBB
PPPPPP
BBBBB
PP
BBBB
PP
B
P
B
PPPPPP
B
P
B
PP
B
P
BB
PP
BBB
P
BB
P
BBB
PP
BBBBB
PP
B
P
B
P
BB
P
BBB

Banker: 40
Player: 32
+12 units

B
P
BB
P
BB
PPPP
B
P
BB
P
B
PPP
B
PPPPPP
BB
P
B
P
BBB
P
BBBBB
PPPPPPPP
B
P
B
P
BBB
PP
BB

Banker: 28
Player: 32

+1 unit

is this what u meant? from a sample shoe from a live casino.

Originally Posted by weddings

is this what u meant? from a sample shoe from a live casino.

Yes, so I get a final total of 0 units with that example.

haha so the lowest shoe you ever played using this method was -6 units?

Originally Posted by weddings

haha so the lowest shoe you ever played using this method was -6 units?

No, I did not say that.

I said use a stop-loss of minus six units.

Once you descend to that, the shoe is usually no longer profitable.
Cut your losses and restart a new shoe.

oh ok, can i clarify something. do we start betting Banker on the first hand or do we wait for the first Banker then we start the method?

Originally Posted by weddings

oh ok, can i clarify something. do we start betting Banker on the first hand or do we wait for the first Banker then we start the method?

As I played it over fifty shoes, I started betting Banker right from the first game (hand).

Take a look at a good 10-20 sample shoes using this method and see what you get out of it.

Well, not a bad idea but look at the math. There are an avg of 9 3 or mores per 8 deck 72 play shoe on avg not counting ties. More than 4 will be player 3 or mores. So you are going to miss out betting on an avg of 4+ Banks per shoe while waiting for a B after 3 or more Ps. That more than defeats the slight B edge already. But keep on thinking Sevenshooter. That was a very good try.

yes i am looking at dublin right now i can see streaks of P in the starting hands. do u recommend any stop loss and then wait for the next shoe?
i will give a it a try and post the results here=]

Originally Posted by weddings

yes i am looking at dublin right now i can see streaks of P in the starting hands. do u recommend any stop loss and then wait for the next shoe?
i will give a it a try and post the results here=]

I chose to use a -6 unit stop loss since most of the shoes that went to -6 at the beginning tended to continue on a downward spiral.

Even if the shoe did recover after hitting -6, the end result was usually breaking even or just slightly plus.

I think the small stop-loss is critical to coming out ahead in the long run since you will encounter a number of shoes with long Banker streaks, as well. Win on Banker, never lose more than 3 units on lengthy Player runs.

Also, with flat-betting, things are much more manageable compared to using a negative progression. You can go through many shoes without exceeding lows of -2 or -3 units. Your highs can be extremely high (as flat-betting goes). +15 is not unattainable.


All I can say is, over 50 shoes dealt out in a land-based casino, I was up +145 units. I charted the Bac pit again this afternoon looking over the results of 10 more shoes played and was up another +51 units (paper bets). Mind you, in retrospect, these ended up being very Banker-biased shoes.

Where is this land based casino ,and are they hand shuffled , 6 or 8 decks
Thanks for the input,gotta love the flat bet or what I use 1-2hi

G

Originally Posted by gerard711

Where is this land based casino ,and are they hand shuffled , 6 or 8 decks
Thanks for the input,gotta love the flat bet or what I use 1-2hi

G

Edgewater Casino, Vancouver, Canada.

8 decks, machine-shuffled.

Originally Posted by sevenshooter

Edgewater Casino, Vancouver, Canada.

8 decks, machine-shuffled.

just the same as in Borgata

.

this method is to win in the long term. to emphasize again LONG term.

Originally Posted by weddings

this method is to win in the long term. to emphasize again LONG term.

Did it work for you?

Up or down units after how many shoes?

Did you use the -6 unit stop-loss?

Originally Posted by John

Don't talk nonsense.

I observed a player flat bet BANK only and while playing a non-commission game, go broke after three days. I suggest even paying the 5% vig, things would NOT have turned out any different.

I've played shoes where the Player (punto) outstripped the banco for 4 shoes on the bounce (by a factor greater than 10 for each shoe). Now you have to figure how to get back to even before you can get ahead.

