Warrior i am current working to learn a new method to get some more complex thinking and advance into deeper understanding.
I never from this moment use Red & Black as they come, i see them as separate random streams. So you get two games into one game.
Think about it, Red by it self produce singles and series in the same way Red & Black do together, this way if one side is erratic you might get the other side to become strong and win many units flat betting.
The method is base upon taking advantage of the "MC" most common events.

I will ask the person who gave me this method if i can share it with out, is very similar method you can read about at BeatTheCasino, where you have known working methods like 4D/5D NOR SAP among others, but i don't recommend anyone to become a member for 45 Euro a month (i am) but i am not there for forum action as the forum is very quiet with little action. I am there to read old topics about great methods and do my home work and advance as gambler. And i can stop paying 45 Euro at any moment and quit my membership, but i am not in a hurry and see at as investment to become a better gambler using the EC and getting more advance skills.

I will PM you when i know if i can share the file with you.

Cheers

BA i don't agree with our opinion.
Warrior i also use EC and join another forum board to advance and meet other that talk the same languish, maybe you should do the same.

Cheers

Warrior, do you like numbers or EC?

Cheers

Hello Warrior, i notice there is two to three person posting on daily basis, so i just glance at the forum board to see if there is some new action and then maybe post a line or two.
When Stephen Tablone join forum board you got some nice action, he has his own sponsoring section, now he is moderated, so the fun debate and ideas vanish and now forum is almost dead again, because there same two to three members posting.

Cheers

 I don't care about the mob or does who are negative, i am known among many gambling forums and will make my verdict based upon honest observations.
But i don't like when some one start to change the rules and strategy overall when the results is not positiv.

Now Stephen was kind to give me additional betting pattern to complete the betting and i will stick to +3 unit win target and push once for more or stop at +2 units or hit loss limit -6 units.
I will use RNG with Roulette Extreme with no zero and i will run seven days each day and post the result in this topic.
Because in the end i want to know what i do average during each week spending in the casino and after four weeks i want a positiv results.

Week 1

1. -6
2. +2
3. +2
4. +4
5. +5
6. +6
7. +3

+22
-6 = +16

Stephen i would suggest a tweak or improvement of TUBS based upon observation i made testing 200 samples with your strategy and you can clearly see the same with Adulay's shoes above.
We call them "REVERSALS" first shoe has hit zero ground five times in a row, no one should lose with a shoe that break even five times during the game play. Same with the second shoe with five reversals or zero ground (back to back results), no one should lose that kind of shoe and the last one has eight reversals.

This means during the game when you attack to reach the win goal you know that there will be certain amount of reversals. Some has past you during the game and some are waiting in the future.
So if you like this idea i will help you to define the average amount of reversals you can expect during 60/80 hands playing your method.
Then you could make additional rule that is much better the limit the loss limit to -3 units that give no room for error or gambling ability to reach the win target (my opinion).

I see it like this, you create some degree of expectation within when you have to reach your win target before is to late and be saved by one reversal.
If some one does not like to do there home work they can just implement the rule after playing half the shoe and hope for the best to hit a reversal or loss limit.

Cheers

Baelog can you send me a PM and explain how you play step by step, i have the book second edition and talk to Stephen about the new additional betting pattern.
But i am honest and can not get past that i am maybe up +25 units in the beginning and after that i hovering around even or encounter small loses.

I thinking to wait with more testing until third edition comes out.

Cheers

Thanks Stephen, that sure made a difference when playing.
I got +26 units after 20 shoes and can feel the change when applying the new rules.

Cheers

Stephen Tabone i can run 100 real baccarat shoes and post both results and the particular shoes if you help me how to improve the strategy beyond what you wrote in the book (second edition).

This is how i understand the original rules in your book and posted at this topic.

1) You main aim is to reach +3 units win target and then continue to push for more (if we play 100 shoes or more) and if we fail we stop at +2 units if not getting higher results.
2) When we reach 35 to 40 hands and not reach our win target we aim to cut loses short and break even or stop at -1 -2 -3 units.
3) If we not reach rule (2) then we aim to reach win target +3 units or hit loss limit -6 units.

