Thread: easy to win

not lose , in long term, strategy is good,win big, small, it depends on your luck.

anybody lose you against him bet 1u ,if win against going ....on and bet 2 u(double) ,if win,bet 1u

you lose ,bet 1u follow his bet.

any opinion ? sorry if wrong idea

Originally Posted by fauzy

not lose , in long term, strategy is good,win big, small, it depends on your luck.

anybody lose you against him bet 1u ,if win against going ....on and bet 2 u(double) ,if win,bet 1u

you lose ,bet 1u follow his bet.

any opinion ? sorry if wrong idea

In a way is good . but would you want someone do that to you .. ? In this game if I know someone keep betting agaisnt me , I hope they lose , that me ..

Originally Posted by fauzy

not lose , in long term, strategy is good,win big, small, it depends on your luck...

...any opinion?

Fauzy,

You said it yourself: "it depends on your luck".

The short answer is that you can't win if anything depends on luck, if every bet you can make has a negative expectation. When you don't have a positive expectation luck will ruin you in the long run. The only way you can win with luck, under these circumstances, is if you walk away after your bankroll went up.

The tricky thing about baccarat is that the game has a very small house advantage. This means that it takes a lot more independent trials to feel the effect of that negative expectation. So, this means that you may play 500 or 1,000 or even 5,000 hands and think that you've entered the realm of the "long run." That is not true, mathematically. So, if you play $5,000 hands and have a positive bankroll you may think you have a winning system. But that would be just an illusion because you just haven't played enough hands yet, to let that casino edge engulf your entire bankroll (along with all the winnings so far).

The casino edge is a time tested principle. You need more than luck to beat it.

Originally Posted by anhtanny

In a way is good . but would you want someone do that to you .. ? In this game if I know someone keep betting agaisnt me , I hope they lose , that me ..

you against 2x , also follow 1x win stop , they never know your system, change person or change table free to choose

every day result is no the same so we call luck. sometime good day when many peoples lose many times.&win many times

win we win(follow), lose we win (against) double bet,we donot hope people lose we hope they win also ,is that bad ?

Originally Posted by anhtanny

In a way is good . but would you want someone do that to you .. ? In this game if I know someone keep betting agaisnt me , I hope they lose , that me ..

124816,32,64hit....win 6 hands.....

1lose,2l,4l,8l,16hit = you against,so you win 4 hands,system only win 1u

1lose ,2hit = draw not win

1win =-1units

against system,more polite ,because we like/love win(money) .sorry
against people, against system, not against shoe/outcome

Originally Posted by fauzy

124816,32,64hit....win 6 hands.....

1lose,2l,4l,8l,16hit = you against,so you win 4 hands,system only win 1u

1lose ,2hit = draw not win

1win =-1units

against system,more polite ,because we like/love win(money) .sorry
against people, against system, not against shoe/outcome

I can't really understand this post, but a 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 progressive bet will bankrupt you eventually. It's not a maybe... it will happen, it's just when will it happen. Likely sooner than later if you ask me.

The casinos have the edge in the long run, but we're always playing in the short run so anything is possible.

Originally Posted by kadiddle

The casinos have the edge in the long run, but we're always playing in the short run so anything is possible.

Actually, I agree with you 100%.

Imagine there is a bag filled with 100 balls. 99 of them are black and 1 is white. You have to put your hand inside the bag and pull out the white ball to win. So, the casino has a huge edge against you. But in the short run you can win. The best chances of winning are inf you do it only once.

Now, imagine you do this once and you happen to pull the white ball out of the bag. You get paid. That was the short run - as short as it gets, i.e. one single time.

If you do it again you've given the casino yet another chance to beat you.

So, I agree with your statement, but I have to add that your best chances of winning in the short run are if you only gamble once. This means that you should figure out how much money you are willing to gamble in a lifetime, go to a casino, put all that money down on a single bet and walk away forever, no matter what the outcome is.

I would rather imagine a bag with 100 balls. 51 are black and 49 are white. Now your chances of winning on the short term have improved considerably.

That's precisely the trap that the casinos work with. Speaking figuratively, they will a bag 51/49 with balls and let you pull them out. The ratio makes it seem that you can win often. The problem for you is that the casino only pays 1 to 1 on independent events that are not 50/50. Therefore they shortchange you ever time you win.

