Quote from: ADulay on June 16, 2017, 11:41:03 PM
Stephen,

  I plugged the 50 shoes (616 thru 666) into the box and using the "new and improved" rules it came out with a +42 units for the run.   That's not bad.

  But, being the detail man that I am, I had to manually check that my calculations on the spreadsheet were giving me valid results so I ran those 50 shoes MANUALLY.

  Yep, it came out with +44 after those 50 shoes.    18 losing shoes (of -5 or less) and 32 winning shoes of +2 or more.

  I would have to say that making the change to "leaving at neutral or slightly down" anytime past about mid-shoe made a difference.

  Let me run back and check that first batch with the "new rules" and see if it made a difference overall.

  AD

when you read edition 3, you will be making a living from the casino!
I've given you the strawberries but JUST WAIT FOR THE CREAM! I really pour it on!

So your purpose here is to promote books which could win max +3 units per shoe?

I can do better than that and obviously your main income comes from book sales rather than playing Baccarat.

Quote from: Blue_Angel on June 17, 2017, 12:00:00 AM
So your purpose here is to promote books which could win max +3 units per shoe?

I can do better than that and obviously your main income comes from book sales rather than playing Baccarat.

no, you should read all my posts. I'm doing okay when I bet though I prefer to write because I don't find much time to go to casinos, max twice a week. re 3+ units, you should read my book because I provide good reasons why 3+ units. Though there is scope for tweaking here and there, the game is  tight 50/50 what are you looking for? is not over 1,000 units not enough for you? if you have a better way of playing I'd like to know before I except an offer from one of the biggest gambling companies out there who are interested in my future works. When you read my 3rd edition you'll see why my research helps people win. 

Quote from: Stephen Tabone on June 16, 2017, 11:46:55 PM
when you read edition 3, you will be making a living from the casino!
I've given you the strawberries but JUST WAIT FOR THE CREAM! I really pour it on!

Stephen,

  Actually I'm not on the list for Edition 3 and really don't plan on buying the book.

  However I did go back and take a look at that first run of 50 shoes (original result was -16) and after applying the "new" rules (mid-shoe losing exit and all that) it dropped down to -4 across all the shoes.

  I'd say that mid course correction does make a difference. 

  I'll put some time into this over the weekend with some testing routines. 

  Thanks for the idea.

  AD

Quote from: ADulay on June 17, 2017, 12:15:39 AM
Stephen,

  Actually I'm not on the list for Edition 3 and really don't plan on buying the book.

  However I did go back and take a look at that first run of 50 shoes (original result was -16) and after applying the "new" rules (mid-shoe losing exit and all that) it dropped down to -4 across all the shoes.

  I'd say that mid course correction does make a difference. 

  I'll put some time into this over the weekend with some testing routines. 

  Thanks for the idea.

  AD

I'm not even sure I want to publish edition 3 it's so powerful. I'm using it to win but shall I share it, I'm not sure. on average no more than 2-4 losses in a row, approx on average 2-4 wins in a row. risk/reward is 1.8win v 1 loss therefore 0.8+ win, when i double on on 3rd edition strategy I gather my losses turning them and yield a profit. and when i win right off flat betting, I flat bet the next no doubling up to risk it. It's almost a constant win. I'm using it now, I'm drawn between keeping it to myself or sharing.

Quote from: ADulay on June 17, 2017, 12:15:39 AM
Stephen,

  Actually I'm not on the list for Edition 3 and really don't plan on buying the book.

  However I did go back and take a look at that first run of 50 shoes (original result was -16) and after applying the "new" rules (mid-shoe losing exit and all that) it dropped down to -4 across all the shoes.

  I'd say that mid course correction does make a difference. 

  I'll put some time into this over the weekend with some testing routines. 

  Thanks for the idea.

  AD

I'm trying to extend my free offer with my publishers so sure will try and sort something for you.

Quote from: Blue_Angel on June 16, 2017, 11:41:40 PM
Andy, could you please let me know where I could find those hands to download?

You can't anymore.  It's not there anymore, at least the database that it came from is not there anymore that I can find.
It was a personal compilation gathered over a specific point in time.  40,000 hands from one single table literally minute by minute, time coded for reference.

I figured that 40,000 hands should be enough to validate pretty much any "system" play that came across my desk.

Quote from: Blue_Angel on June 16, 2017, 11:41:40 PM
What if I can produce a hefty net profit after betting all those hands?
Would that be interesting to say the least?

You know, I've freely handed out that hand compilation to several people who said they desperately needed it to finish off some testing of a great system.  I've never heard back from any of them.  Hopefully at least one of them got some good use from the data.

You're welcome to it if it will help you develop an idea that you have.

Or I can sell it on Amazon as a Kindle book for $9.99. 

AD

Quote from: Stephen Tabone on June 17, 2017, 12:53:02 AM
I'm trying to extend my free offer with my publishers so sure will try and sort something for you.

Stephen,

  No need to send me anything.  I'm only working on this due to a simple miscommunication causing it to cross my desk and am about to put it on the shelf after some validation testing today.

  I've tested it enough "internally" to see that it is not a valid play for me, personally.

