+ Register

[ADulay]

Adulay i respect your test but when you code and run your simulation - was it all in where you won +3 units or hit -6 units loss limit with no other options.
He mention that if you don't win and break even or make a small lose into half the shoe you aim to break even or accept small loss - i reckon that he put it like that.

Sputnik,

  As I already had an Excel sheet programmed for something almost exactly like the TUBS play, it took about 20 minutes to make it adhere to the author's specific instructions.

  A +3 at any time was a shoe win requiring an exit from the shoe.

A -6 was a shoe loss requiring an exit from the shoe.

  Anything else continued play until the end of the shoe.

  As the 50 test shoes I ran were all LIVE DEALT shoes merely transposed into the spreadsheet, I would say I followed the meaning and intent of the book.

  I used shoes 800-850 for the test run as they were relatively recent.

  I'll run another batch if anyone would like it, just pick a starting number between 1 and 900. (Shoes are numbered chronologically backdated to the beginning of time.) 

  But that's about as much time as need be "expended" on this for now.  I'm sure Version 3.0 will be vastly superior to this one.  (/sarcasm font off)

  AD

[Babu]

I didn't know what you were offering me. You did not explain. I thought you were trying to hack into my computer. Sorry that's the way it came across.

No worries Stephen.  The test will just give other members a sense of what your system can do.  If anything, it can help the sales of your book and save you a ton of time.  If anyone wants to see how well it can do, you can just point them to the videos.

That's all it is.  I don't hack into people's computer anymore.

[phallyka]

 I'll run another batch if anyone would like it

[stephen tabone]

No worries Stephen.  The test will just give other members a sense of what your system can do.  If anything, it can help the sales of your book and save you a ton of time.  If anyone wants to see how well it can do, you can just point them to the videos.

That's all it is.  I don't hack into people's computer anymore.

lol,

okay but remember my advise re when to exit a show, half way break even, that way you skip bad shoes, and where the worse case, you go down, try and exit 3- that way you get to survive for that day with TWO bad shoes = 6- down, so in a day, you should get your 3+ unit wins, if you do not, don't chase, take the hit (keep stats records of winnings and loses) and live another day, as i write in my book, to win you have to look at the long term not just a day or playing shoe after shoe after shoe! And remember check results against EAL shoe results not computer generated, moreover computer programs connected to real online play, they pull you in then wipe you out! I am not affiliated with any online gambling as I state in my book. While it suits the causal online player for a bit of fun, it is not for the pro n my mind. Others might disagree, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. Last year, I played online, won big, next day played again and the company kept on closing down window so that I missed chance to play my bet When I tried to cash out they withheld my funds and put me through a lot in order to withdraw my 4k winnings. I had been a member for 9 years, but as soon as i played big and won, they started their tricks. I have not played online since. I always play for real in real casinos.

[stephen tabone]

A pro bets in a casino, a non pro or those having fun bet online. my book is aimed at the pro

[Babu]

A pro bets in a casino, a non pro or those having fun bet online. my book is aimed at the pro

As long as you are playing with real money makes you a pro.  I thought you wanted to validate your system.  I guess not.  No one was forced to.  It was strictly voluntary.

Many of us here plays with real money, whether at a B&M or online.  Perhaps many more hours and years more than you have.

[Eight Iron]

Flat betting Banker only, every hand, from start to finish is the standard against which to test any system.  If it can't beat Banker only, don't bother.

Tested another fifty real card, hand shuffled and hand dealt shoes using TUBS.

All results are before commissions.

Results after 100 shoes = + 8 units.  Won 66 shoes, lost 34 shoes.

Betting Banker only each hand start to finish = 168 units.

2nd flat bet strategy = 260 units

3rd FB strategy = 226 units (partial shoes)


First 25 shoes in Zumma tester: 

TUBS = +1 unit

Betting Banker only start to finish = +75 units

[21 Aces]

A problem with comparing any approach that only plays a part of a shoe is that then you have to say well I can position to watch many tables at once and look for those conditions.  Many players are watching all over while they play.

[NoRegret]

A problem with comparing any approach that only plays a part of a shoe is that then you have to say well I can position to watch many tables at once and look for those conditions.  Many players are watching all over while they play.

Exactly!  Same as saying they know when to catch a long streak.  Maybe some people just have better guts than others. 

[ice789]

i buy this system

i test

result no win long run

opp+stop+wait 3

[21 Aces]

Exactly!  Same as saying they know when to catch a long streak.  Maybe some people just have better guts than others. 

To clarify.

Approach A:  Makes around 60 bets a shoe.
Approach B:  Makes around 30 bets a shoe.
Approach C:  Makes around 10 bets a shoe.

All based on identification of something.  Well, the player using Approach C is most likely going to park where they can watch as many tables as possible and play them when the approach identifies what it is looking for.  You can't compare that apples to apples to an approach like A or B.

Yeah, it really sucks turning around and seeing a long Bank or Player Dragon of 10++ clocking off a couple seconds away.  Too many quiet players.

[stephen tabone]

FREE follow Strategy to this forum

You follow player or banker when either reaches 3 in a row, continue to follow the run until it breaks. Join the next run when whatever player or banker reaches 3. So play for the 4th +
3 is the key, it's the trigger, the strong indicator that a run is likely.

if you want another FREE strategy let me know and I will post.

http://betselection.cc/stephen-tabone's/free-follow-strategy-to-this-forum/

[Jimske]

Thanks Babu, I will look forward to it.

Yes for sure, people win and win consistently. The VDW approach has worked great for me so far and I see no reason why that should not continue. It is a really strong approach combined with the divisor. What more can someone ask for.....a low variance strategy and a good MM which can keep the bets low even when you do hit the odd rough patch. It's manageable and can be employed for real at a Bricks and Mortar Casino. My aim isn't to become rich but I certainly am not going to be happy playing online for pennies after all the time and research I have dedicated to studying casino games. So a test like this which can show positive results within realistic parameters which anybody could replicate is a worthwhile aim.

cheers

Is the divisor some sort of cut back or halfback?  IOW, are you dropping back someplace in the VDW to recoup?  I always beleive that these kind of cutbacks are good for variance reduction.  But they also effect profit.

[Jimske]

I'll prove my system works which is why I'm a best seller in baccarat category

Still waiting!

[Jimske]

Personally speaking, I don't see what difference it makes if someone tested it on 50 consecutive shoes.

Player A goes to the table and gets up 3 units and leaves.

Player B comes to the table straight after player A and wins 3 units as well.

How do the cards know that player A and player B are two different people. Obviously they don't. So the logic doesn't add up otherwise what you are implying is that player B has less chance to win than player A. How can that be?

Exactly right.  The old gambler's fallacy.