I was reading some of the posts and the idea of looking out for singles caught my attention.
The idea of working in pairs seems like a good one to me if I am trying to manufacture results where there is an abundance of singles.
What do I mean by pairs?
There are 4 different pairs that can appear on a Baccarat table excluding the ties.
Banker-Banker
Banker-Player
Player-Player
Player-Banker
It is quite common for one of these pairs just to throw up the odd single appearance and then be absent for long intervals. *see file below*
The Player-Banker pair (number 4) skipped for 17 times, hit, and then skipped 7 times before hitting again. That's just 2 hits in 26. This is not some freak occurence either. It happens with all the pairs where one of them can have some very long intervals before hitting once and then go missing again.
There is an easy way to take advantage of this. You just play the opposite of the pair that is missing and you are guaranteed a hit on the first or second attempt if the missing pair does not appear.
Banker-Banker missing. Bet Player-Player
Banker-Player missing. Bet Player-Banker
Player-Player missing. Bet Banker-Banker
Player-Banker missing. Bet Banker-Player
You could use a conservative 1-1 staking plan opting not to bet the second if you won the first. Why risk a unit when you have already won one. The second bet in this instance is only a recovery bet.
Or maybe a 1-2 where a loss followed by a win still nets a 1 unit profit.
The variance is in our favour with only one pair out of four that can beat us.
There is also the option of betting for parlays when a pair is coming out in very short intervals like the Player-Player towards the end of the file.
interesting , any testers here?[smiley]aes/joking.png[/smiley]
Tracking the even chance bets on roulette is another way to go if you want more action.
The Red Black is appearing at short enough intervals to jump on board with some parlay bets.
The Red Red and Odd Even are appearing at longer intervals. Bet against these with the opposite.
Tracking all three even chances is hard work. A tracker would be ideal if playing from home online.
Quote from: split-monster on September 12, 2014, 04:16:22 PM
Tracking the even chance bets on roulette is another way to go if you want more action.
The Red Black is appearing at short enough intervals to jump on board with some parlay bets.
The Red Red and Odd Even are appearing at longer intervals. Bet against these with the opposite.
Tracking all three even chances is hard work. A tracker would be ideal if playing from home online.
Hi friend split-monster. Good to see that new people is entering the discussion. This is already much more than some do. I must admit that at first I thought you were a player betting two roulette numbers due to the split references. It will remain as a personal anecdote for me.
We can tell that for these basic systems there must have trackers made already. Perhaps some of the forum members already have this set? It is most probable. Hopefully some member can show soon with the tracker already made. Many thanks if someone shares. Greetings to you.
Thank you for your encouragement wannawin.
I am thinking maybe a Labouchere would be the best type of betting strategy for these pairs.
What appeals is crossing out two numbers in the line for every win and just adding one on a loss. Especially when we effectively have three pairs working in our favour against one for the Casino.
I have read a lot of posts on the Labouchere from Rolex-Watch and how he often splits the lines rather than allowing the bets to get too large. I think this is a sound idea. Time for some experimenting.
So far so good with my Labouchere testing. I have played a few dozen strings and the worst drawdown is only 6 units.
Give it time. I know, I know. But I like the Labouchere in tandem with the pairs. 7 losses and only 5 wins to be -6 at worst is ok. Just a small run of one of the three pairs in my favour against the one for the house and it clears itself.
There was a great run going opposite of Red Black this morning.
It went as folows.
BB
BB
BR
BB
BR
RR
RR
RR
RR
RR
BB
BR
RR
BB
RR
BR
RR
BR
BB
BR
RR
RR
RR
23 successive pairs all opposing Red Black. Not even one interval of the Red Black in any of that lot.
If I just take the right hand side of those results, I get the following.
B
B
R
B*
R
R
R
R
R
R
B*
R
R
B*
R
R
R
R
B*
R
R
R
R
From the fourth result down, I have marked the intervals where a Black appears. There are only four singles from here. There are only 6/23 Blacks in that whole passage. Some food for thought there.
Now back to my Labouchere testing and running this on all three even chances for roulette. An idea may be to run separate Win/Loss tables for all three even chances and give them each their own Labouchere string. This would allow you to manipulate the strings as you see fit.
When one string is not performng so well, stop playing and donate some of the losses on to a string that is going well. It's just an idea for now. I will need to do some experimenting with it.
But suffice to say, there are plenty of options.
