Hi Nick, this is just the standard vdw with a two unit stop loss per nine decisions correct? If you hit your stop loss at hand five of nine, then you just start over at hand one on the very next hand and don't sit through the rest of the nine series right? It is my understanding that version has been the most profitable, or is there other tweaks you use that I missed? As always thanks for your help.

Quote from: ADulay on July 25, 2016, 06:18:55 PM
Yes, I'll get my current play typed up shortly. 

Also, for the time being it might be good to think of this VDW play as a good way to stay on the table, floating around while waiting for the strong streak or ZZ run to appear.  Especially if you're only looking for a small win per shoe.

AD

Whenever you have time that would be greatly appreciated...Thanks so much.

Hi all, I do understand the VDW play....but I am kind of lost about the different methods that players such as Adulay and Trbfla have been using to make VDW more profitable for them. I have played it some live online as it was first posted and just skipping the mutual bets with mixed results. I appreciate any insight into the different methods...thanks folks.

I do not have the means to test the play in simulation and I just play low stakes live dealer online baccarat. I know you have and are testing several different scenarios/options within the framework and I suspect there may be many more options that could be tested such as if you reset after a tie or continue, do you reset after a tie early in series versus late in series. I know some have said that most of the wins seem to come early. In that case maybe if there is a tie hand on the 7th hand, the simulations would show that it would be better to rest there and maybe if a tie occurred on hand 5 it would show that we should continue on. Would it possibly show that a certain AP seems to complete many more times for us where as maybe one such as the 1-5-9 would be a bad proposition. I assume it takes many, many simulated hands to safely arrive at these conclusions and maybe you have already done most of this but I thought I would just throw it out there. I mean if in a 250,000 sim a 1-3-5 completes 75% of the time and a 1-5-9 busts us 65% of the time....can we just dismiss that as random variance or does it take on a meaning....thanks for your time.

  It looks as though on your test that a stop loss of one unit per series is giving you the most profit from the testing. I have been using it some on live dealer baccarat online. I reset the series count to one on any win or tie and only go to hand number eight. Other than the stop loss is there any other recommendation for baccarat? Thanks again for your help.

I am definitely no mathematician but I was just reading the Wikipedia page on this theorem and a few more questions came up. As I read it in laymens terms, it seems to me that the theorem would only be a guarantee when it comes down to the 9th hand and the previous hands fell exactly as in the example on the Wikipedia page. In that case, I can see that there is no way that an AP will not be completed on the 9th hand but even though we know for sure that in that case that it is a 100% guarantee to complete, unfortunately we still do not know for sure which AP will complete. So does this still not put us back at a 50/50 chance? It seems as though the ambiguous no bet situations that we cannot bet are the only times that an AP are actually guaranteed to complete such as the occurrence of 3-6-9 banker with 1-5-9 player. Also when a tie gets thrown into the mix, I assume we would just have to restart the hand count at one because the third element of a tie. Hope this makes sense...thanks all

Hi again folks, I understand to reset to hand number one after a win or an ambiguous no bet situation... But after a loss do you just continue on until hand number eight trying to complete? Or is it possibly a one shot and done deal per eight or nine hands and restart at loss?  Thanks

Thanks folks...It is also my understanding that if you hit a 1-2-3 in the first three hands of a series that you may go ahead and count the very next hand as hand one again and start over correct?....thanks again.

Hi all, I have been playing around with VDW on baccarat for a few days and a question arose. I know that there are times when there is the possibility of both a player and banker based AP being completed on the same step which makes for a no bet situation due to ambiguity....My question is about the times when a single side bet will actually complete two AP's at the same time, for example when a bet on banker may complete a 1-3-5 and a 3-4-5 for at the same time. Would this still be considered a bet since it actually completes two different progressions with the same bet? I have been playing to where it does but wanted to see what others thought about it....thanks all.