As I said in another post, all you have to do to lose a $100 bankroll .05c at a time is to win a $1 bet 2,000 times.

So, when you say "your chances of winning on the short term have improved considerably" it is up for interpretations. It depends exactly what you mean by short term. If you mean to place one single bet, then yes, but if you mean to play a string of bets that should be considered "short term" because the total number of bets is less than infinity, then I'm afraid your chances of winning decrease. The more bets you play, your chances of winning get closer to zero. They never actually reach absolute zero, which adds to the illusion, but the odds get astronomical, which means they are practically zero.

Originally Posted by MrPink

... but I have to add that your best chances of winning in the short run are if you only gamble once. This means that you should figure out how much money you are willing to gamble in a lifetime, go to a casino, put all that money down on a single bet and walk away forever, no matter what the outcome is.

From the thread, Lead, follow, or get out of the way... :

__________________________________________________ ______________________
QUESTION: Hi, Wizard. Let’s say I have $300 to gamble with, and can accept a 25% risk of ruin. What should I do to maximize my upside? Thanks! — Jerry T from Hertford

ANSWER: I would make the banker bet in baccarat. My betting advice would be to do what is known as a two-step progression. First, bet 1/3 of your bankroll. If that wins, walk away. If that loses, then bet the other 2/3. Again, if you win, walk. With any tie, just bet again until the bet is resolved. Here are the probabilities in baccarat:

Banker: 45.86%
Player: 44.62%
Tie: 9.52%

The probability of a banker win, given that the bet is resolved is 45.86%/(45.86%+44.62%) = 50.68%. The probability of losing both steps of the progression is (1-0.5068)2 = 24.32%. The banker bet pays 19 to 20, so you will have a 75.68% chance of winning $95, and a 24.32% chance of losing $300. June 7, 2008 . (At http://wizardofodds.com/askthewizard/baccarat.html .)
__________________________________________________ ______________________

I certainly agree with you that the odds are in the casinos favor. But let me ask you, do you agree or not agree that there are players who make a consistent profit and living by playing against the odds with baccarat?

Garnabby,

This is a very good argument to throw on the table.

I am not quite sure if my answer will be 100% accurate, but I think the question that had been asked on The Wizard's site is a bit different from the point I was making. I think the key difference is in the fact that part of the question included the 25% risk of ruin condition. So, to answer the question The Wizard was solving a mathematical challenge with the specific condition and he came up close to 25% (exact number being 24.32%).

In The Wizard example the condition is 25% risk of ruin and the solution leads to a potential profit of $95 (let's round it up to $100) which is basically 1/3 of the bankroll. In my example the numbers are different. The risk of ruin is roughly 50% and the potential profit is doubling the bankroll (minus commission on banker bet).

When The Wizard says "walk away" he means to never set foot in a casino again. That's when that risk of ruin is 25%. But if you keep repeating that experiment over and over again the risk of ruin changes, because you continue to gamble and you are no longer betting 1/3 and then 2/3 only if you lost the first bet.

The Wizard calls it a two-step progression. Your bankroll is $300, first bet is $100 and the potential second bet is $200. This two-step progression is basically the first two steps of the Martingale progression, i.e you double your next bet if you lose. We all know that the Martingale increases your odds of winning in the short run. But the main difference between Martingale and The Wizard's two-step progression is that The Wizard says "walk away" if you win the first bet, and Martingale says "bet one unit" if you win the bet. So, with The Wizard you walk away and with Martingale you keep gambling. That's a big difference.

Instead of the two-step progression described by The Wizard you could take a four-step progression and split the $300 bankroll into $20; $40; $80; $160. We could call that a four-step Martingale progression, I guess. If you preserve the condition that you "walk away" (meaning forever) after the first bet has been won (regardless at which step of the progression you win) then the risk of ruin drops and so does your potential profit. Your $300 bankroll can only win 19 bucks (after commission) on a banker bet.

So, yes, your best odds of winning are if you split your bankroll and apply a progression. But in that case there are a few things that also need to be mentioned. First, you can only win a maximum of what your first betting unit was (on even money bets) and you do need to walk away forever either after winning the first bet or when all is lost. You can never apply the second part of the Martingale, which tells you to reset your bet to one unit and start all over.

Looking back at my statement I should have phrased it differently. I shouldn't have said "your best chances of winning" (because that could mean winning $1 out of a $50,000 bankroll). Instead, I should have said "your best chances of doubling your bankroll."