Congratulation split-monster.
You are on the right track to a long term winning system.
Spend more time tweaking the entry and exit signals using the 4 pairs.
You will discover a couple of sets with very low variance.
From here you can decide which mm to use. At this stage any mm used will produce positive results.
I can't say more. I have said all I need to say.
Best wishes and regards.
Thank you Chef. It's good to know I am on the right track.
Here is a file covering all three even chances and I stopped it at this point because it kind of explains a few different things for anybody following.
The Even Odd has not shown for 17 pairs. That means the opposite Odd Even is a winner every time.
Looking at the second result of each of the 17 pairs.
E
E
O*
E
E
E
O*
E
E
E
O*
E
E
E
E
E
E
There are only three single intervals of the Odd noted by the asterix.
There was also the chance to do a bit of parlay betting here as well.
Looking at the Even Even over the last 9 pairs.
W,W,L,W,W,W,L,W,W.
I think just looking for the single L interval when betting for parlays is the best option. Then you are only ever risking two units at most to win four. A good qualifying trigger for this in my opinion would be looking for three W out of four before betting for a parlay.
Happy hunting.
Hi all . . .
In my file of trackers I had one that tracked EC couplets which is what I think you are doing here.
If not, just disregard the attached tracker or give be a better explanation of what you are doing and perhaps I can make the adjustments.
Cheers
Nick
Hello Nick. Your tracker is good. The only difference is that I am filling in the blank spaces adding up how long the missing intervals are.
For eample.
BB
RR 1
RR 2
RB 3
RB 4
RR 5
BB X
BR 1
BR 2
RR 3
RR 4
BB X
So the interval for BB is 5/4 so far. For a bet, I am looking for a pair with just single X intervals which are missing for long periods of time. This happens frequently tracking all four pairs using the three even chances.
Betting against BB would see me betting on RR for the next pair. This would guarantee me a win on the first or second result of a pair if the BB does not appear. It would either show RR, RB or BR. Any one of them would give me at least one win out of two. That's where the Labouchere idea comes in because even one win out of two will allow for progress in clearing the line.
I hope that explains it a bit better. Thank you.
The parlays are just an optional extra and not as reliable as the main bet in my opinion.
Having a look back at my last file *labouchere3*, every pair came out by the time the 28,32 appeared apart from the Even Odd and the Low High.
So I can either bet Odd Even or High Low (or both) on the next two bets. I will win on either the first or second bet of the next pair as long as the Even Odd or the Low High don't appear.
I would have won either the first or second bet betting Odd Even on the next 12 pairs that came out. I would also have won either the first or second bet betting High Low on the next 8 pairs that came out.
Three of the Odd Even bets would have been double wins meaning I win on both the first and second result of the pair and two of the High Low bets would have been double wins as well.
I was trying to think of an easier way to track things and think I have come up with it.
*see file attatched*
Take Red Red as an example.
It did not come out in the first two pairs.
Then it came out as the third pair (denoted as x) and also came out as the fourth pair (x again)
Then it did not appear on the next three pairs.
Odd Even.
It appeared as the first pair.
Then it did not appear on the next six pairs.
This is the pair I would be betting against and would bet Even Odd.
So that would be Even on the next spin and Odd on the spin after that.
I am a winner if any of Odd Odd, Even Even or Even Odd appear.
Even Odd appearing as the next pair would give me two wins.
Any one of the Odd Odd or Even Even and it's just the one win from two bets.
Tracking this way would be much easier on the Casino scorecards with one of those eraser pencils.
I will give it a try tomorrow at the Baccarat tables just using BB, BP, PP, PB.
The casino I am visiting has Punto2000. No tax apart from only paying out 1/2 on Banker 6.
I will use the Labouchere and see how I get on. Should be interesting.
Hello Split-monster,
My sincere congratulation to you again.
You are inching closer to a long term winning system.
Keep going my friend.
You deserved success.
Regards and Best wishes
Hello Split-monster,
Go easy on the MM now, work on the entry and exit signal instead.
A time will come when you realize that the variance gets lower and lower.
You will never find an edge over the casino, because there is none.
When the variance is consistently low, any MM used will yield long term profit.
Don't expect to win every session, this will never happen.
Put a stop loss at twice your profit target and you will have your personal grail.
You will always win more than you lose.
Regards
Well, I did manage to hit the tables today to give all this a try and it was an interesting experience.