Assuming a loss of -6 occurred on each of these four shoes, that's -24 units. Just two good Banker shoes would more than make up for that loss.
Remember, we are not betting Banker every hand. Long Player streaks cannot hurt this system. Even if the Player streak went to, say, sixteen, that's not -16 units but just -3.

All I can say is in my experience testing this method, I'm over +200 units in sixty-some shoes.

hello sevenshooter thank you for your system....

as all the expert said as we all know this is gambling after all....

and key is limit losing and gain more winning....

we should not be too tough on system.... i mean any system can hit losing shoe..

and yes some one in the world can hit 20 losing streak and on the other someone can have 20 winning streak.. it is a lot to do with luck...

so my point is money management is such a key... let's say you have 20 losing streak.. say you lose 20 shoes... all of it... okay... so sevenshooter said that most you would lose in shoe is -6 so it would be 120.... say you were playing $10 it would be $12000... if you were playing $100 then lose $12000.. ouch... well and i won't be surprise this can happen.....

that's why... i tell people to start small and build up the bankroll... well, losing $1200 isn't too bad... compre to $12000.... see if system does well in long term.. no need to rush... start from small and see if you can double your bankroll first.. well, i would say this is fun way to test your system... maybe start with $5 or $10.. have $500 bankroll and see if you can double that bankroll... I would really start from minimum... and build up.. this is also good training to get more patient.... lol......

that's why gambling is very dangerous when you are desperate because you put lots of money at once...

thanks

Originally Posted by sevenshooter

Assuming a loss of -6 occurred on each of these four shoes, that's -24 units. Just two good Banker shoes would more than make up for that loss.
Remember, we are not betting Banker every hand. Long Player streaks cannot hurt this system. Even if the Player streak went to, say, sixteen, that's not -16 units but just -3.

All I can say is in my experience testing this method, I'm over +200 units in sixty-some shoes.

Why don't you have the testers like Ayuinca to test it over a substantial amount of shoe for you to verify it from a second source.

Originally Posted by scot

Why don't you have the testers like Ayuinca to test it over a substantial amount of shoe for you to verify it from a second source.

A very good idea.

Rules of the Strategy:

a) Always bet one unit on Banker
b) Halt betting after appearance of PPP
c) Rebet Banker after Banker reappears
d) -6 unit stop loss for shoe Resume play at start of new shoe

I have a feeling a simulation running one million hands will show a negative outcome.

I am confident, though, per session, it would be relatively easy to consistently hit your target of winning several units. Again, I advocate playing nothing less than $100 chips.

Originally Posted by sevenshooter

A very good idea.

Rules of the Strategy:

a) Always bet one unit on Banker
b) Halt betting after appearance of PPP
c) Rebet Banker after Banker reappears
d) -6 unit stop loss for shoe Resume play at start of new shoe

I have a feeling a simulation running one million hands will show a negative outcome.

I am confident, though, per session, it would be relatively easy to consistently hit your target of winning several units. Again, I advocate playing nothing less than $100 chips.

I see. It is more of a Money Management type of play where you get out when you are ahead (per shoe, per session) then?

Originally Posted by scot

I see. It is more of a Money Management type of play where you get out when you are ahead (per shoe, per session) then?

Not the way I played it over the last sixty shoes.
I played right thru all shoes from beginning to end.
The only times I deviated from this was when I hit my stop-loss of -6 units, recorded that as a loss and restarted another shoe.

Originally Posted by sevenshooter

Rules of the Strategy:
a) Always bet one unit on Banker
b) Halt betting after appearance of PPP
c) Rebet Banker after Banker reappears
d) -6 unit stop loss for shoe Resume play at start of new shoe

I have a feeling a simulation running one million hands will show a negative outcome.

(1) 1 million random generated shoes showed -0.58 units per shoe. (41% winning shoes)
(2) my own historical real world shoe data shows -0.11 units per shoe. (45% winnng shoes)
(3) Zumma600 shows -0.03 units per shoe. (50% winning shoes)
(4) Zumma1000 shows +0.03 units per shoe. (53% winning shoes)

Do you have a win goal? Your avg is about 3.6 unit s a shoe. i'm sure your ahead bymore than that in the shoe. if you had a win goal i think your profits will increase

I quite the shoe if you reached -6 or +15.

+8 to 10 should be a good number