The Ultimate Silver Bullet Proof Baccarat Winning Strategy 2.1


In order to profit from the game of Baccarat you'll need to use a concrete, proven method of making winning betting decisions. Unless you use a strategy that works it's highly unlikely you'll secure long term profits. Many books and expensive workshops on Baccarat fail because they do not offer any logical, non complex and non risky ways of winning. They confuse bettors and expose bankrolls to being wiped out. 

In this book you'll learn about a strategy that has stop losses and bet again triggers. You'll also read sound money management advice. Since Baccarat is a 50:50 random game of chance, to realize long term profits you'll also need patience and discipline. This book teaches you how to master the most important principles that'll help you become a Baccarat winner.

As the Author of this book I understand the problems you face in trying to win. I have developed and tweaked my strategy so it works to its optimal performance. It's ultimately the best way of winning the game of Baccarat. I've tested it on 10,000 live casino shoes. The wins broke out of the breakeven zone and plus profits continued to rise.

When you're ready to start winning on a regular basis and build up those profits, this book, 'The Ultimate Silver Bullet Proof Baccarat Winning Strategy 2.1' will help you make that winning feeling a reality. 

Kindle: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0741PX6JK/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1500450704&sr=1-2&keywords=the+ultimate+silver+bullet+proof+baccarat+winning+strategy#

Paperback: https://www.amazon.com/Ultimate-Silver-Baccarat-Winning-Strategy/dp/1548900613/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1500993911&sr=1-1&keywords=the+ultimate+silver+bullet+proof+baccarat+winning+strategy

Do Systems Work?

Casinos have a winning system. It is known as the 'house edge'. But in the game of Baccarat the house edge is a little over 1%. Despite a low house edge most Baccarat bettors end up losing because one or both of the following two factors work against them.

1.   The bettor's way of trying to win the game fails therefore he loses. If he chases his losses he will lose more because his way of playing does not work. If he doubles down to try and win his money back, even if he wins his money back he has now increased his unit stake. So when he continues betting to try and gain profit he ends up losing even more given that he had increased what was his smaller bankroll he started out with. Therefore his system (or his decision making) is failing him. 
2.   If his way of playing is half decent, when he wins he continues to play because he becomes greedy and doesn't understand, that since Baccarat is a 50:50 game unless his way of playing has strict stop loss and bet again trigger rules, the likelihood is that continued betting will result in him losing what he'd won. Therefore he lacks money management skills. 

It thus follows that if a bettor, in trying to gain profits out of the game of Baccarat, were he to implement a strategy that combats the problem of the when and where to place his bets he will gain the upper hand beyond the house edge.

But in order to hold on to those profits he will need to manage his money by learning to walk with a realistic number of unit wins as his profit target. Remember earlier in this book I wrote that the average difference of Banker or Player having more outcomes over each position if fairly low. And there are only an approximate set number of outcomes in a Baccarat shoe. Therefore the start of a shoe is when the battle should begin.

Enter the game without your armor, without a strong rule based strategy, without protecting your bankroll reserves when the sequence of outcomes fights against your strategy, and your chances of succeeding to achieve long term profits are nil.

Adopt and stick to a strong rule based strategy that combats patterns and secure your profits and you'll beat the game of Baccarat. You only need secure one to a few units in order to be a winner. The art of being a long term winner is to understand the principle of saving small unit wins so that net plus profits break away from breakeven and continue to climb higher into the net plus profit zone.     

If you converse with most casino gamblers or communicate with people in online gambling forums it will not be long before you read or hear the mantras, 'there's no system' / 'systems don't work' / casinos were built on systems' / etc, etc.

But are those that take this view correct or is it the case that they just haven't come across a winning system or do not know how to properly implement a strong winning system?

My view is that any bettor who wagers money on a casino game such as Baccarat is implementing some kind of system no matter whether he believes he is or is not following one.

A system is an organized or even a loose method of trying to win a game. Very few gamblers merely toss a coin in their mind and go with whatever side their thoughts instruct them to bet on. And even people who do try and fight randomness with randomness are in a sense still following a system. By whatever means they come to reach a decision of when and where to place a bet, like it or not they're following a system!