My limited testing had me excited and I thought I was on to a good thing. I gave Baccarat a try first and lost my first 8 bets using the Labouchere. Now this is something I can't ever remember trying before and it was a bit daunting left with a string consisting of 1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9. Losing the first and second bet of the first four pairs was not a good start.
Now this had me thinking about what Chef was saying about entry and exit points. I came to the conclusion that it really needs to be played on roulette and use all three even chances.
Keeping a win/loss record for each different even chance seems like a good idea. The 8 losses above would have resulted in a L L L L. So switching to another even chance after an L and looking for some W's seemed like a good idea. I can't say I would have not lost when switching over to another even chance, but at least I would not have lost another six bets following the same even chance. In hindsight, it seems like I was a bit foolish to carry on playing the same even chance.
So I decided to quit Baccarat with my loss and head over to the roulette table. I wanted to have more options available to me. I decided that I would switch over to another even chance on any loss and look for the strongest bet. It worked out well and I recouped my losses. I just started a new Labouchere string at the roulette tables and things never got out of hand.
I did not run separate strings for all three even chances. I just migrated the string over to any even chance that I started playing following a loss.
Thank you Chef. Your words were stuck in my mind and they helped me to think how to turn around a bad situation.
Now I know some of you will think losing 8 bets is nothing. I agree it can happen anytime. But one thing I have noticed about the variance of these pairs is that the losses appear in clusters.
Then you get huge intervals with maybe just some single losses in between.
So I will do some more experimenting. Maybe switching over to another even chance after one loss of a pair is too severe and I should wait for two losses. I think there is mileage in the approach, but it is still early days as I look to fine tune things.
I just thought I would show you all the first 50 spins (25 pairs) from the roulette table.
**see file below**
Look across any line after the first few pairs have appeared and there is always a pair in one of the even chances that is very close to or passed a double digit number. Remember this means that particular pair has not shown. We already know a dozen or column can go missing for 15-20 spins at times. So it's safe to assume four pairs can go missing at times for even longer than three dozens or columns. Especially when we are working with twelve pairs incorporating all three even chances as opposed to three dozens and three columns which only equals six.
Here is the complete 74 spins.
**see file attatched**
The High High went 23 pairs (46 spins) without showing. Betting Low Low was very rewarding.
Marking like this does have it's advantages.
Take a look at line 26. Numbers 26 and 13 have appeared as the pair.
Going across that line shows 6, 2, W, 7.
The 6 is Red Red. The 7 is Black Red. So the last result in the pair is Red. But remember these are absent pairs. So the opposite of Red is Black.
Take the lowest number which is 6. This means the last 6 pairs had a Black number as the second result of the pair.
Working backwards.
13
31
4
22
10
20
These are just some interesting things that you may like to take a look at.
I was doing some more testing and thinking about this. To be honest, I don't think it's going to stand up betting on two results in each pair.
The better option IMO is looking for the most dominant even chance on either the first or second result of the pair and going for that.
If Red Red is not showing, I am going to be looking at Black Black because I know a Black is going to show as the first or second result as long as the Red Red continues to be absent.
Now that's all well and good, however when it starts producing runs like these..
Red Black
Red Black
Red Black
The first bet just becomes a wasted bet.
The file I attatched in reply 12 is the best way to track for what I am talking about because you can then see in an instant which of two pairs in an even chance are not showing.
Looking at that file and the Red Red, Red Black, Black Black, Black Red.
RR= 2,X,X,3.
RB= X,5,X.
BB= 4,X,X,1.
BR= 1,X,5.
So it's easy to see straight away that the RR and BR are the two pairs which are most recently absent. This means that I am either going to get RB or BB as the result. The common denominator there is the B as the second result. So I would just play for the second B.
This would certainly make it much easier to track and play.
Just having another quick look back at that file in reply 12 and the Odd and Even pairs were a good opportunity as well.
OO= 4,X,1,X.
OE= X,6.
EE= 1,X,5.
EO= 2,X,X,1,X,1.
The Odd Even and the Even Even are the two pairs here which are most recently absent. So I am either going to get Odd Odd or Even Odd showing. The common denominator there is the Odd as the second result. So I would just play for the second Odd.
Following this way on the three even chances will throw up plenty of bets.
So I am going to throw out a few spins and show you how I would track this spin by spin.
