+ Register

[Trbfla]

Ok, as promised here are some of my results-I still have to catch up

Shoe 1   +9
Shoe 2   +21
Shoe 3   +3
Shoe 4   +9
Shoe 5   +4

Total +46

Shoe 6   +4
Shoe 7   -4
Shoe 8   +11
Shoe 9   +5
Shoe 10   -3

Total +13    total 1-10  +59

Shoe 11   +12
Shoe 12   +11
Shoe 13    -1
Shoe 14   -4
Shoe 15   +6

Total +24

1-15 total  +73

[roversi13]

With my approach "hit and run":
Shoes 1,3,5,6,10,11,12,13,18: +1 big unit
Shoe 8: + 2 big units
Other shoes:no bet

As far as VDW/2 and TBL/2 are concerned,both lose big against 2's,and if I accept that bet selection with VDW/2 is more sophisticated than TBL/2,the result is exactly the same for both progressions with your shoes.
With VDW bets are a bit less frequent.
Maybe you have noticed that variance with VDW/2 is more under control,but I'm afraid it's an illusion.
I've studied VDW/2 for a long time and I 'd like to know why you prefer it to TBL/2.

[Bally6354]

The shoes are from shuffled cards from the BB2 simulator. You can define the shuffle if you like, however I just use it's default version. The shoes I am putting up are just the first 5 I test daily.

Cheers

[Sputnik]

I follow this topic and like it very much.
All results from Adulay and Bally is valid and no guess work or hide and seek topic.

Adulay mention what method he use and anyone can read about the method and get the same results playing it.
Bally mention that he will at the end of the testing show what method he used.

Others who join and show results without mention what method they use so other can test and get same results are just empty words and claims with no validation.

Cheers

[ADulay]

For what it's worth, I have also tested this (and others) using a 1,2,4 progression but the end results are very close at the end of the day.  The only difference is the exposure of your working capital on the table.  The way VDW is structured and plays will sometimes put a quick 1-2 loss up before a win.  That puts up a lot of +4 wagers in a short period of time.

If one were to push their Marty out to 6 or 7 places, it would work much better, but then I'm not looking to do that as the flow of the flat bet will allow me to continue on long after the Terrible Twos have taken their toll on others.

VDW does require you to sit out a few hand at a time (usually waiting for the 2-4-6 wager) but for the most part I've never had any problems at the table or online with it.

Many people (make that MOST) people cannot and will not play flat betting for a variety of reasons.  That's a personal choice only you can make.

AD

[Trbfla]

I follow this topic and like it very much.
All results from Adulay and Bally is valid and no guess work or hide and seek topic.

Adulay mention what method he use and anyone can read about the method and get the same results playing it.
Bally mention that he will at the end of the testing show what method he used.

Others who join and show results without mention what method they use so other can test and get same results are just empty words and claims with no validation.

Cheers

Nick
I am using a method I learned from another website. I will also devulge my method after this test. AD is fully aware of this approach and if you'd like further confirmation I'm sure AD would love to double check I'm playing the approach correctly.
Also, I am not in need of validation nor do I seek it. I get my validation daily from a boat that will never leave the shore. Winner winner chicken dinner.

[Eight Iron]

Others who join and show results without mention what method they use so other can test....

I used a modified version of Follow the Pony.  Tommy Renzoni, who introduced Baccarat to the US, mentioned it in his book. I bet on the side that won the previous hand and modified it by betting with the chops after three consecutive losses.

It works okay when the single chop strings are long, and it loses when they are short.

I lost 18 units using it on these real card, hand shuffled live shoes from Fairway. 


#1

BPBPBPPBPBBBPPPPBBBTPTTBPBTBPPTBPBPBBPPBPPBPBBBPPBPBBPPPPTP

#2

PPPBPBBPBPPBBPBPBPBPBBPBBBTPPBBBBPPBPTBBPBBBPPPPPBPBBBPBPT

#3

PTBPBBPBPBBPBPBBPBBBPPBTBPPBBBPPPPBBBPBBBBPBBBTPPPPPPPBPPTBPBPP

#4

BPBPBPBTPBPPBPBBPBBBBBPPBBTPTBBBBBPBTBPPBPPPTPTPBBPBBBBPTPBBB

#5

PPBBPTPBBPBPPTPPTPPPBPPTTPBBPBBBPPBBBBBTBPBBPBPPPTBPBPBBBBBB

#6

PTBBPTTPTPBTPPTTPPBBBBPBBPBPPPBPPPBPBPBPBTBPBBPBBPBBPBPTPBT

[Trbfla]

I was getting ready to post my next 10 shoe results but I feel that it isn't right to add to thread with my results because I employ a mild progression which adulay isn't and I'm not sure about bailey. I just saw the post that asked why others aren't posting results and I thought I would join in. So I will replay my shoes using flat betting as adulay does so it's more apples to apples comparison. But I can say I'm sure adulay will be kicking my butt as my approach scores better with a mild progression.

[ADulay]

I was getting ready to post my next 10 shoe results but I feel that it isn't right to add to thread with my results because I employ a mild progression which adulay isn't and I'm not sure about bailey. I just saw the post that asked why others aren't posting results and I thought I would join in. So I will replay my shoes using flat betting as adulay does so it's more apples to apples comparison. But I can say I'm sure adulay will be kicking my butt as my approach scores better with a mild progression.

No need to make a contest out of it.

Just play the shoes the way you would when your money is on the table. 

This allows the others to see the differences and the way others play the game.

Flat betting may work with one play but not another.  Most people won't play it that way and will always utilize some type of Marty, no matter how small or large.

I'll post up one of the previous shoes, along with details of the play, sometime today when I get the scanner back online.

AD

[Trbfla]

ok, I was just thinking it wasn't the same since you are flat betting but I will post the next shoes

[Trbfla]

shoe 16  + 5
shoe 17  +11
shoe 18  +10
shoe 19   +9
shoe 20   -6

shoe 16-40 =39 units

using a 1, 2, 1, 1 2, 3 , 4 progression

[jsintl]

shoe 16  + 5
shoe 17  +11
shoe 18  +10
shoe 19   +9
shoe 20   -6

shoe 16-40 =39 units

using a 1, 2, 1, 1 2, 3 , 4 progression

Hello!  Nice results.  Regarding your progression, do you reset back to 1 on any win?  Thanks

[Sputnik]

Hello!  Nice results.  Regarding your progression, do you reset back to 1 on any win?  Thanks

I don't fully understand the progression, maybe there is a type error, because using a 1, 2, 1, 1 2, 3 , 4 progression is not logic.
First bet is 1 and second bet is 2 then back to 1 and 1 again then higher bets again 2 3 4 ...

I would understand if he use 1 2 2 where you win two first bet and accept -1 loss at the third bet and recoup with the other four bets, but that is not the case.
And 122 is the same thing as staking 111 where both win or break even with the two first bets and accept -1 unit loss at the end, from that i reckon you could build recoup progression.

So i assume 1 1 1 2 2 3 4 would be a option, but i have a hard time see that you bet higher at the beginning and then lower you bets and then again bet higher.

Cheers

[goez]

How about a Positive progression.

[ADulay]

Hey!  I think we're falling behind on the shoe posting!!

I need my fix!

AD