Quote from: Stephen Tabone on June 24, 2017, 11:49:12 PM
Proof if anything that despite these bad shoes my strategy holds its own and therefore is the most powerful strategy ever!

It seems that you've revised the strategy in response to those "bad" shoes, and now it turns out they weren't really bad shoes after all!

I'm not saying that you're necessarily cheating deliberately, but this happens all the time on gambling forums. Here's the pattern, which is an endless loop:

1. System is published on the forum.
2. Members test and find weaknesses
3. System is tweaked to plug the gaps.
4 GOTO 1

The trouble is that in a negative expectation game, whatever you do and however many extra tweaks  are introduced, there is always a nemesis. All you're doing with the tweaks is changing the nemesis. It's endless. All the patterns and progressions, all the win targets and loss limits do absolutely nothing to change this.

So although your tweaks have resulted in a win for those particular shoes, there will as a consequence be a shoe pattern which has been newly added to the "bad" shoe list! Before the tweak, those shoes might well have been winners. It's easy to find the nemesis for any baccarat system because all you have to do is invent a sequence of outcomes which make it lose. Then ask yourself, "what is the chance that this pattern will actually occur?". Whatever that chance is, it's the same for ANY pattern of the same length. This fact has devastating consequences for the possibility of creating a winning system.

Quote from: Stephen Tabone on June 24, 2017, 06:07:49 PM
Hi, Mike, I'm not going to include any computer generated shoe results in future publications. Just going  advise readers to obtain real live dealer casino shoe results. This is the best way forward.

Stephen,

You still haven't given any reason why you believe live dealer results are better than computer generated results, and you haven't anywhere said how many bets you've made in your tests which enable you to come to the conclusion that your system is a long term winner.

There are basically two ways to "prove" that your system works. 1) You can prove it mathematically or 2) You can prove it empirically by testing over a large number of placed bets.

Since it's impossible to prove mathematically that a negative expectation game is actually positive (D'uh), you are left with option 2. And because it seems that you make relatively few bets per shoe, you must have had to play an awful lot of shoes (many thousands) in order to arrive at statistically significant results.

For an even chance bet, especially one with a low house edge like Baccarat, you need to generate positive results over at least 10,000 BETS (NOT shoes) and show an increasing standard deviation. So what is the statistical evidence which proves that your system works?

It's absurd to trumpet that you have "beaten" the game on the basis of a few hundred bets. 

Where is the math?

Stephen,

For future reference (I'm thinking about the 3rd edition of your book), are the Wizard of Odds' shoes acceptable to you for testing purposes?

https://wizardofodds.com/games/baccarat/1000-baccarat-shoes-8-deck.txt

Quote from: alrelax on June 22, 2017, 12:08:54 PM
Steve why are you fighting and sparring with these people why don't you just let you work stand for what it is if you believe in it and those that believe in it will support it in my opinion.

It's not a question of fighting and sparring, but a question of EVIDENCE. Stephen has given no evidence that the system wins, other than his own claims and "testimonials" from a few others, which, as you have admitted yourself, are biased.

If it was just a question of "believing" in a system for it to actually work then the casinos would have gone out of business, lol.

Quote from: Sputnik on June 22, 2017, 02:22:42 PM
Mike do you even know how such test is made, see my past reply from the book i suggest.
I could fix a digital copy for you and save you 100 Euro - if you want to read it.

Sputnik,

I'm not sure what test you're talking about thanks for the offer. If I had the book I could do my own tests. So are you saying that Stephen's system is based on the same premise as that given in that book you mention? In which case why have your tests shown a negative result?

Quote from: Stephen Tabone on June 22, 2017, 11:18:51 AM
who wrote you have to get 2nd book to understand 3rd?

scaldecat said so. So it's not true?

Quote
re stopping when ahead, you got this wrong, ask any day trader, they will tell you that you HAVE TO STOP WHEN AHEAD. Gambling works the same as spread betting does. One must stop when ahead. It is as simple as that. Gamblers lose because they don't stop.

Day traders don't quit when they're ahead. They enter a trade when an opportunity arises and quit when circumstances are no longer favorable. That's not the same as creating an edge by quitting when ahead, which makes no sense. If a shoe presents favorable opportunities then you play, in which case you may well be playing "shoe after shoe after shoe". Do you see the difference?

So is it true, as someone has mentioned, that the 3rd edition of your book is useless without the 2nd edition? If that's the case, then I would like to be removed from the list of those members who will receive the 3rd edition, because I have no intention of buying the 2nd edition.  It's misleading for you to offer the 3rd edition for "free" if there are strings attached. You should have made it clear that this is "BOGOF" offer.