Is that correct or is it more to it ?

Cheers

Mike i am not saying that Tablone's strategy is based upon same principals. Mike i respect you and will send you a PM and when the times come and i visit London to play, maybe we could meet up :-)
I have no idea how he come to the conclusion to reach +3 units as win target and a loss limit with -6 units.

The book i am using as reference when i develop methods is based upon significant statistics that is free for any one to twist or apply in any given situation using any kind of strategy.
And as all selections method is the same no matter any given combination, so is the significant statistics in the book the truth about what expectation you can have after placing 60.000 placed bets with a house edge around 1.7% or lower.

Cheers

Quote from: Mike on June 22, 2017, 08:23:49 AM
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.

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.

I have a book that claim he place 60.000 bets with 1.7% house edge and 90% of times being ahead.
Also add reversals to that when you get more then a second chance to stay ahead of quit even.

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.

There is several casino games with house edge below 1.7%.

Cheers

I have the right to write my opinion and make my own conclusion.
What is this talk about a mob? i am not part of a gang who talk stuff! i am a honest person!

Cheers

My verdict and i will give you a negative review at Amazon based upon your baccarat method.
It does not matter how you twist or try to improve the method, Adulay got lucky with his test using 50 shoe that end up with +44 units.

Assume i would play a 50/50 game with out house edge - then the first 50 samples would gain +24 units and the second 50 samples -2 units and another 40 samples -1 units.
So 140 samples are equal to playing 140 shoes and you don't end up with profit.

Sorry to say but this method is not a winner and the verdict is based upon my own testing using the rules in the book.

Cheers

Quote from: ADulay on June 16, 2017, 11:41:03 PM
Stephen,

  I plugged the 50 shoes (616 thru 666) into the box and using the "new and improved" rules it came out with a +42 units for the run.   That's not bad.

  But, being the detail man that I am, I had to manually check that my calculations on the spreadsheet were giving me valid results so I ran those 50 shoes MANUALLY.

  Yep, it came out with +44 after those 50 shoes.    18 losing shoes (of -5 or less) and 32 winning shoes of +2 or more.

  I would have to say that making the change to "leaving at neutral or slightly down" anytime past about mid-shoe made a difference.

  Let me run back and check that first batch with the "new rules" and see if it made a difference overall.

  AD

Adulay i send you a PM and could not notice one important difference.
I would have to say that making the change to "leaving at neutral or slightly down" anytime past about mid-shoe made a difference.

Now i can see that if you not reach the win target and not break even at mid-shoe you did not continue until you break even or hit loss limit and stop before that with any unit value close to zero.
That would make the loses less.

I will make another 100 samples.
And this time i will also push for more when i reach +3 or stop at +2

Cheers

 I got a run with even results running 50 samples with 100 random bits with La Partage Rule. I end up with -2 units.

1. +2.5   
2. -6      
3. +0      
4. +0       
5. +1.5   
6. +0.5   
7. -0.5   
8. -0.5   
9. +0      
10. +0

+4.5
-7
TOTAL -2.5

1. +2.5
2. +2.5
3. +3
4. +3
5. +2
6. -6
7. +3
8. +3
9. -6
10. +3

+20
-12
TOTAL +8

1. +2.5
2. +0
3. +3
4. +2.5
5. +3
6. +3
7. +3
8. +3
9. -6
10. +0

+20
-6
TOTAL +12

1. -5.5
2. -6
3. -5.5
4. +2
5. -5.5
6. +0
7. +3
8. +0
9. +3
10. +3

+11
-22.5
TOTAL -11.5

1. +3
2. -6
3. -5.5
4. +3
5. +3
6. +0
7. +0
8. -6
9. -6
10. +2

+11
-23.5
TOTAL -12.5

13 BREAK EVEN
25 WON
12 LOSS

+68 UNITS
-70 UNITS
-2 UNITS