I will try my best to recall the moves, it helps me and hopefully will help you/others in your pursuits of this game. I can recall most of it as it is fresh. So typing as I was thinking when I was at the table is what I am saying.
Gravy train shoe for sure. (Of course it was, but you understand the game in a live B&M especially when the players are playing the game receiving the cards, bending and peeling, blowing and erasing, etc.)
On the first two P columns did you do your oft mentioned pospros (1326 or the 1248 16,1...etc, or other?), and did u continue with your pospro through the 5th/6th hits on the first two P column runs? (It was the beginning of the shoe and there was several negative aspects against us. One which is really a subject I brought up in the past numerous times and I should once again, was today's players in a B&M are really almost never all together, such as all agreeing on something or not wagering, etc. Used to be, we almost all would agree, high five, feel good, pump it up, smack the casino attitude and keep it going. I know!!!! One million zillion percent, all of that does not CHANGE the presentments coming out. YES I know, but it stops the, "Well #2 is betting table max and I feel awkward and stupid if I lose my $500 on the opposite side, he has been winning and is on a roll" type of thought. Because if he wins, then it turns out to be screw me, I should have followed and got on it, but if he lost, it turns out to be, screw me why I fell prey and did not really pump it up. I hope you understand what I am saying here? Also, the opposite bettors of today, they wait till the very last second and throw up a table min or super small wager against whatever the larger players are wagering. And the last group of today's players are the, cutters. Playing to cut. I understand once again the CUT. Streaks are not the only way to win, not at all. Strong is Strong. Streaks, cuts, chops, 1-2-3s, all of the patterns, I have written about it at length. So years ago, we used to all be virtually on the same side in good situations, and we would only lose the LAST wager on whatever gravy train was being presented, 5 or 10 or 15 hands and then back to normal and individual wagering, etc. ALL OF THAT IS HARDLY PRESENT TODAY.)
RE: Pro Progressive. No. And I kick myself, did not even think of it at the time. I had one friend there, and we usually play together in the majority of the wagering. However the others were mostly all banker types most all hands or they play for the cut. It was vocal and it did influence me, I will admit as embarrassing as it is. I will say now and I know if this happened mid shoe or even later, I would have killed it considerably larger. Also, those 2 ties were both natural ties, so it was like, here comes the bankers side coming forth. Pressed 2nd and third after ties, stayed on players. Cut way down on the 5th player because of huge money on the banker side and my thought, too good to be true. Then the player came out once again and I stayed on it and the natural came out for the banker and it was a N9 against a players B8. I went for the players to come back after that N9 first banker and lost and the table once again smacked it hard. Now everyone was on the banker even my friend. I stayed on the player with a smaller wager. And it was a natural and I pleaded with them to let's do an old school and rock n roll. Everyone stuck banker. I pumped it up but no where near what I should have. Good money for sure, but not great. The last two natural in the 2nd row started to change the table. But their wagers were small, smaller than usual in every aspect. I know the people pretty well. They would be betting a few green chips instead of their normal black and purples, etc. All of what was happening and being presented was highly unusual in so many ways, not typical but far and large. However, it was there and it was as Asym said, the casino has to pay, etc. But you have to be so neutral, open minded, forget the past, realize anything and everything happens if you play enough, etc., and all of that is not easy with a full table of people or playing by yourself. I have seen almost full shoes of doubles, or chops, or streaks that run 18-19-20-28 and 29 to one side. Yes, not often, but they all appear and what the heck difference does it matter if you can win thousands on every hand, hand after hand on say 15 chop chops, or 15 doubles or a streak of 15 players or bankers? When you bring $50k of chips to the cashier the cashier does not ask, how did you win those--I have to know before I cash those?
To me, maybe not yourselves, the hardest shoes to play are the 1s, 2s and 3s, a streak of 4 to 7 here and there and everything mixed in the way most shoes are, is super hard. Because you wind up losing just as quick as you did winning the highest majority of the times. Playing chops you lose on the second repeats, playing for 3 and cut or 4 and cut you lose when it repeats, playing for doubles you lose when it chops, playing for streaks you lose when it does not. So on and so forth. That is the simple reason, no one strategy or system will ever work.
How or did these initial P runs affect your wagering approach when the even better P-runs presented in P columns 3/4??? Yes, the influence was there, but (and honestly trying my best to recreate the feelings and thoughts here as I was sitting at the table playing it. In one sense, too good to be true. In another, everyone once again was right back to the banker with larger wagers. I stuck on the players but smaller amounts, I did switch up at least 2 times to the banker and then when back to the player I would wager even a smaller amount as usual, maybe a test amount? It was the perfect scenario to do table max and if it one just keep doing it until you lose the last one, but that is armchair quarterbacking talk. More so than the board or the presentments themselves, the people did influence me. I am not blaming them, I am merely telling you how I was influenced.
Without knowing anything else I likely would NOT have continued with my largest wager on Player C1 hit # 5th/6th, however, after the first two P colum runs the 3rd/4th P runs that showed immediately following your toteboard pic, would have been difficult to stay off. Especially with such precedence showing at that strength level. (Well I guess the answer I laid out above pretty much covers this one also. This shoe brings back the old school days of Atlantic City in the 80's and the 90's with no electronic scoreboards and where there were all back tables, 14 players, 7 each side, no back betting, 2 dealers sitting, 1 dealer standing, 2 floor people with one behind each of the 7 players each side, etc. The casino would have been out hundreds of thousands of dollars, easily. Because the whole table would have been together. The thing about the old school days is almost all of us seldom left unless we won large. I learned as I stated the past few years or so. There is a time to win large and there are times when you just cannot win or get past even status.)
....just hypothesizing as maybe dif opinion if more info, ..who knows as kinda the ol hindsight always converges toward 20/20.