First number is 35. Second number is 7. That's BR, OO, HL.
RR. 1,
RB. 1,
BB. 1,
BR. X,
OO. X,
OE. 1,
EE. 1,
EO. 1,
LL. 1,
LH. 1,
HH. 1,
HL. X,
Of course the X = a hit and the 1 represents that this particular pair did not show.
The next two numbers are 27 and 33. RB, OO, HH.
RR. 2,
RB. 1,X,
BB. 2,
BR. X,1,
OO. X,X,
OE. 2,
EE. 2,
EO. 2,
LL. 2,
LH. 2,
HH. 1,X,
HL. X,1,
So you can see above that LL and LH have not appeared for two pairs.
If this continues, it means I will get either HH or HL appearing. The common denominator in that is the first H.
The next two numbers out are 31 and 2. BB, OE, H,L.
RR. 3,
RB. 1,X,1,
BB. 2,X,
BR. X,2,
OO. X,X,1,
OE. 2,X,
EE. 3,
EO. 3,
LL. 3,
LH. 3,
HH. 1,X,1,
HL. X,1,X,
Now the LL and LH have not appeared for three pairs and I would have won betting the first H in that pair.
Other opportunities are in the Odd Even e.c's.
EE and EO has not appeared for three pairs. If this continues, it will be either OO or OE as the next pair. The common denominator is the O as the first result of the pair and that would be the bet.
What about the Red Black e.c's.
RR and BR has not appeared for three and two pairs respectively.
If this continues, it will be either RB or BB as the next pair. The common denominator is the B as the second result of the pair and that would be the bet.
So it's not too difficult tracking all three even chances and working out these bets.
I will try and wrap things up within the next few posts because I think I have a pretty good handle on this now.
The two posts above pretty much sum things up, however there are a few more things I need to explain.
I have worked out that there are six possible bets for each even chance.
The best way for me to explain it will be with an example.
So I will throw out some numbers and show you how things go.
The first two numbers are 8,21. BR, EO, LH.
RR. 1,
RB. 1,
BB. 1,
BR. X,
OO. 1,
OE. 1,
EE. 1,
EO. X,
LL. 1,
LH. X,
HH. 1,
HL. 1,
I wouldn't be looking for a bet here. I will wait to see what becomes dominant.
The next two numbers are 9,4. RB, OE, LL.
RR. 2,
RB. 1,X,
BB. 2,
BR. X,1,
OO. 2,
OE. 1,X,
EE. 2,
EO. X,1,
LL. 1,X,
LH. X,1,
HH. 2,
HL. 2,
So there are a few opportunities here.
First of all with the Red Black ec's. RR and BB have not appeared for two pairs.
If they continue to be missing, I will get either a RB or BR. Now there is no common denominator here. So what I would need to do is to wait and see what the first result of the pair is. If it's an R, I will bet B next. If it's a B, I will bet R next.
The Odd Even ec's present the same type of bet as the Red Blacks.
OO and EE have not appeared for two pairs. If they continue to be missing, I will get either a OE or EO. Once again, there is no common denominator here and I would need to see what the first result of the pair is. If it's an O, I will bet E next. If it's an E, I will bet O next.
The Low High ec's are a bit more straightforward.
HH and HL have not appeared for two pairs. If they continue to be missing, I will get either a LL or LH. The common denominator here is the first L and that would be the bet.
One other tricky bet until you get the hang of it is the following.
Suppose the two missing pairs in the Red Black are RB and BR. If they continue to be missing, I will get either RR or BB. Once again, there is no common denominator here. This time however, you would wait and see what the first result was and then bet the same again to repeat. So if R, bet R. If B, bet B.
Now I will list all six bets for the even chances and they are all interchangeable.
RR, OO, LL =1.
RB, OE, LH = 2.
BB, EE, HH = 3.
BR, EO, HL = 4.
If 1/2 absent. Bet B1, E1 or H1. (1 means the first result of the pair)
If 1/3 absent. Bet the opposite of the first result on the second result of the pair.
If 1/4 absent. Bet B2, E2 or H2. (2 means the second result of the pair)
If 2/3 absent. Bet R2, O2 or L2.
If 2/4 absent. Bet the same as the first result on the second result of the pair.
If 3/4 absent. Bet R1, O1 or L1.
One final piece of advice.
**see file attatched**
The Odd Even and Low High even chances produced some nice results with a few wins each.