So then when trying to win at the game of Baccarat, setting aside the tie – which does not concern this book -- a bettor has one of two choices. These are whether he bets on the Banker or the Player. No matter how he goes about deciding what side to bet on, and when to bet (since he might not bet in every coup: round of play) the mere fact he is 'thinking' about where and when to bet means he is 'systemising'. He is trying to work out the likelihood of one side winning over the other. Thus when you hear and read that 'there's no system', know that this is the biggest fallacy of all.

Now we've established systems do exist we need to address whether systems work. By 'work', what we want to know is whether using a certain system will help us win at the game of Baccarat. We must judge whether a system works by two criteria.

The first is to compare a system against other systems over the long run, over thousands of shoe outcomes. The second is to test the performance of a system in terms of profit and loss, playing shoe after shoe, as a bettor encounters each time he visits a casino.

Finding out whether a system works or does not work over many shoes is handy information up to a point. No one expects a bettor to try to win shoe after shoe after shoe, over hundreds or thousands of shoe outcomes. He will need time to sleep and do other things in his life. He cannot be expected to attempt such an impossible undertaking.

The more practical approach would be if he sets himself a reachable target each time he visits a casino. By focusing on smaller steps he will be on his way to familiarizing himself with a strong rule based system and to increasing his profits over time.       

Everyone is entitled to his opinions on whether he believes in systems or not and whether he believes that systems work or not. You might have your own way of playing Baccarat to try to win. This might be working or might not be working for you. The real test is long term profits.

The strategy in this book is my idea and my thinking is based on my research, intelligent structures and tests. It's a well worked out logical strategy. I'm not forcing anyone to adopt my strategy if they do not believe in it. But I have received hundreds of emails from people from various countries stating that my strategy is working for them.

If you do not believe in systems for whatever reason, you're entitled to this belief. Likewise people who do believe in systems are entitled try out new ones. My system is based on gaining small profits that are saved so as to increase over the long term rather than short-term greed that will result in long-term losses.

I came across Bluejay's $30,000 challenge

http://vegasclick.com/gambling/betting-system-challenge (sourced 6th July 2017)

The challenge states the person setting up the challenge will wager $30,000 against a system users $3,000 (or his $10,000 against their $1,000) that the challenger's betting system cannot beat baccarat, as a player, using common Vegas rules, starting with a generous $5000 bankroll (play money, not real money), in a computer simulation, as per the additional terms below.
And then I thought...although my strategy of course was not meant to be played continually over thousands of shoes (in the case of this challenge 200,000 outcomes in a 6 deck shoe would mean playing approx 3,300 shoes). I knew my strategy would win the challenge. I knew this because I had tested it over 10,000 live casino shoes. Of course anyone might claim that in another 10,000 shoes the outcomes might be different. However my strategy is so strong, so Silver Bullet Proof it does not allow the randomness of the game to dictate a long term advantage.

The person setting this challenge states:

'I will program a computer simulation within three days of my acceptance of the system rules, and provide you with the results as well as the source code'

I was about to take up the challenge until I read the above line. Namely, he would 'program a computer simulation'...once he understood the rules of my strategy. So clearly he's a computer programming expert or knows one. How would I know therefore that there wouldn't be a bias implemented against my strategy?

After all he would have the rules of my strategy, even if it were possible to input these properly into a computer simulation. But how would I know that there wouldn't be any ghost rule/s within the programming code/s omitting a winning percentage from my strategy based on the outcomes within those codified Baccarat shoes?

The short answer is that I wouldn't unless I was a computer coding genius or knew one. And even then, codes can be designed in such a way so as to create hidden biases.

That said he goes on to write:

'you can have your own expert(s) verify its accuracy.'

Then I thought well that sounds reasonable save that as aforementioned how can I be sure that there is no true bias within the way the coding would be set up to test my strategy.

He goes on to state,

'If you dispute the simulation results because of my code, if I agree it's an error then I'll correct it and run the simulation again, with the new test being the official one.'

I nearly fell off my chair when I read this. So this guy would set up the code after learning of my strategy! Then if the program does not show a profit and I would complain, if and only if he agrees there to be an error will he set up another simulation! With the new test being the official one!!

So let's get this right, if I were to complain he'd set it all up again (however he chooses to go about this) and this would be the official one.

But if I were to complain again he states the following:

'This will repeat as many times as you find errors that I agree are errors and fix. If you believe my code to be in error and I disagree, you can claim to the escrow agent that I forfeit and to pay out to you. If the agent disagrees, you may submit the case to arbitration as below.

