Flat-Betting Banker

[gerard711]

hi seven and everyone else,

from a pure logical sense, when u hit -6units, y not stay at the same shoe and continue to do the same but only change it to player?

yes i know statistically speaking, banker has a slightly higher chance of winning, but speaking from a pure logical sense (and also from your observation, u said), the reason we stop at -6units is because the shoe doesnt fit this method right, so invert the method and that should fine, won't it?

also, im still puzzling with this, if this method works, or if u want to prove that this method works, y not double your bankroll everyday before u go home? because if it works, then it should really matter right

So how about a combo of waiting for the first side to hit 6 play that side with sevens original rules win goal +2 or +3 stop loss -5 or -6 if you hit stop loss switch sides, with same win goal and maybe go up to 2x units and look to get even for that shoe

[gerard711]

Gotta tell ya this COMBO thing seems to be getting great results hitting like 75% of time my 3 unit win goals and when switching sides after the stop loss been breaking even on those shoes 100% of the time hmmmmmmm its been only a short test but I gotta say its has to mean something will go live with this next week , stay tuned........flat bet is key to saving your BR and thats is what I have been doing 75% of the time


any comments feel free to reply

[AZJeff]

Hello Gerard,

Nice post. I will be following this idea. I will try it on some bac websites and see how it does.

Regards,
Jeff

[extremeb]

Gotta tell ya this COMBO thing seems to be getting great results hitting like 75% of time my 3 unit win goals and when switching sides after the stop loss been breaking even on those shoes 100% of the time hmmmmmmm its been only a short test but I gotta say its has to mean something will go live with this next week , stay tuned........flat bet is key to saving your BR and thats is what I have been doing 75% of the time


any comments feel free to reply

u serious? im surprised.

so let me confirm again - it's basically using sevenshooter's method (betting banker), except when it reaches the stop-loss (-6units), sevenshooter will quit the shoe entirely, but u will continue the shoe by switching to betting player instead, is it?

[gerard711]

u serious? im surprised.

so let me confirm again - it's basically using sevenshooter's method (betting banker), except when it reaches the stop-loss (-6units), sevenshooter will quit the shoe entirely, but u will continue the shoe by switching to betting player instead, is it?

Yes but before making first bet see which side hits 6 wins first. Then go with that side switch only if hitting stop loss been getting great results ......comments welcomed

[extremeb]

Yes but before making first bet see which side hits 6 wins first. Then go with that side switch only if hitting stop loss been getting great results ......comments welcomed

"see which side hits 6 wins first" - u mean see which side win 6 times first right? doesnt have to be 6 in-a-roll right?

[gerard711]

not 6 in a row just whichever side hits 6 wins from the start of the shoe ,as soon as the side hits 6 go with that side looking for +2 or +3 real simple ,using larger units say $50 ,so $150 a shoe 3-5 shoes a day your looking at a nice pay day,when you break it down its really not that hard ,dont let greed guide you

[extremeb]

yes, 2-3units per shoe is pretty alright

sorry, just 2 more questions (so that i can run some simulation tests)...

1) if u won your first 3bets (for example, 9 bankers right from the start), u are already +3units, do u quit the shoe?

2) let's say banker won 6 times first, so u keep flat betting banker first, then if u hit -6units, u switch to keep flat betting player. what if u hit -6units again (i guess it will mean in total -12units), do u switch back to keep flat betting banker again? or do u quit the shoe entirely?

[gerard711]

yes, 2-3units per shoe is pretty alright

sorry, just 2 more questions (so that i can run some simulation tests)...

1) if u won your first 3bets (for example, 9 bankers right from the start), u are already +3units, do u quit the shoe?

2) let's say banker won 6 times first, so u keep flat betting banker first, then if u hit -6units, u switch to keep flat betting player. what if u hit -6units again (i guess it will mean in total -12units), do u switch back to keep flat betting banker again? or do u quit the shoe entirely?

1)Yes quit the shoe its a winner

2)Yes you quit the shoe -12 .....I have found that it may happen not too often after the switch there are some things you can do to make up for the first 6 units lost you can increase you flat bet to 2x your original bet and look to get +3 to get out of the shoe even or you can go for +4 after the switch and look to get an extra unit from current shoe and the same when you start the next 2 shoes get the extra unit to make up the loss......if however you did loose 12 units flat betting I feel strong enough with this method to increase to 2x units next 2 shoes and go for 3 units each .....hope Im clear


starting with 20 units and your at $50 units and you look to get 3 units a shoe thats 15% of your buy-in cant ask for a better return than that ........ discipline is key


G711

[gerard711]

Had my first bad shoe at casino espresso here is the time 06-09-2010 08:52:01 got to -6 switched sides lost another 6 units down 12 the next 2 shoes if I had went 2x my original unit size we recovered nicely very powerful method

[dg0412]

Interesting. Wouldn't it be better to look for shoes where 6 bankers won first and bet bankers only. Change only when hit stop loss -6.

This way you will not be betting P when player hit 6 first as afterall the essence of sevenshooter strategy is to take advantage of the banker slightly better probability.

anyone can confirm with their live shoes data if the B reach 6 first with banker flat bet, how many ends with profit and how many ends with loss

[gerard711]

Interesting. Wouldn't it be better to look for shoes where 6 bankers won first and bet bankers only. Change only when hit stop loss -6.

This way you will not be betting P when player hit 6 first as afterall the essence of sevenshooter strategy is to take advantage of the banker slightly better probability.

anyone can confirm with their live shoes data if the B reach 6 first with banker flat bet, how many ends with profit and how many ends with loss

shoes that have started with 6 players first have done very well its seems to me it doesnt matter B or P

[green8]

Interesting. Wouldn't it be better to look for shoes where 6 bankers won first and bet bankers only. Change only when hit stop loss -6.