However the Red Black produced three straight losses. I have put the next bets in brackets for the Red Black just to show you.
The advice would be to keep a running Win and Loss record for all three even chances.
If you are getting a string of losses in one of the even chances along the lines of L L W L L W L L etc....
Then the obvious thing to do is just bet the opposite even chance of what you normally would and you will win.
We don't know in advance how things are going to go. It could be a day of the 'opposites' streaking on all three even chances for all we know.
Nicely done Split-Monster - I'm quite fascinated by this. It will be interesting to see how it pans out. Chef seems to agree and it sounds like he/she is speaking from experience so that seems like some positive support for your approach.
Thank you sqzbox.
The one thing that this gives us is plenty of options. Randomness takes so many twists and turns.
Just to show the strength of playing the opposites at times, I have attatched another file where I have put all the bets in place and then recorded a win or loss.
The Odd Even chance went L W L L L L L L L L.
The Red Black even chance went W L W L W L L L L W
I like to bet the dominant side when there is just single intervals of W or L.
Of course there are also parlay options should you see X, 1, X, 1, X, X, 1 going down a row or a pair may go on a huge streak of absence and you could oppose it with a 1-2 negative progression picking up a unit for each further time the pair is absent. The only thing about this particular one I don't like is needing to win three bets just to break even. I am not really sure if that's worth the risk.
But like I said, there is certanly plenty to look out for. I hope it is useful for anybody who decides to give it a go.
Thanks.
So it now becomes a bit subjective as to which approach to take doesn't it? You can't know ahead of time so half the time your decision will be wrong. A bit of a problem, that. Perhaps Chef might like to weigh in with some advice at this point.
Quote from: sqzbox on September 18, 2014, 12:38:29 PM
So it now becomes a bit subjective as to which approach to take doesn't it? You can't know ahead of time so half the time your decision will be wrong. A bit of a problem, that. Perhaps Chef might like to weigh in with some advice at this point.
My idea of the most sensible way to approach it would be to look for whatever is happening the most and stick with it. The opposite bet on the Odd Even e.c's in the file above was obviously working best at the time.
The more I think about gambling, the more convinced I am that trying to learn when not to bet is more important than when to place a bet.
I certainly agree that Chef sounded like someone talking from experience with this type of bet and it would be great if he/she could add any more insights.
Hello Split-monster & Sqzbox,
The most important thing to work on is look for entry and exit signals which have low variance.
Low variance is vital for building a playable system. It still cannot guarantee success. There is no sure win system.
But with a proper stop loss and a session win target build in , you can have a long term winning system.
This is not the same as hit and run. You can play many sessions together on the same table.
A new session starts when the other ends.
The missing link is the MM. This is not difficult to work on. When the variance is low, everything will come into place.
Example of entry & exit signals from the data you attached.
2
1
4
2 (Always look at the last 4. We must have at least 3 groups. Bet against the missing group for the next 2 spins)
4 LW
1 WW
4 LW
4 LW
1 no bet because last 4 shows only 2 groups
3 NB
1 LW
3 WL
1 NB
4 NB
1 LW
3 WW
2 LL
3 (No bet if all 4 groups appear)
2 WW
3 NB
3 NB
4 NB
2 LW
2 LW
1 LL
3 LL
2 WW
3 LW
3 LW
4 NB
4 WL
3 NB
1 NB
3 WL
2 LL
This is just one example on the entry exit signals. There are many more such signals. Work on it till you find one which
suits your bankroll and tolerance of pain.
Regards and Best wishes to you guys.
Chef you are the man!!! 8)
Rolex-Watch and split-monster this is what i am talking about :thumbsup:
Trust me its working so far but i combined it with sputnik idea in the extreme thread.
Hello MoneyT101,
Nice to hear about your success.
Wish you the best.
Regards
Thank you for your reply Chef. I agree about trying to find something with a low variance and then MM does not become so scary.
I was also thinking more about sqzbox's question because my answer was a bit vague.
Quote from: sqzbox on September 18, 2014, 12:38:29 PM
So it now becomes a bit subjective as to which approach to take doesn't it? You can't know ahead of time so half the time your decision will be wrong. A bit of a problem, that. Perhaps Chef might like to weigh in with some advice at this point.
So I created a Win Loss concept to go along with things.
You can see it here in the attatched file. I will come back later and explain how it works properly.