Having said all that I still stand behind my statement, but I will rephrase it here (in this hypothetical example):

If you want the best chances of doubling your money you should figure the exact amount that you will gamble throughout your lifetime. Then put that money together, place it all on a single banker bet in baccarat and walk away forever whether you win or lose.

You will not really double your bankroll because of the commission on banker bets, but that's more or less the idea.

kadiddle,

Before answering your question I want to make sure we understand each other correctly. In other words, I would feel more comfortable answering your question if it had been phrased as follows:

"...do you agree or not agree that there is a possibility that there might be players who make a consistent profit and living by playing against the odds with baccarat?"

Basically, I cannot agree that there are any, simply because I really don't know of any. But I do agree that there is a possibility that there might be some.

Basically, is there a possibility that there might be a player whose strategy is to predict the exact number on a roulette spin and wins every single time? So, he only plays one single straight-up bet on each and every spin and wins every time. If you ask me if there is a possibility that such player exists, I would have to say yes. The possibility does in fact exist, but I'd have to add that it's very unlikely. The other thing that I would have to add is that this player doesn't really have a strategy and that he doesn't really predict anything. Regardless what goes on in his mind and what kind on analytics he might be using, he is simply lucky.

So, that would be one helluva lucky individual. But what about a baccarat player that consistently wins?

Yes, the possibility does exist but there are a few things that I would add to that. First, he is just lucky and his luck might run out. I'd say that the more he continues playing the more likely it is that his luck will run out. There is no guarantee that his luck will run out in his lifetime, but the odds are still against him, because (as you also say) the house has the edge.

I have seen many players that are convinced they are consistent winners. But I've also seen many players that chose to ignore some of the previous losses, either because that was before they were using that winning system or for whatever other reason. I've seen a lot of players that unintentionally forget about some of their loses. There are definitely many players that fall into those categories.

And lastly, there are players that are truly consistent winners at baccarat, but are not sharing all the information. The players I am referring to in this last paragraph are advantage players and/or cheat. Those players have an edge either by cheating or by exploiting a weakness that they've managed to spot in a particular casino, or a combination of both. But those players are not truly gambling.

Originally Posted by MrPink

Those players have an edge either by cheating or by exploiting a weakness that they've managed to spot in a particular casino, or a combination of both. But those players are not truly gambling.

Sure they are, by falsely believing: they ever held, or could hold, such a possible and small advantage; that luck, particularly the variances of their relatively-small BR's, won't catch up to also them; and that they won't soon be "re-advantaged" and/or cheated back... or worse.

Foremost, this "loaded term" AP... for advantage-player or advantage play. Sonny (and a few of the bj-mathematicians), over at Blackjack and Card Counting Forums - BlackjackInfo.com (and elsewhere) ekes out a living there by contrasting that to eg, "voodoo"... trying to enhance the former by unceasingly and often improperly belittling the latter. (If believe that nothing beats baccarat (, or at the same time nothing can hurt the player by it) in the day-to-day sense, then can't repeatedly believe eg, betting progressions are of harm.) Read "between the lines" over there... Sonny, like the casinos, some book-sellers and internet-sites, is quite the "user".

Go to Vegas, or anywhere else thusly supposedly-popular, to check out the action if you don't believe me. Those big-idea guys come by the dozens every week, but run scared a month later... and for reasons having nothing to do with bj! Or wait until i have the screen-sharing processes set up for some of the better on-line casinos, which allow for AP-play, to see no one "step up to the plate". (Odd that johno, John1234, Ellis, and some of the other long-term "big talkers" suddenly and completely "bowed out" of the public forums?)

The only viable advantages, in any field, still lay primarily in what has not yet been discovered. And to achieve those, one must become aware of the basics which can lead there... and be prepared to follow through with a lot of hard work for nothing. (All the current AP-cryptic stuff, "hinted at" like Hitler's secret weapon when he was cornered, and more is, of course, already known to the casinos, and their own formally-trained cheaters, et al.)

Originally Posted by MrPink

kadiddle,



And lastly, there are players that are truly consistent winners at baccarat, but are not sharing all the information. The players I am referring to in this last paragraph are advantage players and/or cheat. Those players have an edge either by cheating or by exploiting a weakness that they've managed to spot in a particular casino, or a combination of both. But those players are not truly gambling.