Quoteyet I keep receiving emails from people saying they are winning! can't make head or tail of it all

Anecdotal evidence is not evidence that the system works. ANY system, even if a loser, will elicit both favorable and negative reviews in the short term. Furthermore, you're more likely to receive emails from satisfied purchasers than from those who have lost. The latter won't bother to complain because they know it's pointless, and besides, it didn't cost them much. The correct way to gauge the merit of a system is to test is over a statistically significant number of decisions. The system should have no subjective elements or ambiguities; no room for "interpretation" or discretionary bets. If it does, the "system" is worthless (it's just guessing).

And to suggest that  playing "shoe after shoe after shoe" undermines the system is nonsense. How can the (or indeed, any) system be played any other way? "Quit when ahead" is one of those persistent myths so beloved by gamblers, who seem unable to comprehend just how absurdly illogical it is. If you have a real edge then playing 10 shoes one after the other will generate the same results as playing 1 shoe per day for 10 days. The edge has to be there before you start playing, it's not created by quitting when ahead.

Sputnik,

I've heard of the book. I thought he just did the simulations to generate statistics, and didn't claim that any of the systems actually came out ahead over those bets.

Quote from: Stephen Tabone on June 14, 2017, 04:19:17 PM
fair enough i'd be happy to give you a free copy 9th to enter

Thanks!

Wasn't expecting that... LOL

Stephen,

I'd like a free copy of your third edition too please. I just want to prove that it doesn't work, but I don't want to pay for the privilege.

Thanks (well, worth a try, lol).

In the majority of cases (about 95%), and with a HA of 1.35%, you would be losing before 60,000 bets. That's flat betting, if using a progression your mileage may vary.

The problem is that if you keep testing and tweaking systems, then eventually you're going to find a system which SEEMS to be a winner over a LOT of bets. It doesn't mean it really IS a winner though, unless of course you have a real edge. A real edge does not  weaken as you make more bets. If it does, it means you're riding high on waves of variance, that's all.

There can be no "proof" which will demonstrate that a negative expectation game has a positive expectation. It's an oxymoron.

What's left?

reviews, anecdotes, and empirical test results (but not so many that the negative expectation is revealed!).

Quote from: Jimske on June 14, 2017, 02:44:48 AM
This makes no sense.  You either have rules or don't.  This nonsense that your strategy cannot be programmed to test results is just that - nonsense.  If there is a subjective element that must be conquered to win then the strategy is worthless.  Well granted, it has some value as a benchmark for some, as AD has said, don't have a lot of experience and need a starting point.

Successful day traders are not guessing.  They are using known leading indicators that will give them a positive expectation.  With a positive expectation the only risk one is managing is trading "within their bankroll" so as to overcome downturns.

Well said!

And Stephen's statements are contradictory. Elsewhere he says that it's important to test a system in the long term not just the short term. Now he says it's mistake to test a system over 100's of shoes!

Quote from: Stephen Tabone on June 14, 2017, 01:31:05 AM
"Stephen makes the sweeping claim that all online casino games are fixed. Just how he comes to this conclusion I would really like to know. Does that include casinos which offer live Baccarat?"

This is my opinion, I have evidences but why should I share to those who are skeptical about anything I write. I can't see the point.

"computer generated" I didn't or have not said that I don't agree with these otherwise I wouldn't have included them in the first edition book! What concerns me is people posting up results, made up by themselves that go against my strategy that do not show it in a fair light. They could make up the worst set of results over and over. I.e. such results are not random, not computer generated, and certainly not casino table results. Okay I get your point re not everyone has the time to get 100 of live casino baccarat table results, but if the average table takes 1 hour to conclude, and there are 4x tables at that casino and you take 3 shoes results of each table then you have 12 full shoe results. If you visited a casino once per week and did the same you would have over 600 full shoe results. Still this will not help anyone who cannot understand how to use  strategy to benefit him/her.

Stephen,

You seem to have a short memory about what you've written in your own books. In the kindle preview of the second edition you say:

QuoteYou will know when you read this book that I do not agree with computer generated Baccarat or any online casino games. They are fixed so that you lose and the only people that profit are those that run the service and those that have referred to the service who receive commission.

And yes, I too wondered why you had written that when you have included computer generated shoes in the first edition.

Quote from: Sputnik on June 13, 2017, 05:42:51 PM
Mike ,,, what do you mean with fake review ? when i read the three reviews on amzon i can see that they buy papper edition and all three give it five stars.
One review mention testing it against 500 shoes with good results and i assume all is done flat betting.

So how are does fake reviews ?

Now two members at the topic Stephen R. Tabone started mention good reviews about his methodology.
How do you explain that!

Cheers

See here https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=201930110

and here http://www.wikihow.com/Spot-Fake-Reviews-Manufactured-by-an-Amazon-Seller

I can't proof that the reviews of the 2nd edition of his book aren't genuine, but they're not verified purchases. On the other hand, there's one negative review of the first edition, which IS a verified purchase. The reviewer says the 200 shoes provided by the book would have generated a loss.

I don't know if the first edition contained a lot of shoes, but it was 368 pages long whereas the second edition is only 38 pages long!