However just as a quick example..you can see the WL and LW are both missing for a while. So this is giving the WW and LL dominance. So ''repeating the last'' is a strong bet. Now looking over to the left at the origial concept, you can see that there is a nice run of wins followed by a run of losses.
More later.
What a great thread! This is exactly what this forum is really all about -- exploring, discussing, testing in a supportive, courteous manner. :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Congratulations, split-monster, for all your hard work that you've so kindly shared.
Thank you esoito.
I have some time before I dash out to try and explain a bit about the Win Loss concept that I attatched above.
It is a little bit of a mirror image of what you see on the left hand side. One difference however is that you have to wait for two pairs to come out before you can record anything.
The Win Loss pairs are..
WW=1
WL=2
LL=3
LW=4
The first two results on the left hand side are a Loss and a Win (LW). So I put an X on the right hand side under the LW and a 1,1,1 under the 1, 2 and 3. So it's really just the same idea as you see on the left.
Looking at line 7. You can see that the WL and LL have both missed for three times each. If they continue to miss, I will have to put an X in either the WW or LW. So the dominant factor here is the second W. This means I will bet for the second pair on the left to be a Win.
Things ran well here for a few pairs because it was suggesting the second W and also B2 using the left hand concept. I picked this file out because it is pretty straightforward to follow. Things can get a lot more compex when figuring out the bets.
I will attatch another file below with another example for anybody who is trying to get their head around it. What it all boils down to is having the awareness to spot what is working the best between the left hand and right side. In the file I am attatching in this post, the LL is the missing pair towards the end on the right hand side. So this leaves me with WW, WL or LW. So that means at least one Win from the first or second pair on the left hand side. Those last few results on the left were Win, Win, Loss, Win, Win, Loss.
Probably the best thing I like about the whole idea is how it seems to throw wins up in clusters. This is important especially if you are using type of MM scheme because as we all know, you need those cluster of wins when things are getting a bit hairy or the bets just escalate out of control. I am testing this with GLC's 'Mongoose tames Trioplay' and it is working out really well. I just look for what appears to be the strongest triggers and go along with it. If it's all a bit out of kilter and I can't read it, I stop!
I wonder if we aren't getting a little too clever (read "complicated") now. Complexity means errors. I think the point that Chef was making was that the key is low variance - or, if you prefer, low volatility - because it is this that makes for a winning strategy in the end. Reason - because you can't beat the probabilities long term but if you can keep the variance low then you can win money with the MM even when you lose in terms of wins versus losses.
If you look at the example provided by Chef on one of your own sequences you can see that in terms of wins versus losses there were one or two more losses than wins but since the variance was low the MM would have ensured a profitable run. Why try and aim for more wins than losses by being excessively clever (or complicated) when it is unnecessary? It just introduces potential for error during play which is usually costly.
Hello sqzbox, it maybe looks complicated with the Win Loss tracker thrown in, but in all honesty, I think it makes it a better strategy to play.
Here is one of my cards from my casino trip today. It all fits neatly on one page and I could manage to track everything without any mistakes. The spins were roughly every 60 seconds which I agree is not quick, but not too slow either.
Playing this way means I don't need to play all three even chances. They are all independent from each other anyhow and playing that way X 3 just makes for more work IMO. I feel it's better to beef up just one EC with the Win Loss tracker as well. That also brings back Baccarat into the equation.
I made a nice few units playing this today. It will take hours of practice and play to get better at reading all the signals for sure. But I really do feel this is something that will give me a good fighting chance of winning playing the EC's.
do you look at the prior 3 pairs then bet against?
example
if the show is:
PPBPBB your next bet you be PB?
Hello Rich,
BB BP PP PB
1, 1, X, 1,
2 p2 X, 1, 2 p2
X, 1, 2 b1 3 b1
Your pairs were..
PP
BP
BB
The second rows indicates a bet on Player on the second result of the next pair. However I think it's wise to always see if the first bet is a Win or Loss. No point betting for Wins and getting a streak of losses.
This particular bet did indeed lose because the second result of the next pair was a B (Banker).
So although the next bet is pointing at a bet on Banker on the first result of the next pair, I would be inclined to go against that and look for another Loss which means I would bet Player on the first result of the next pair.
Today was a good day for me betting against Wins. They were a lot of Loss sequences and I captured a lot of them.
I am in the process of testing this against the Wiz's Baccarat shoes (6 decks).
