Played three shoes the other night. Not my normal game. This particular table only had one shoe, and was a hand shuffle game. I don't often play a hand shuffled game.

First shoe in progress when I arrive at hand 34. No tie yet. Wow, ok, that's not too common but 34 hands isn't much of a stretch. It was another 23 decisions before the first and only tie of an 8 deck shoe. There were 24 more hands dealt before that shoe ended.

Same deck of 8 hand shuffled. Some recognize and are comfortable with continuous shoes being a fair representation of random, others feel each shoe is a separate entity of random. Either way is fine but the second shoe went to hand 31 before it tied for the first time. (Ended up being 5 more ties in that shoe.) Put them together and you have 1 tie in shoe one at hand 57, and then another 55 decisions until you reach hand 31 in the second shoe for a total of 2 ties in 112 decisions.

Then in shoe three Tie didn't show until hand 54.

Food for thought for anyone that considers running a progression on the tie bet.

I'm willing to type the shoes out later if anyone is interested. Presently I'm headed to the casino.

I'll be back later, I've certainly got more to say.

HBS

Good job Al,

Maybe a little bit of censorship will mask your ignorance and ineptitude. Though, that mask won't last long.

Deleting my posts is proof you are only willing, and interested in dishing out offensive, intentionally belittling remarks, but unwilling or incapable of receiving any.

You are an emotional child.

Oh, and a complete and utterly desperate fool. Evidenced by placing a 1k wager on Wewinn222's underdog Mariners pick. This was after you posted a link showing all of the baseball approved statistics that pointed to the Astros winning.  You bet against the trend! The exact opposite of what you keep saying to do!

You bet for the cut!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH

You are the most ignorant hypocrite I've ever witnessed.
Lookie there, you came in first in something.
A real winner.

HBS

Didn't want to continue off topic in the other thread. And was compelled to make some input regarding streak as I am predominantly an FLD bettor.

I accept there is no (substantial) statistical difference in the occurrences of simple streaks (BBBBBBBBB) and convoluted streaks (BBPBBPBBP). However, I do feel there is a significant difference between the two. The standard streak of 9 B is not only more easily recognizable, but consists of only one decision repeating itself. The repeating 2-1 pattern of BBPBBPBBP is much less recognized as a streak of 9 than it is recognized as B doubling three times in a row, and P singling three times in a row and really consists of 3 decisions repeating themselves as opposed to one.

When I see BBBBBB, I don't see two three streaks of B, nor do I see one repeated event of BBB. I see a streak of six.

I'm not going to say what you really have here in BBPBBPBBP are two separate types of streaks each of a length of three. But I am going to say they are very nearly always recognized and considered as such. You stretch this out to BBPBBPBBPBBPBBPBBP and it should be universally recognized as a streak of BBP. Still most likely considered a streak of 6 and not 18. Obviously BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB is without a doubt never interpreted as anything except a streak with a length of 18.

I only need one repeated event BB, to signify that I might be on a streak. It could be argued that BB is also only one repeated event that signifies I might be on a streak of BBP. BUT, I don't need a third decision to prove it. The BBP bettor does. My streak may never go past the 2hole, yet it is still a streak. The BBP streak never developed, and in essence, never really was a streak, not even a streak of 2.

Now we can dramatically extrapolate this perspective and say that not just any, but every combination of B and P is a streak of whatever length you desire.

BBBPBPPPBPBPBPBPPBBBPBPBPPPBPBPBBPBPBPBPBPPPPPBPBPPPPBBBBPPPB is a streak of remarkable length, how did everyone miss it? The obvious answer is because it is too convoluted, you could have patterns inside your pattern.

The 'frequency of occurrence' of any and every combination of 9 decisions is (very nearly) exactly the same.

I am confident Lung Yeh's remark that a streak of 17 should be an unmissed opportunity to take the casino to the cleaners was based upon 1. His style of play and 2. The blatant display of an easily recognizable trend even the most novice of gamblers should recognize, and more importantly, take a single chance on. Pick a number and get on it. My number is 7.