*I know its easy to monday-morning quarterback a game like this
Gravy train shoe for sure. (Of course it was, but you understand the game in a live B&M especially when the players are playing the game receiving the cards, bending and peeling, blowing and erasing, etc.)
On the first two P columns did you do your oft mentioned pospros (1326 or the 1248 16,1...etc, or other?), and did u continue with your pospro through the 5th/6th hits on the first two P column runs? (It was the beginning of the shoe and there was several negative aspects against us. One which is really a subject I brought up in the past numerous times and I should once again, was today's players in a B&M are really almost never all together, such as all agreeing on something or not wagering, etc. Used to be, we almost all would agree, high five, feel good, pump it up, smack the casino attitude and keep it going. I know!!!! One million zillion percent, all of that does not CHANGE the presentments coming out. YES I know, but it stops the, "Well #2 is betting table max and I feel awkward and stupid if I lose my $500 on the opposite side, he has been winning and is on a roll" type of thought. Because if he wins, then it turns out to be screw me, I should have followed and got on it, but if he lost, it turns out to be, screw me why I fell prey and did not really pump it up. I hope you understand what I am saying here? Also, the opposite bettors of today, they wait till the very last second and throw up a table min or super small wager against whatever the larger players are wagering. And the last group of today's players are the, cutters. Playing to cut. I understand once again the CUT. Streaks are not the only way to win, not at all. Strong is Strong. Streaks, cuts, chops, 1-2-3s, all of the patterns, I have written about it at length. So years ago, we used to all be virtually on the same side in good situations, and we would only lose the LAST wager on whatever gravy train was being presented, 5 or 10 or 15 hands and then back to normal and individual wagering, etc. ALL OF THAT IS HARDLY PRESENT TODAY.)
RE: Pro Progressive. No. And I kick myself, did not even think of it at the time. I had one friend there, and we usually play together in the majority of the wagering. However the others were mostly all banker types most all hands or they play for the cut. It was vocal and it did influence me, I will admit as embarrassing as it is. I will say now and I know if this happened mid shoe or even later, I would have killed it considerably larger. Also, those 2 ties were both natural ties, so it was like, here comes the bankers side coming forth. Pressed 2nd and third after ties, stayed on players. Cut way down on the 5th player because of huge money on the banker side and my thought, too good to be true. Then the player came out once again and I stayed on it and the natural came out for the banker and it was a N9 against a players B8. I went for the players to come back after that N9 first banker and lost and the table once again smacked it hard. Now everyone was on the banker even my friend. I stayed on the player with a smaller wager. And it was a natural and I pleaded with them to let's do an old school and rock n roll. Everyone stuck banker. I pumped it up but no where near what I should have. Good money for sure, but not great. The last two natural in the 2nd row started to change the table. But their wagers were small, smaller than usual in every aspect. I know the people pretty well. They would be betting a few green chips instead of their normal black and purples, etc. All of what was happening and being presented was highly unusual in so many ways, not typical but far and large. However, it was there and it was as Asym said, the casino has to pay, etc. But you have to be so neutral, open minded, forget the past, realize anything and everything happens if you play enough, etc., and all of that is not easy with a full table of people or playing by yourself. I have seen almost full shoes of doubles, or chops, or streaks that run 18-19-20-28 and 29 to one side. Yes, not often, but they all appear and what the heck difference does it matter if you can win thousands on every hand, hand after hand on say 15 chop chops, or 15 doubles or a streak of 15 players or bankers? When you bring $50k of chips to the cashier the cashier does not ask, how did you win those--I have to know before I cash those?
To me, maybe not yourselves, the hardest shoes to play are the 1s, 2s and 3s, a streak of 4 to 7 here and there and everything mixed in the way most shoes are, is super hard. Because you wind up losing just as quick as you did winning the highest majority of the times. Playing chops you lose on the second repeats, playing for 3 and cut or 4 and cut you lose when it repeats, playing for doubles you lose when it chops, playing for streaks you lose when it does not. So on and so forth. That is the simple reason, no one strategy or system will ever work.
How or did these initial P runs affect your wagering approach when the even better P-runs presented in P columns 3/4??? Yes, the influence was there, but (and honestly trying my best to recreate the feelings and thoughts here as I was sitting at the table playing it. In one sense, too good to be true. In another, everyone once again was right back to the banker with larger wagers. I stuck on the players but smaller amounts, I did switch up at least 2 times to the banker and then when back to the player I would wager even a smaller amount as usual, maybe a test amount? It was the perfect scenario to do table max and if it one just keep doing it until you lose the last one, but that is armchair quarterbacking talk. More so than the board or the presentments themselves, the people did influence me. I am not blaming them, I am merely telling you how I was influenced.
Without knowing anything else I likely would NOT have continued with my largest wager on Player C1 hit # 5th/6th, however, after the first two P colum runs the 3rd/4th P runs that showed immediately following your toteboard pic, would have been difficult to stay off. Especially with such precedence showing at that strength level. (Well I guess the answer I laid out above pretty much covers this one also. This shoe brings back the old school days of Atlantic City in the 80's and the 90's with no electronic scoreboards and where there were all back tables, 14 players, 7 each side, no back betting, 2 dealers sitting, 1 dealer standing, 2 floor people with one behind each of the 7 players each side, etc. The casino would have been out hundreds of thousands of dollars, easily. Because the whole table would have been together. The thing about the old school days is almost all of us seldom left unless we won large. I learned as I stated the past few years or so. There is a time to win large and there are times when you just cannot win or get past even status.)
....just hypothesizing as maybe dif opinion if more info, ..who knows as kinda the ol hindsight always converges toward 20/20.
*I know its easy to monday-morning quarterback a game like this