This way you will not be betting P when player hit 6 first as afterall the essence of sevenshooter strategy is to take advantage of the banker slightly better probability.

anyone can confirm with their live shoes data if the B reach 6 first with banker flat bet, how many ends with profit and how many ends with loss

Let let me look through my stack of scorecards from my vegas trip and post one up for you if it corresponds to you guys method.

[gerard711]

Please send a couple of shoes

[extremeb]

Had my first bad shoe at casino espresso here is the time 06-09-2010 08:52:01 got to -6 switched sides lost another 6 units down 12 the next 2 shoes if I had went 2x my original unit size we recovered nicely very powerful method

gerard711, so how did u go?
u were down -12units in one shoe, so u double your units in the next shoes? and then u won back all the losses?

[gerard711]

Yes flat bet first shoe -12 then next 2 shoes went 2x unit won 3units each shoe got back 12 units ...that is the high I will go 2x......still testing and will go live Thursday

[extremeb]

Had my first bad shoe at casino espresso here is the time 06-09-2010 08:52:01 got to -6 switched sides lost another 6 units down 12 the next 2 shoes if I had went 2x my original unit size we recovered nicely very powerful method

this shoe that hit u down to -12units...which side won 6times first?

[gerard711]

this shoe that hit u down to -12units...which side won 6times first?

player

[tuasbird]

bryan, you're a solid guy! wish you the very best in your continued success via your profession. hope to have your triggers someday, but if it don't come, you do provide some valuable insights & backbone of playing this game successfully liao...to me at least!

take care! drop me an email if you like after reading this

[eyz]

Yes but before making first bet see which side hits 6 wins first. Then go with that side switch only if hitting stop loss been getting great results ......comments welcomed

you incorporated leonard's method into the system as well?

[extremeb]

you incorporated leonard's method into the system as well?

sorry, which one is leonard's method?

[gerard711]

sorry, which one is leonard's method?

Leonards method was waiting for the side to hit 6 wins first

[green8]

Ok, I was looking through my the scorecards I kept from LV trip. One of the scorecards I looked at had 36 players and 32 bankers. Player was the first to hit 6 wins.

[gerard711]

Ok, I was looking through my the scorecards I kept from LV trip. One of the scorecards I looked at had 36 players and 32 bankers. Player was the first to hit 6 wins.

looking back toward the end of the shoe you got up +3 on player and stop

[sparkart]

Did a couple of tests regarding the idea that the side that hits 6 wins first will be the dominant side.

20,000 randomly generated shoes (using Baccarat draw rules as posted on Wizard of Odds):
Success-rate: 60.51%
Neutral-rate: 4.86%

100,000 randomly generated shoes:
Success-rate: 60.68%
Neutral-rate: 4.625%

Surprisingly interesting results. Don't feel like testing 1,000,000+ shoes right now, but if it still holds true.. sounds like we have a long term winner.


Makes me wonder if the "first to 6" ratio (player 3 banker 6 = 1/2) has any effect on the dominance proportion.

edit:
Looked at a shoe and for this shoe that I looked at the results were:
Banker - 39
Player - 33

Player reached 4 wins before Banker reached 6 wins, so stats for that shoe after the trigger:
Banker - 33
Player - 29

Just something you should take into consideration, also because of the fact that from what I've been seeing, on average the dominance is insignificant. What is more interesting is predicting large dominance (e.g. 20:40).

[now here]

The trend is your friend

[sparkart]

The trend is your friend

And the losing trend is your enemy. If only I had powers to find my friend and hide from my enemy.

[now here]

You and me both, brother.

[Archer]

Did a couple of tests regarding the idea that the side that hits 6 wins first will be the dominant side.

20,000 randomly generated shoes (using Baccarat draw rules as posted on Wizard of Odds):
Success-rate: 60.51%
Neutral-rate: 4.86%

100,000 randomly generated shoes:
Success-rate: 60.68%
Neutral-rate: 4.625%

Surprisingly interesting results. Don't feel like testing 1,000,000+ shoes right now, but if it still holds true.. sounds like we have a long term winner.


Makes me wonder if the "first to 6" ratio (player 3 banker 6 = 1/2) has any effect on the dominance proportion.

edit:
Looked at a shoe and for this shoe that I looked at the results were:
Banker - 39
Player - 33

Player reached 4 wins before Banker reached 6 wins, so stats for that shoe after the trigger:
Banker - 33
Player - 29

Just something you should take into consideration, also because of the fact that from what I've been seeing, on average the dominance is insignificant. What is more interesting is predicting large dominance (e.g. 20:40).

Then one might say watch a shoe until "strong" trends appear and bet those and those only. A strong trend would, by definition, be "large dominance."

Example: We know that in an 8 deck shoe with about half a deck cut out we are going to get 18 1's on average. If the 1's were occurring normal or higher than average relative to the number of decisions so far we might want to bet for a chop after seeing a run of one. Win or lose we could parlay or play a neg prog on that bet as long as the 1's maintained the relative position. Conversely we could also bet the opposite if the 1's were substantially less than average.

Archer

[sparkart]

Then one might say watch a shoe until "strong" trends appear and bet those and those only. A strong trend would, by definition, be "large dominance."

But will you be right by a substantial percentage?

We know that in an 8 deck shoe with about half a deck cut out we are going to get 18 1's on average. If the 1's were occurring normal or higher than average relative to the number of decisions so far we might want to bet for a chop after seeing a run of one.

Why would you bet on chops after seeing runs of one occur more often?
[/QUOTE]