I will take a stong position and say only an absolute fool would continue to bet against a streak and lose 17 times, and a bigger fool would start at 11 or 12 and relentlessly bet against its continuation until it ruined them. I will say picking a number, even 7, and betting against it a small number of times is acceptable. Not very fruitful as only a single won bet, and certainly will NEVER allow them to easily make bets that yield them a very large amount of wins in a row. After only 3 of which you are free to press and parlay with an unconflicted conscience until your bets are bucking up against the table max.

Now betting against the streak wasn't part of the original conversation I was responding too. I got a little side tracked there, back on topic.....

Streaks of great lengths are not a myth. And streaks of the same single repeated event are the easiest to notice and the easiest to bet on. What has a 1 in 130,000 chance of occurring WILL occur. And Murphy says if you continue to boldly bet against it, you will see it in less than 130,000 chances. You can only lose one bet taking a single chance that this might be the Monster Dragon. And if you find yourself sitting there watching 17 repeated events go by and you haven't made a single bet with it, well, you can pat yourself on the back for having extreme discipline, but you might as well go ahead and do it on your way out of the casino never to return again.

If you cannot or will not capitalize on the easiest streak possible, you will never be able to capitalize on any streak of even the slightest less recognizable pattern. Such as the BPBPBPBPBPBPBPBPB. I will state one exception, and one exception only. And that is if you are specifically looking for a particular streak, as in if you are an OLD bettor, or constantly on the hunt for 2x2's etc. Though, I will still fault you for not taking a chance on the most recognizable streak possible.

HBS

Odd, I know. It struck me the other day during a short conversation about playing poker.

It really is not complicated.

Poker is a game of skill....and luck. No guarantee, even long term, of breaking even minus the house edge times 3-5 standard deviations of your action.

I don't want to say you can flat bet 1u for 400 bets in 5hrs and expect to keep 90% of your buy in, or even half, anything can happen. But you can, it happens, sometimes be ahead even, it's tough to lose 100u in 400 bets in baccarat 1u at a time. It is not that difficult to dump 100u in 400 hands of poker.

I choose to take my chances against a single opponent who only has a slight 1.24% advantage......

HBS

Alright, why don't you go ahead and tell me where this casino is that brings out the cards pre shuffled in a specially wrapped box. Where the players don't get to cut and the dealer starts the shoe immediately.

Because it is no longer a game of chance. It's not me vs random. It's me vs another human. This is now a skill based game. Like Poker. Unlike Poker. It can only be Banker of Player. All I got to do is guess what he guesses I'm going to guess next and guess the opposite.

As long they are trying to rig 80 hands at a time in advance.....piece of cake.

What's not to like about this scenario?

HBS

First, I consider myself a five dollar player. I'd like to increase my base unit size but I've run into a problem quarter bettors and high rollers don't have. My very first increase in unit size is DOUBLE. And when you are at the bottom, double is quite a bit. Now at the quarter level, you could do a 20% increase for a $30 bet. And pretty much not make much of an adjustment at all to stay in your comfort zone. But for me, and any five dollar bettor, the first step is a 100% increase. Tough to wrap my head around so I can stay comfortable.


Second, I talk of units. And a 20u win goal. This is somewhat misleading. Something I've been aware of but hadn't fully caught my attention until I tried to raise my unit size. Typically, I open with a 3u bet, and no longer make 1u wagers, even if I'm on a $5 table. I still try and win 20u. But in reality, it is closer to 7u. 7 x my 3u base bet.

When I considered doubling my BR and unit size I'm looking at opening with a $30 bet. That's 6 of what I consider my units. Not the 2u bet I was thinking about, that I obviously wasn't thinking about too closely. So apparently, I have already inadvertently increased my unit size without increasing my buy in. My buy in has shrunk from 80u to about 27u without me realizing it.

I'd like to increase my win goal to 40 base units, but it appears my comfort zone is holding me back. I've reverse engineered my buy in for twenty seven $25 units. Open with a 5 base unit bet and follow up with a 3 instead of the 3/2 I've been playing. Adjust my win goal to about 30 or so base units. This is my present strategy to prepare my psyche to build a comfort zone of larger units.

Has anyone else had difficulty doubling there unit size? And if so, what methods do you use to overcome this mental barricade?


HBS

As I understand it, according to what I've found online...