I will upload each file as I complete a shoe.
The first shoe was a breeze with a Loss appearing on the first result of a pair six times.
Then it did a u-turn producing six Wins on the first result of the next six pairs.
on that wiz shoe how much were you up in the end?
Rich, I would have made between 8-10 units if I was flat betting that shoe.
It was a fairly predictable shoe using my strategy. I am a firm believer nowadays that less is more when it comes to gambling. That would have been a nice shoe just to sit back and recharge the batteries.
Shoe 2 was much more complex in comparison. I am just finishing that one now.
The Wins and Losses were all over the place, however because of the information at my disposal, it was not insurmountable.
Have a look at the Win Loss groups so far..
2 3 2 1 4 4 2 2 4....so mostly 2's and 4's which are represented by either WL or LW. You can see the LL on the right hand side has been missing seven times in a row up till now. So one thing you know with 2's and 4's is that the second result of the pair will be the opposite of the first.
So if the first result is a Win, the second result is a Loss. Alternatively if the first result is a loss, the second result is a win. The last 5 pairs have played out like this.
One other notable trend which is also sticking out is the PP went missing for 17 pairs. So the first or second result of a pair has to be a B.
So even though Shoe 2 was more complex than Shoe 1, it was certainly ripe for the picking.
You need options when dealing with randomness and plenty of them. These concepts allow you to have a very broad perspective of what's going on.
Here is Shoe 2 finished.
There was another WL and LW to add to the 2's and 4's making a run of seven.
I will give this another shot at the Baccarat table tomorrow and see how things pan out.
Shoe 3 was a good one for throwing up a few different things to point out.
The Win Loss groups on the right hand side were mostly throwing up Losses early on. There were enough to make a few units.
Another thing to note about these four groups. I will write them out in order as they appeared.
4
1
2 (so the missing one is 3)
3 (the 3 appears. Now the furthest back one is 4)
2
4 (the 4 appears. Now the furthest back one is 1)
1 (the 1 appears. Now the furthest back one is 3)
3 (the 3 appears. Now the furthest back one is 2)
The furthest back one can appear in clusters like above. You can play for these furthest back groups to appear using a parlay. If you play for the 1, bet for WW to appear. If you play for the 3, bet for LL to appear etc.
Other notable streaks in this shoe were the missing BP early and towards the end.
Also the WW and LL were missing towards the end for a time leaving either WL or LW to appear. This accounts for the five consecutive *2* and *4* groups towards the end.
Certainly not an easy shoe to read and the most difficult of the three so far. However it would have been a profitable one.
Shoe 4 was pretty similar to Shoe 3. A lot of Losses on the Right Hand side.
Shoe 5 was a belter.
The Win Loss groups came out as follows...
4,2,2,4,4,4,4,4,2,2,1,3. Eight consecutive wins on the Right Hand side.
I like the idea of playing this on Baccarat as opposed to a continuously spinning roulette wheel with the zero added on. It should roughly produce around 10-15 bets per shoe. The break in between shoes is a good time to think about any adjustments that may need making with regards to MM. It's certainly not something I could play online because of the speed of some of the baccarat games.
I think that's me done with this one. Not saying it's the HG or anything like that, but I think it's a winner with some disciplne to not go chasing bets and to just let the runs come by themself.
Thanks for reading and for all the comments and suggestions.
split-monstar your write on the money now. This is what I've been trying to tell you!
I've recorded about 20 shoes live and it doesn't matter what happens in the game. The patterns stick!!
Hello . . .
With permission of Split Monster, I am attaching his 2 trackers for EC Intervals.
The first tracker is blank so you input your numbers into Column A to get the intervals.
The second tracker (RNG) comes with a built in RNG function so all you need do is press Function Key F9 to get another set of RNG numbers. This will give you a good idea of the intervals.
Cheers
Nick
Thanks Nick,
There are a few different ideas I have had regarding these intervals.
One area that looks ripe for attacking is to use parlays.
Quite often I see running down one column something like...
X
1
X
X
1
X
1
X
1
2
Keeping the interval to 1 makes 2 units profit or 3 units if an X follows straight after another X.
Assuming you started betting after seeing X, 1, X above, you would have the following.
X +3
1 -1
X +3
1 -1
X +3
1 -1
2 -1
So 5 units profit. Tracking across all three e.c's may throw up some nice runs.