  Others may find it most suited to their own style.

  Thanks anyway.

  AD

okay, thanks for testing

Adulay, thanks for the test ...

Cheers

I buy the book yesterday and read it and done some testing.
But i can not produce the same results as Adulay got, so i would like to ask if i am missing something.
Maybe the reason is that i run RNG with Red & Black with La Partage Rule.

Could see a link to wizards of odds baccarat results, maybe i should test them?

1) Win Taget +3 units and Loss Limit -6 units.
2) When you reach half the shoe without hitting your Win Target you break even or hit loss limit.
3) When i you reach +3 you can push for more and if you lose stay at +2 (did not apply this with my testing)

Quote from: ADulay on June 16, 2017, 11:41:03 PM
Stephen,

  I plugged the 50 shoes (616 thru 666) into the box and using the "new and improved" rules it came out with a +42 units for the run.   That's not bad.

  But, being the detail man that I am, I had to manually check that my calculations on the spreadsheet were giving me valid results so I ran those 50 shoes MANUALLY.

  Yep, it came out with +44 after those 50 shoes.    18 losing shoes (of -5 or less) and 32 winning shoes of +2 or more.

  I would have to say that making the change to "leaving at neutral or slightly down" anytime past about mid-shoe made a difference.

  Let me run back and check that first batch with the "new rules" and see if it made a difference overall.

  AD

50 SAMPLE OF 100 RANDOM BITS.

11 SAMPLE OF 100 RANDOM BITS BREAK EVEN
31 SAMPLE OF 100 RANDOM BITS WON
  8 SAMPLE OF 100 RANDOM BITS LOSS

+83 UNITS WON
-59 UNITS LOSS
+24 TOTAL NET GAIN

1. +0
2. +2.5
3. +3
4. +2.5
5. -6
6. +0
7. +3
8. -0.5
9. +2.5
10. +3

+16.5
-6
TOTAL +10.5

1. -5.5
2. -6
3. -0.5
4. +0
5. +2.5
6. -5.5
7. +0
8. +3
9. +3
10. +3

+11.5
-17.5
TOTAL -6

1. +3
2. +2.5
3. -5.5
4. +3
5. +3
6. +3
7. +3
8. +3
9. +0
10. +3

+23.5
-5.5
TOTAL +28

1. +3
2. -6.5
3. +0
4. +3
5. -6
6. -6
7. +0
8. +2.5
9. +3
10. +2.5

+14
-18.5
TOTAL -4.5

1. +3
2. +0
3. +3
4. +2.5
5. +0
6. +3
7. +3
8. -6
9. +3
10. -5.5

+17.5
-11.5
TOTAL +6

 I got a run with even results running 50 samples with 100 random bits with La Partage Rule. I end up with -2 units.

1. +2.5   
2. -6      
3. +0      
4. +0       
5. +1.5   
6. +0.5   
7. -0.5   
8. -0.5   
9. +0      
10. +0

+4.5
-7
TOTAL -2.5

1. +2.5
2. +2.5
3. +3
4. +3
5. +2
6. -6
7. +3
8. +3
9. -6
10. +3

+20
-12
TOTAL +8

1. +2.5
2. +0
3. +3
4. +2.5
5. +3
6. +3
7. +3
8. +3
9. -6
10. +0

+20
-6
TOTAL +12

1. -5.5
2. -6
3. -5.5
4. +2
5. -5.5
6. +0
7. +3
8. +0
9. +3
10. +3

+11
-22.5
TOTAL -11.5

1. +3
2. -6
3. -5.5
4. +3
5. +3
6. +0
7. +0
8. -6
9. -6
10. +2

+11
-23.5
TOTAL -12.5

13 BREAK EVEN
25 WON
12 LOSS

+68 UNITS
-70 UNITS
-2 UNITS

Quote from: ADulay on June 16, 2017, 11:41:03 PM
Stephen,

  I plugged the 50 shoes (616 thru 666) into the box and using the "new and improved" rules it came out with a +42 units for the run.   That's not bad.

  But, being the detail man that I am, I had to manually check that my calculations on the spreadsheet were giving me valid results so I ran those 50 shoes MANUALLY.

  Yep, it came out with +44 after those 50 shoes.    18 losing shoes (of -5 or less) and 32 winning shoes of +2 or more.

  I would have to say that making the change to "leaving at neutral or slightly down" anytime past about mid-shoe made a difference.

  Let me run back and check that first batch with the "new rules" and see if it made a difference overall.

  AD

Adulay i send you a PM and could not notice one important difference.
I would have to say that making the change to "leaving at neutral or slightly down" anytime past about mid-shoe made a difference.

Now i can see that if you not reach the win target and not break even at mid-shoe you did not continue until you break even or hit loss limit and stop before that with any unit value close to zero.
That would make the loses less.

I will make another 100 samples.
And this time i will also push for more when i reach +3 or stop at +2

Cheers

Are you guys ignoring COMMISSION?  I think you are.  So a break even shoe is a losing shoe!  I'm getting tire dof bringing this up.

EZ Back with no commissions if you are in the USA usually one property nearby has it available.