The first four bets are a one step parlay, and the following 5 bets are flat betting for two wins in a row. The book can be a bit confusing about how to determine your bet size. There is imo a slightly easier and more important way to make that determination if you are going to play it by the book I found online.

The System consists of 1 profit bearing progression, with 2 recovery progressions to get you back to the first progression. They are as follows.

1112 | 5 10 15 25 40 = 100u
2224 | 10 20 30 50 80 = 200u
66612 | 30 60 90 150 240 = 600u

That's 900u. The book says your base unit size should be the first value after the "|" in the first progression, which is the 5. Now this eliminates $5 bettors in a B&M. I imagine even $25 bettors that can play the first progression at a $5 table would balk around the $450 bet let alone the final $1200.

So, look at the entire System laid out in full instead of just the first progression. And use the final recovery progression as a means to determine your base bet for the opening progression. Which is still going to take some pretty deep pockets for a B&M casino.

Personally, I think this system is dangerous for anyone under $250 units and they should still start out with a $5 opening parlay attempt in the first progression.


I'm still not on board with risking 100u for 9 attempts at two in a row. I would think a progression like Soxfan's or one more conservative would be better.

111 22 3 4 5 7 is a 26u bankroll for 9 attempts at winning two in a row with a profit of   3,2,1   2,1   2  2  1  2   Now the profit isn't on par with the Star at 3,2,1,3 | 5 10 10 20 30 However it is at 1/4 the risk. Even if you double it, and then double the whole thing again just like Star is written, you are still at 1/4 the risk with 234u.

There is a slight difference, as the final 5 bets of Star tread water with a WLWLWL pattern. Even so you could stretch out a 1-2 parlay progression 15 places for 153u. Double it after a bust and only risk 306u. (total 459u) That would be 30 attempts to win 2 in a row. And the Star System isn't exactly 27 attempts, because it is written to lump all four parlay attempts into one big bet for the first time you enter into the second and third progression.

There comes an advantage with risk. The Star System does have increased profits for successful coups, so it takes less coups to recover in the second and third progressions. And any successful coups in the first progression reduce the impact of the inevitable bust. But it is a long precarious climb up a 900u mountain to bust safety.

Now, I have over 600 live B&M craps Pass/Don't decisions and not once did I fail to win two in a row in 15 attempts. Though it did go to 14 attempts once. (it's been reverse engineered) I'm not advocating its use, just illustrating just how robust it is. Which brings me to my final point of interest.

Soxfan has a steep 2 step parlay that is similar to the Star System where as he increases risk deeper into his progression he reaps larger profits. I'm not criticizing this approach but want to defend what some may consider a small reward of only 1u-3u for being driven deep into a progression. Where you are down 85u, parlay a 29u bet risking a total of 114 if you lose and only winning 2u profit if you win. Keep in mind it's not 'only' 2u, it's 87u! This approach of winning more the deeper you go does not take advantage of winning 4 6 8 even 10 or 12 in a row. As now with the first successful coup of two wins you are reset to the smallest bet and reap the smallest rewards. If your larger rewards are at the first bet stage, then these times when you win 4 6 8 10 and more in a row you reap the maximum profit.

I know it's not common to win 12 in a row, but 4 in a row isn't really uncommon at all, and it seems counter intuitive, or at least like you are playing with fire, hoping for some losses before you win in order to get the most out of your MM. If you would humor me a bit down gamblers fallacy lane..... If you have been driven all the way into the third and final progression, then things have not been going well for you for some time and you are (possibly) "due" not just some double wins, but (hopefully) more likely 4 6 8 or more in a row. And a progression that yields more with its first bet really shines here, when you need it most.

HBS

PS. I've come across some mentioning of E Star, but could not find any detailed explanation of its design.

+ 28u tonight. And the stress of winning is really starting to build. It hasn't been so poignant before as it is now.