What progressions to use?
Star instantly comes to mind.
Another one would be a kind of modified 'foolproof' MM. That's the one by Stetson Bailey where you just keep raising a unit regardless of a win or loss. However there is no need to be so aggressive when betting parlays. So I thought about something like 1,1,1 2,2,2 3,3,3 etc or maybe even 1,1 2,2 3,3 and so on.
All just ideas for the melting pot really.
Another idea regarding the 'foolproof' MM which may work out better than the above is just to concentrate on the missing pair.
Using a betting sequence like the following..
1/2
2/4
3/6
4/8
5/10
6/12
7/14
8/16 etc..
Example:
BB missing. So I am betting for RR.
B (bet 1 here) lost -1.
B (bet 2 here) lost -2. Total loss -3.
Now say RB is missing. So I bet BR.
R (bet 2 here) lost -2. Total loss -5.
R (bet 4 here) won +4. Total loss -1.
Now of course RB is still missing. So I bet for BR again.
R (bet 3 here) lost -3. Total loss -4.
R (bet 6 here) won +6. Total +2. Stop here and reset if you like or carry on.
I like this idea better than the two I gave above in the previous post. The missing pair is more likely to stay missing than getting a repeating X.
If you win the first bet in the pair, you don't need to bet for the second result. You could even then stay at the same level in the MM.
I will test some more with this one.
Here is a longer example:
BB missing pair. Play RR.
B (bet 1. lose -1)
B (bet 2. lose -2) total loss -3.
RB missing pair. Play BR.
B (bet 2. lose -2) total loss -5.
R (bet 4. lose -4) total loss -9.
RR missing pair. Play BB.
R (bet 3. lose -3) total loss -12.
R (bet 6. lose -6) total loss -18.
BR missing pair. Play RB.
R (bet 4. win +4) total loss -14. don't play for second result. Stay at same level.
BR still missing pair. Play RB.
B (bet 4. lose -4) total loss -18.
B (bet 8. win +8) total loss -10.
BR still missing pair. Play RB.
B (bet 5. lose -5) total loss -15.
B (bet 10. win +10) total loss -5.
BR still missing pair. Play RB.
R (bet 6. win +6) total +1. Reset or carry on.
There were 8 losses and 4 wins here for a total of +1.
I always kind of liked the 'foolproof' method. This modified version for the missing pairs doesn't look too shabby. Time will tell I suppose.
Now here is the whole idea of the Intervals transposed over to the dozens.
Yes, I know what some of you are thinking. [smiley]cps/suicide.gif[/smiley]
Can you figure it out?
Here it is a bit further on.
Here is how it works with the dozens.
There are 9 pairs.
1-1 = 1.
1-2 = 2.
1-3 = 3.
2-1 = 4.
2-2 = 5.
2-3 = 6.
3-1 = 7.
3-2 = 8.
3-3 = 9.
Now going back to the e.c's...remember that if RR was the missing pair, that then leaves RB, BB and BR. So I would play BB knowing that one of the results of the next pair would be B as long as the RR stayed missing.
So how about the dozens?
If 1-1 is missing. It then has to appear as either (2-2) (3-2) (2-3) (3-3) if no 1 continues to be absent in both the first and second result of the pair.
Here is the full list.
1-1. (2-2) (3-2) (2-3) (3-3)
1-2. (2-1) (3-1) (2-3) (3-3)
1-3. (2-1) (3-1) (2-2) (3-2)
2-1. (1-2) (3-2) (1-3) (3-3)
2-2. (1-1) (3-1) (1-3) (3-3)
2-3. (1-1) (3-1) (1-2) (3-2)
3-1. (1-2) (2-2) (1-3) (2-3)
3-2. (1-1) (2-1) (1-3) (2-3)
3-3. (1-1) (2-1) (1-2) (2-2)
Here is one type of bet you can make.
Looking at line 5 in the file I attatched in the above post. You can see that dozens 1,2,3 have all come out as the first result in the pairs. However only dozens 1,2 have come out as the second result of the pair. So this just leaves dozen 3 as the missing dozen. So you would bet here dozens 1,2 to appear as the second result of the pair. There were 5 wins of 1 unit before dozen 3 appeared as the second result of the pair. Then dozen 2 became the missing dozen on the first result of the pairs. So you would now bet dozens 1,3 to appear as the first result of the pair. Another 2 wins followed here.