Yes Mr. Pink, you are correct about this.
There are some reading this site who have not posted anything, but
do reach out to others via PM. I have seen such players in casinos,
sometimes drawing heat. The most interesting part is that the players around them don't even see or believe that these players are any different than anyone else. I woulds venture to say that those same people willing to buy a phoney system would not recognize the real thing when it is sitting right next to them.

Garnaby, is Ellis really banned from this site? Who else?

Hey Mr. Pink, it is the most beautiful Sunday of the summer in the NYC area. Why are we playing with this now. Go outside and enjoy the day.

Originally Posted by Profbac

I have seen such players in casinos,
sometimes drawing heat. The most interesting part is that the players around them don't even see or believe that these players are any different than anyone else. I woulds venture to say that those same people willing to buy a phoney system would not recognize the real thing when it is sitting right next to them.

Baccarat is a simple game, either banker or player.
Some like to think that it is complex and if you show them a simple way to make money, they won't believe.
But, if you sell them a garbage system, they will believe and pay for it.

Baccarat is definitely a simple game to play. It's a game of chance where the player doesn't even have to make any hit or stand decisions (such as in BJ). It's a game of chance, just like roulette. The player places a bet trying to predict the outcome of a future event, and then waits to see what happens. So, in that sense it's not any different form roulette or a coin flip.

But is the theory behind all the mathematical principles also simple?

But is the theory behind all the mathematical principles also simple?[/QUOTE]

A major (big 20) university awarded a Phd in mathematics to a man
whose dissertation was "an examination of card counting methods in
baccarat".

The dissertation was posted on the internet. If you can get through all the Greek alphabet, he explains why the methods used in blackjack don't
work for baccarat. He then explains what a system developer should be looking for in developing a system.
He did not conclude with how to actually do it, but he provided the theoretical basis for the work that some people are doing, but keeping quiet.

PS. The short answer was nonlinear systems. There, keep it simple.

BTW, read a great book called Deal Me In. It is about poker stars, but the stories are great. Chris Ferguson, aka Jesus, because of his hair and beard, looked at poker and applied a branch of matematics called Game Theory to come up with his own strategy to play. He has a Phd in
computer systems, and his father is a professor of mathematics.
Today he is a top champion. When he startd doing this, everyone told him that all the matematics of the game was well known and alrady looked at.
"If it could be done, someone would have done it already"
If you believet that, you are going nowhere.

Originally Posted by Profbac

But is the theory behind all the mathematical principles also simple?

A major (big 20) university awarded a Phd in mathematics to a man
whose dissertation was "an examination of card counting methods in
baccarat".

The dissertation was posted on the internet. If you can get through all the Greek alphabet, he explains why the methods used in blackjack don't
work for baccarat. He then explains what a system developer should be looking for in developing a system.
He did not conclude with how to actually do it, but he provided the theoretical basis for the work that some people are doing, but keeping quiet.

PS. The short answer was nonlinear systems. There, keep it simple.

BTW, read a great book called Deal Me In. It is about poker stars, but the stories are great. Chris Ferguson, aka Jesus, because of his hair and beard, looked at poker and applied a branch of matematics called Game Theory to come up with his own strategy to play. He has a Phd in
computer systems, and his father is a professor of mathematics.
Today he is a top champion. When he startd doing this, everyone told him that all the matematics of the game was well known and alrady looked at.
"If it could be done, someone would have done it already"
If you believet that, you are going nowhere.

What I find amazing about these folks is that they are able to take all of this fancy abstract rocket science material and turn it into something so K.I.S.S one can explain it by a few illustrations on a piece of napkin.

Don't know if some of you folks were there at the opening of the Aria casino in Vegas. There was a massive flock of some interesting baccarat players during that time. For three days I was able to observe what was going on which I say a very educational and eye opening experience.

What was interesting I find is not that some of the players were able to win big and consistently with their systems/methods but technique(s) being used to record the shoe. The ones who did very well and moving chips from the dealer to their own piles used numbers as opposed to the usual Ps, Bs and Ts to record the shoe. Some of them were very open about as to why that is so yet they didn't disclose their methods which is fine. They stated that with using numbers as opposed to letters the shoes reveal themselves more clearly with higher probability bets that using letters will miss.

I was at the Aria a couple of weeks after it opened,and the baccarat had quieted down. I believe that the opening coincided with Chinese New Year, or some major holiday,because the dragons and decorations were still up. According to a host at the Wynn, the Aria really did do a major marketing effort to get asian high rollers, and they took those players from the Wynn.