Usually, the stress is pretty high walking in Even, knowing that if you bust a session BR you are digging a deeper hole from the very first unit. You try to be careful and conservative protecting wins and going home with some sort of profit. So the next session that stress is alleviated a bit. If I bust this session BR I don't dig a hole the entire size of my buy in. And then eventually I'm ahead one full session BR and I'm not stress free, but a great deal more relaxed. Here, if I win a bit, I'm actually happy and very near stress free. Knowing that I'm now working on recovering the loss of the previous session BR. ( I'm down overall for my career, and have those lost units separated into session BR's I'm trying to recover 1 at a time. Milestones you might say, positive psychological reinforcement.)

Now though, I feel like I keep waiting for a loss. I can feel weight of it pressing down on me. Second guessing my bet selection. I've recouped all of this year's draw down and have started working on my lifetime draw down. I feel like I should chip up, double my unit size since I've nearly won two session BR's recently and take advantage of a faster recovery. But I cannot shake the feeling that as soon as I do I'll lose all that I've gained so far.

So the stress mounts, buying in for the same amount, making the same size bets. Scratching out small gains, knowing I'll have to win six more sessions before I'm comfortable chipping up. So if I do lose at that exact moment, I'll still have two normal size BR's to start this all over again. 

Anyone else feel pressure mounting from consecutive winning sessions? How do you deal with it?

Tonight's shoe was an easy winner for me, which only adds to the impending doom of guessing it wrong next time. It was however finally a shoe Banker was leading when I got there. Betting for B runs and P singles again, I'm conflicted cause I don't like to bet the strong side.

B
P
B
PP
BB
P
B
P
BBBBBBBB
PPP
B
PP
B
PPP  I showed up here.
B   My first bet for B to repeat and I lose 3u
P 
BBBB
P
BBB
P
B
PPP
BBBBBBBB   
P

I rode that 8 Banker streak and colored up when it was over, fearful of giving back what I had gained.

This is like the 3rd or 4th time out of 5 trips I've walked up on a shoe with Player winning by 10 or more. This shoe was 1/3 complete before I got there. Player 44 to Banker 35.

P
B
PPPPPPP 7P I wasn't around for, saved me a 5u bet as I would have bet it went to 8
B
PPPPP
B
PPP
BBBBBB
PPPPP
B
PP
B
PPP
BB
P
BB
PP
BBBB
P
B
P
B
P
B
P
BBBBB
PP
B
P
B
PPP
BBBBBB
PPPPP

I like to bet P to avoid commission loss, but bet exactly opposite of last week thinking that surely I'd run into a B dom shoe. My bet was for P to single and for B to repeat.

+24u by decision 34 of the following shoe which was once again led by P 20 and B 14

It is commonly used as an example that a 7 or 9 step negative marty is doomed. A long harrowing journey trying to win one unit at a time, avoiding commission losses, 250 to 500 times before the impending bust. Almost always occurring well before you win enough to cover a bust that size. And if you do manage to surpass your bust limits. It's another arduous journey of 1u profits until that bust comes.

What I ponder is the opposite. It seems to me, and I'm sure many will agree that when you do bust your 9 step marty it won't be to a streak of exact length. It will probably be a longer streak. This imo is especially true once you get into streak lengths in the teens. Streaks of 4,5,6 and even 7,8,9,10 seem to occur with the necessary frequency.

But the longer streaks are a bit more random. That is to say, you will probably not see two streaks of 12 before you see 1 streak of 13, or two streaks of 13 before one streak of 14. You are more likely to get some odd streak of 15 or 17 before completely filling in the gaps of all the 14,13,12,11 streak distributions. Probably not see a single one of several of those at all until after a longer streak.

I ponder entering a very long positive progression on P to avoid commission. Thinking that I will hit it early, working with Murphy's law against the marty bet. Or even just keep at it until I overcome my draw down. It would take nerves of steel tho.

Or maybe my head isn't bolted down securely?

I knew I was picking what many would consider a bad bet selection. But I prepared myself to bet with confidence, to be a bit more aggressive knowing that my BS would eventually come around. I was ready to make some much larger than normal bets because I was going to focus on one particular bet ONLY. And that bet was for a B single. All of my bets would have been on Player avoiding commission loss for increased bet sizes as I went deeper into my Lab. I was ready.

