Quote from: alrelax on November 07, 2017, 08:48:01 PM
Plenty of high limit 2 deck games in casinos, on the main floor--no, but the main floor in most places is for recreational and tourists anyways, seriously.  Anyone saying otherwise--is fooling themselves.

What percentage of gamblers have the financial wherewithal to play in high limit rooms?

You may be in a position to regularly play in high limit rooms, but most gamblers are not in that position.

Quote from: esoito on November 07, 2017, 02:29:15 PM
I continue to be amazed by the lack of blackjack posts and general interest in BJ on the forum.

Given the very low edge at some casinos if one plays basic strategy consistently and carefully, why is there such a lack of interest here, d'you think?

With a suitable money management  it's not impossible to overcome the edge sufficiently often to make and stay in profit.

So why the lack of interest?

You are very wrong in thinking that people can make (possibly consistent) profits from playing BJ under current conditions.

By current conditions, I am referring to 8-deck shoes and 70% (maximum) shoe penetration --  applying basic strategy (which was originally developed for one or two deck shoes) is not going to pay dividends with the above-mentioned two conditions which are common in most casinos nowadays.

Quote from: wannawin on March 09, 2015, 02:29:40 AM
Bayes said this:

maybe I am not reading the implications correctly? This is a discovery of major proportions if kept as stable. To win the variance is a way to earn money with progressions although not having more than normal game wins.

This should be discussed thoroughly.

How (or why) is the proposed strategy better than betting on the three most recent unique double streets (six lines) or the three double streets that have appeared the most frequently in, say, the last 12 spins?

Victor,
It is good that you are trying to rekindle interest in this potentially profitable strategy (I am very familiar with this strategy and that is my well-considered opinion about it).

But, sadly, for you and this forum, what will happen is the following.

People from roulette-only forums, like roulette30.com and rouletteforum.cc, will download the document -- but then discuss the strategy in depth over on those other forums.

You will not have much discussion of this strategy on this forum.

This forum is regarded by many people as primarily a baccarat forum and so for serious roulette-related discussions, people usually go over to those other forums (and that will probably happen with this topic also once you upload the document here on this web site).

Quote from: ADulay on June 17, 2016, 06:30:20 PM
As the above mentioned online casino is currently in discussion in another thread, I would like to ask if anyone here is actually playing there lately.

I have been researching their site and rules but haven't seen any mention of our forum members who play there here on the board.  (with one exception).

So, if anyone has any FIRST HAND information to relay, this would be a good thread for that data.

It doesn't matter if you're a $1 player or a $100 player, just real time, first hand information would be nice.

One just never knows when they might need a back up online casino.

AD (this editor is driving me nuts)

A Dulay,

I was wondering how has your recent experience with betphoenix.ag been.

Have you had any problems with internet connections getting cut off or with money withdrawals?

I am interested in joining that outfit as a member, but still worried about any unethical games they might play. I am based in the the US, so my online options are obviously limited.

Quote from: Still on March 09, 2017, 02:33:20 PM
Imo, the zero is too much of an oddball to include in the EC calculations. A programmer might try both ways, since it's easy to swap ideas out.  But for an even chance test, i would exclude it from the calculations column, and have a separate column that is designed to produce a zero at it's normal rate of appearance.  Then just subtract, from the profit or loss stream, the amount of chips you had exposed each time the zero showed up in it's own column.  This essentially disregards the zero in your calculations, but exactly mimics live play, which only calculated for EC's.

In terms of its effects on your profits/losses accounting, the zero is a much bigger problem for us American players. We have to contend with both the zero and the double zero and when one of them appears you lose everything that you put on the outside bets.

UK players are in better shape dealing with the above problem since they have only one zero to deal with. On top of that they have the "la partage" rule mitigating the effects of the appearance of the zero.

In mainland Europe, you also have single zero roulette and there in many casinos, you also have the "en prison" rule to soften the blow from the lone zero.

It should be noted that these two special rules apply only to even chance bets -- and not to dozen / column bets.

For this reason, I feel that even chance strategies are much more useful for UK/European players than they are for us American players.

Wannawin,
Thank you for sharing this wonderful resource with us !

Wong,
I asked you to provide a couple of examples of mild progressions, since you are talking about them all the time.

You evaded my request and instead asked me to look at GLC's progressions.

I am very familiar with them. Nearly all of GLC's progressions are brutally effective bankroll killers.

Wong,
You keep talking about mild progressions in your various H G report threads. Can you give an example of what is, in your estimation, a mild progression for the following two cases:

1. Even chance bets.
2. Double dozen bets.

Soxfan,
Just curious -- did you get this idea from Barstow's book? He discussed a similar parlay method in his book (his parlay sequence  had slightly different numbers and had 9 steps).

Also, General, Real, Caleb is the same person as Xander.

Spike , for sure, is a different person from the above four personas.

Quote from: from100 on September 03, 2016, 02:29:21 PM
Is Spike = General, Real, Caleb... etc?

General, Real, Caleb may be the same person.

But Spike is a different person.

Quote from: Tomla on September 01, 2016, 05:18:38 PM
where has assym been?

Did he ever publish that baccarat strategy book he was touting last year?

Quote from: ignatus on September 11, 2015, 09:03:50 AM
This is the final tweak for this strategy. 7 streets bet (21 numbers). it should be faster to play... I tried a new set of live-spins, and they were all successful.

STEP (1): -Wait until a dozen sleep for exactly (3) spins. Now, when that happen bet for it to continue to sleep a fourth spin,--Bet all streets in the two dozens, all except the current street hit. ONCE then STOP.

STEP (2): After a win/loss, wait for the sleeper to awaken, then go to step (1)

Progression -none- FLATBET

5/5 Games won

Played with 25u bets (wingoal +500, stoploss -500)

Mogul,
Interesting twist on what is essentially a double dozen strategy. Thanks for "bumping" it up -- it is definitely worth paper-testing.

Mogul,
With roulette, there is a reasonable explanation. Roulette, in spite of its terrible HE, is a fascinating game because of all the different types of bets possible: singles, splits, quads, streets, double streets, R/B, O/E, H/L, dozens, columns -- and various combinations of them.

So people are always coming up with new methods. And so when you read about a new method, soon thereafter there is another new method to replace it -- and so people tend to jump around from one new method to another.

And so we do not systematically test out any new method to arrive at a rigorous empirical conclusion as to whether it is a viable method or not (there are exceptions, of course). Just my 2cents on this issue.