I have also noticed more players writing down the numbers of the cards, or at least the hand totals. I don't think that is related to card counting, but I am not sure what exactly these people are doing.

Originally Posted by Profbac

I was at the Aria a couple of weeks after it opened,and the baccarat had quieted down. I believe that the opening coincided with Chinese New Year, or some major holiday,because the dragons and decorations were still up. According to a host at the Wynn, the Aria really did do a major marketing effort to get asian high rollers, and they took those players from the Wynn.

I have also noticed more players writing down the numbers of the cards, or at least the hand totals. I don't think that is related to card counting, but I am not sure what exactly these people are doing.

They are using it in trying to catch ties. The folks told me it is not card counting. Also ran into a few who were using Zuan Xin's recording technique but they stressed that they don't follow the methodology being taught. They use this method to catch pair/reverse patterns (Would be interesting to know further what this is). Another player only recorded the winning hand amount for each outcome. Couldn't have a conversation with him since he didn't speak English.

One of the Bright brothers of Bright Trading in LV is banned from the baccarat tables in Vegas because he uses numbers as opposed to letters in recording a shoe. Given his strong accountant background I guess it was the logical step to approach towards this.

Vegas has been very quiet since the downturn of the economy. Given that Las Vegas is so hard hit with the real estate crash, it is not surprising things have slowed. That is also why I think there are more innovative bets being introduced into baccarat like Dragon Bonuses and other high reward low probability to attract people into the games.

Wynn/Encore like the new City Center is an amazing hotel and place to stay. Stayed there twice but the Encore is a pain when trying to hail a cab to the airport.

Originally Posted by DiMenosCor

One of the Bright brothers of Bright Trading in LV is banned from the baccarat tables in Vegas because he uses numbers as opposed to letters in recording a shoe. Given his strong accountant background I guess it was the logical step to approach towards this.

Now you really have my attention.
I have been getting heat in Atlantic City for some time.
A couple of years ago I was barred at Treasure Island in Las Vegas after getting too obvious and too greedy with a tie bet at the end of the shoe.
I have heard some rumors of baccarat card counters getting heat in Las Vegas.
Tell me about this Bright fellow. Where was he playing?
How was he spreading his bets?
Was he working in a team?

Originally Posted by DiMenosCor

What I find amazing about these folks is that they are able to take all of this fancy abstract rocket science material and turn it into something so K.I.S.S one can explain it by a few illustrations on a piece of napkin.

Don't know if some of you folks were there at the opening of the Aria casino in Vegas. There was a massive flock of some interesting baccarat players during that time. For three days I was able to observe what what going on which I say a very educational and eye opening experience.

What was interesting I find is not that some of the players were able to win big and consistently with their systems/methods but technique(s) being used to record the shoe. The ones who did very well and moving chips from the dealer to their own piles used numbers as opposed to the usual Ps, Bs and Ts to record the shoe. Some of them were very open about as to why that is so yet they didn't disclose their methods which is fine. They stated that with using numbers as opposed to letters the shoes reveal themselves more clearly with higher probability bets that using letters will miss.

I've been trying to get these guys to convert to using a 1 for P and 2 for B. It's like pulling teeth. It does open up many different ways to look at decisions that have been hashed and rehashed since gambling began. Good to hear there are others willing to look "Outside The Shoe". Wish I could have been there with you to observe their recording system. Can you elaborate any on what you saw as far as recording?

Interview with the Bright Bros. of Bright Trading: Card Counters Turned Stock Market Millionaires

He was a card counter playing Blackjack and prob enjoys Baccarat now ,being banned for that makes sence....... read on

The Trader Monthly 100
The highest earning prop and independent traders in 2004

By:

Rich Blake , Imogen Rose-Smith , Robert LaFranco

Issue:

June/July 2005 , Page 70
Bob Bright - More on Bob

City: Las Vegas
Firm: Bright Trading
Age: 65
A senior statesman among prop traders, Bright still lights it up. The NYSE-listed equities market has always been his sandbox (he dislikes Nasdaq market makers), though he dabbles in futures and options, mostly equity indices. Lately, he has been employing a pairs-trading strategy. "He's thrilled over the NYSE merging with ArcaEx – it's a big win for prop trading," says his brother, Don. When he's not trading, Bright scours the Strip for a baccarat table from which he hasn't been banned. He also owns Bugsy Siegel's 1933 Packard limousine.
Estimated income: $15 - $20 million

Originally Posted by Profbac

Garnabby, is Ellis really banned from this site? Who else?