I even recorded the shoe by hand, which I haven't done in a while because of the electronic display. First thing I did was make some bets at the end of the first shoe I bought in toward the end of. Dropped 4u without any reason, just random bets. Impatient for some action? not a good sign. Second thing I did was at the beginning of the next shoe, I still didn't set up my Lab string. Just started betting. And somehow decided to pick up a second BS. That every Player doubled. Another selection many would consider bad, but it was in line we me betting P only. After about 12 decisions I finally reversed engineered my lab string. Two of em, one for each BS. In about another 9 decisions I open up a third lab string on Banker streaking passed 2.

In hindsight I'm realizing I was working three bet selections with only ONE bankroll. This quickly turned ugly for me. Eventually, I abandoned use of the lab strings and started betting random amounts of units. My composure is gone, I'm in a tailspin here. I'm thinking about re buying in when I still have over half of my buy in left! I'm convinced I'm going to have a huge draw down even thought at the time I wasn't aware why. ( 3 simultaneous bets selections and 1 bank roll )

I did have a 55u draw down, but amazingly pulled out of it with 24u profit. Here are what I have recorded for the three lab strings.

B singles.   1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 3 4 4  made some 5u bets I lost and stopped recording wins and losses and bet randomly.

P doubles.   1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 5 2 4 4 This is a mess, I did not execute this lab even remotely like it is supposed to be.

B triples.     1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 2  I was careless using this one too and eventually made and 11u bet that was the beginning of my over all recovery.

Here's the shoe I'm sure everyone will say "duh" I would have killed it. Like I said, my head was not in the game.

B
P
BB
PPPP
BB
P
B
PP
B
PPPP
BB
P
BB
PP
BB
P
BBB
P
BB
P
BB
PP
B
PP
BBBBBBBBBBB  out of nowhere 11B
P
B
PP
B
PPPP
B
PP I colored up and went to the cage
B
P
end of what I saw. Shoe nearly finished.

The Streak of 11B saved me. 11u bet on 3B, and stayed on the run with random bets of 3 to 6 units. The following occurrences of B singling and P doubling put me over the top and I fled the scene.

The first one was on Banker. I don't bet the Banker Dragon bonus at all, so don't notice them much but a nice Asian lady was on it and her screams of joy brought it to my attention. 

The following two Dragons were on Player, within about 10 decisions or less of each other. Both times I had a Banker bet out and nothing on the Player Bonus. Tried not to let it get to me the first time. I usually always hedge my Banker bet with a Player Bonus equal to half my Banker bet. The second time took a great deal of effort to ignore. The same nice Asian lady hit both of them too. She was having a good night.

After the first DB, the dealer remarks about how there were two in one shoe the night prior. And then shortly there after this shoe produced three!

All three of them came very early in the shoe. Against the odds I'm going to say, as there is a card counting method for gaining an advantage on the Player DB. And like BJ, the advantage play comes late in the shoe.

Never been to LV. Never really been to a big casino for that matter. I need to make a trip to AC before it disappears I guess. But haven't heard many good things from casinos desperate for losers. So perhaps a trip to Vegas would be better.

What does it take to be a high roller in Vegas?
What kind of buy in for a roped of VIP section where your every need is catered too?
What's it take to get a suite comped?

How much do you need to bet each hand? Can I play my normal BS where I don't bet every hand?

I'm a modest bettor but can splurge for the sake of entertainment and experience. Strong possibility I break even or only drop a few units, and a decent chance I win 10+ inflated units. Which would be great to fund my normal play. But I'm looking more for the experience of being uptown, with people that know how to behave in public and dress accordingly, and some staff that are professional in their ability to hide there disdain. Sit in a comfortable chair, order bizarre beverages, eat some great food, and sleep in a quiet room.

Rolex Watch, you are always talking about VIP rooms and having someone cater to your every need. I see that picture of stacks of pink chips (denomination unknown) and bands of cash I can't see clearly to know what they are. Doubling your buy in is impressive, but what's the bottom line for such prestigious treatment?

Anyone else enjoy preferential treatment? I'd like a piece of that pie one time.

Thanks in advance.

OTBL is no worse or better than any other bet selection. I'm not advocating it. But this is a trip report of sorts.