After nearly falling of my chair I nearly pissed myself laughing when I read the above.

(a) He has to agree there are errors (b) If he disagrees, I'd have to try and prove that the program he set up is somehow biased. How would I prove this when he would've created the codes and the rules within such a program? I would end up losing my money on the basis that the escrow agent or arbitration person wouldn't be able to either understand how the codes were designed to operate.

It then follows that his claim on his website page that reads, 'Any betting system that promises to make you a winner is a scam,' is in my opinion a scam statement within itself when backed up by a clearly biased challenge.

If he is against systems because he does not believe any work then he should be against gambling because most gamblers use one system or another as I have addressed above. But when I saw links on his website to online gambling this told me a lot.

No doubt he's an affiliate member and receives commissions as a result of people joining and/or depositing funds / losing funds. Read his site http://vegasclick.com/ (sourced 6th July 2017) and he positively encourages gambling.

So he's all for people betting real money but does not believe you can win using any system! He doesn't believe any system can work in the long run and offers to prove it by setting up his own computer program and biased rules. 

I had a think about this and wrote the following email to him.

"I'm so confident that my rule-based Baccarat system can gain profits over the long run I suggest we both employ three neutral freelancers (from different countries) via three freelancer websites (I'll cover the cost). We'd instruct each of the three freelancers to simulate say 4,000 baccarat complete shoes. This then would give us 12,000 complete shoes, approx 720,000 coup outcomes based on 6 deck shoes.
My strategy which is rule based would then be applied to these coups. I'd put up $100,000 against your $1,000,000. You can then have the results checked as much as you wish. I'd even cover the cost of getting them properly checked by a known auditing company; their final check will be the official result.
If you agree, I will instruct my solicitor to contact you regarding the depositing of the said funds through a legitimate third party escrow agent and can establish the arbitration person during this process.
Please let me know if you will take me up on this.
Regards, Stephen."

Alas, I'm still waiting for his response.

Kindle: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0741PX6JK/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1500450704&sr=1-2&keywords=the+ultimate+silver+bullet+proof+baccarat+winning+strategy#

Paperback: https://www.amazon.com/Ultimate-Silver-Baccarat-Winning-Strategy/dp/1548900613/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1500993911&sr=1-1&keywords=the+ultimate+silver+bullet+proof+baccarat+winning+strategy

Stephen,

You clearly don't understand computer programming and how a programming language works. It's impossible to create what you call "biased" code because the language is completely transparent. The only way you can hide the logic of the code is to make it deliberately hard to read, but even then there can be no hidden bias. Ask esoito, he's a programmer.

In any case, you don't need to inspect the code, just the output or results. If the program generates a detailed report of every bet made together with the outcome of every hand (and you can supply the shoes to make sure they are not biased against the system, or use publicly available ones like the Wizard of Odds'), then you can do some random checks to make sure the system rules are coded correctly.

For what it's worth, I intend to code your system myself when your book is released. If the system performs as expected I will be the first to congratulate you and apologise for inflicting any stain on your character (as you seem to believe I have done, together with other members of "the mob", lol).

Quote from: Mike on July 25, 2017, 03:31:33 PM
Stephen,

You clearly don't understand computer programming and how a programming language works. It's impossible to create what you call "biased" code because the language is completely transparent. The only way you can hide the logic of the code is to make it deliberately hard to read, but even then there can be no hidden bias. Ask esoito, he's a programmer.

In any case, you don't need to inspect the code, just the output or results. If the program generates a detailed report of every bet made together with the outcome of every hand (and you can supply the shoes to make sure they are not biased against the system, or use publicly available ones like the Wizard of Odds'), then you can do some random checks to make sure the system rules are coded correctly.

For what it's worth, I intend to code your system myself when your book is released. If the system performs as expected I will be the first to congratulate you and apologise for inflicting any stain on your character (as you seem to believe I have done, together with other members of "the mob", lol).

I'm not into codes.
This is why I opted to bypass that by as I wrote paying for fresh shoe outcomes. I was not taken up on my offer as I wrote in my book.
There is one particular member who is taking matters too far and I have emailed my U.S based lawyer regarding what he is writing about me. I shall expect a call from my lawyer by tomorrow. In the meantime My UK based solicitor will be gathering the evidence.