Mike hasn't banned anyone with any sort of a history... no one we would readily know. (He has immediately banned a few blatant advertisers, unintelligible/disruptive posters, and the like.)

But he has not-really "banned" a few others. John1234 requested that Mike do that to him last year, after having "stormed off this site" in the wake of the GTG debacle... but soon asked Mike to "un-ban" him after his own little site's baccarat-system (for sale) went nowhere. I think johno just had enough over there at the GG, and wanted out of the other sites as well.

Originally Posted by gerard711

When he's not trading, Bright scours the Strip for a baccarat table from which he hasn't been banned. He also owns Bugsy Siegel's 1933 Packard limousine.

Thanks gerard711,

That would be news to me, on both counts. But then again, perhaps not.

First, whether one believes these articles and replies... there was a lot left out. (Like in the thread at Interview with Baccarat Pro Alex Sicnitz .)

Second, i suspect that most barrings/bannings from casinos have little to do with the subjects' abilities to actually consistently beat the game on a day-to-day basis... though that would be difficult to prove here.

Third, even were card-counting alone enough to do so, that would still be a complex task, perhaps beyond even most accountants, who "work with numbers every day". (I do know of a few persons who could relatively easily assign numbers for the sake of numbers to accomplish basically the same thing but by completely-different mental processes.) Regardless, the value of counting, however slight, will always be a positive one... to be combined with any of the others.

Fourth, the near-even outcomes are the bad aspect of the casino-games, as no one else than an addicted gambler would much consider and enter such a daily back-and-forth "slug match" against a much-larger opponent; whereas the good aspect is the slight house-edges, which can as easily compound over the long-run for the players who [devise/stumble upon] just about anything useful to "turn the tables"... doesn't take much that way (, but still a large BR compared to the table-minimums, and considerable experience in/out -side the casinos.)

Fifth, Game Theory isn't a point-of-view, personal-history or cryptic matter... by applying its principles, anyone may derive any optimal strategy, or game-value by it. (Not the sort of secret which could remain for long.)

Originally Posted by Profbac

Now you really have my attention.
I have been getting heat in Atlantic City for some time.
A couple of years ago I was barred at Treasure Island in Las Vegas after getting too obvious and too greedy with a tie bet at the end of the shoe.
I have heard some rumors of baccarat card counters getting heat in Las Vegas.
Tell me about this Bright fellow. Where was he playing?
How was he spreading his bets?
Was he working in a team?

I didn't meet Bob Bright at a casino though. I met him at one of those Trading Expos that was being held in Las Vegas because I wanted to move out there and heard great things about his prop firm. When I did have a chance to meet and speak with him a few months later for an "interview," that was how the conversation of baccarat came up. From our conversations I don't think he was working in a team since I gather him as someone who flies solo doing his own thing. As for anything deeper in how he bets we didn't get into specifics but we chatted about how it relates to trading in many ways.

Originally Posted by Therapy101

Wish I could have been there with you to observe their recording system. Can you elaborate any on what you saw as far as recording?

One of the folks who was using Zuan Xin's method of recording stated that he doesn't go all the way to 10 and only goes to 4 in some casinos and sometimes to 7 depending on the baccarat rules. This is because as he stated it will reveal the pairs and reversals very well ( I am very intrigued to find out what he means by this since he didn't get into specifics). He stressed that the method being taught to play is rubbish but the method of recording is one of the most effective he has encountered.

I offered $20 bucks to buy his card and asked him if he would mark all the plays he made of both wins and losses. He sold me the card but he didn't mark the wins and losses though. Still looking at it right now if I find anything interesting and concrete I will post it up. He started with $3500 as his stake and left with a $1200 profit. Not bad at all.

Ran into another fellow a few hours later who with two other people who looked like they were doing the same technique in recording the shoe but they didn't elaborate. Gave me the cold shoulder. Those folks did very well too.

There were a large number of individuals who used the method of recording both the Banker and Player numerical values per decision. These are the folks who also play the Tie bet. I saw a few did very well at betting ties yet they weren't betting big wagers. $5 and $10.