This is the third week in a row I've walked into shoes where Player was winning by more than five. Tonight I bought in when Player was +12, made it to +17 and ended up +11 by the end of the shoe. First 9 hands were Player, and Player streaked to 9 again! halfway through the shoe.

I could not settle on a 2 step parlay progression but I did find a bet selection for it. All bet selections being equal I have/had decided to wait for a streak of 2 before betting OTBL so I'm not betting for the majority of the shoe. Limits my exposure and gives me time to think in between bets. I ran through some of my bac cards and found I liked the trigger for my bet selection. And even though there were many successful parlay coups, I am partial to a regression to capture profit in a WLWLWLWL situation.

I often play ( at craps ) a 20 15 10 regression and then parlay the third win back to a $20 bet. So I win an extra 1/4 unit for WL and WWL but drop 3/4 of unit for any win streak of 3 or greater.

But tonight I decided on a Lab. Never made a bet bigger than 4u. And I play it very conservatively. A little unorthodox, if I lost a 3u or 4u bet I would sometimes back down 1u or continue with the same size bet. Instead of crossing off two numbers I would just cross off the same size number and lower my bet 1u.

First String

1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3  2 2 3 3 4 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 .. Opened up with several losses, see sawed back and forth a bit. Lost my first 4u bet, didn't like that at all. But kept it together and completed my string as the shoe turned in favor of my BS.

Second String

1 1 1 1 1 1 2 .. Too easy, I didn't like it but made another string and carried on.

Third String

1 1 1 1 1 1 3 4 3.. Opened up with a 3u bet and lost it, followed up with a 4u bet and lost it too, back to a 3u bet and lost it also. Like I expected a string of losses following several wins and a row that closed out my second string so fast. Made a 2u bet and parlayed it to a 4u bet [smiley]aes/thumb.png[/smiley] and then won the rest of my bets to close the string out.

Ended up +20u after 2u in commission and 2u in tips. Certainly did not like winning it so easy, wanted to stay and complete more strings but the shoe looked like this (as accurately as I can remember)

PP
BB
PP
B
P
BBB
P
B
PP
BB
PP

I really didn't expect OTBL to continue so strongly. That pattern closed two strings for me, it was late, and didn't want to hang around for the next shoe or get in the hole if my BS tanked.

I won a couple extra units closing my strings with 2u bets when I had a single 1 left and I made just a handful of deviated bets, like FLD on that second 9 Player streak. I got on at 7P, and an OLD bet or two.

I also dropped 2u on the Tie bet [smiley]aes/joking.png[/smiley] for the first hand of that shoe. Table was 2u min.

I like to bet the Tie on the opening hand of a shoe.

First off, it gets the shoe started for myself and the rest of the punters waiting fora decision before making one themselves.
Secondly, I personally feel it's the only appropriate time to make a Tie bet without card counting. The shoe composition changes after each play, even though it is pretty insignificant it does change a bit. The shoe is never more pure than it is for the first decision.

I'm not a math guy, but to me it seems the Tie should show 1 out of 10 decisions roughly. To me, hypothetically, it should show on the first decision once out of every ten shoes, it should also be the second decision once out of ten shoes, it should also be the third, fourth, etc etc. However not every shoe has the exact same amount of decisions. So, for me its difficult to mathematically reconcile the Tie showing on decision 78 ten percent of the time when not all shoes reach the 78th decision. But there are (supposedly) enough cumulative ties to satisfy the statistical chance of 1 in 10. So, perhaps some of those ties are forced to appear more than one out ten times on some undetermined decision number. If that was true and could be pinpointed and edge could be found I guess.

But I just stick with the first decision. Every shoe has a first decision and I feel it is the most optimal time (outside of card counting) to make the bet. Oh I know it still holds a house edge, but afford me the indulgence of making a bad bet only once every 75 decisions or so.
It can be fun and I do win it, about 10% of the time. It's entertaining having the table congratulate you like you just predicted a 1 in 100 occurrence. I just bet the min table amount 5 bucks. My normal betting size is ever so slightly more than that. Never engaged in trying a progression on it. Thought it would be a long road to ruin with an 8 to 1 pay off on a bet I only make 3 to 10( max) times per trip to the casino.

Any thoughts? Perhaps a math guy can confirm my intuition.