You guys don't deserve to know the details
  • You guys don't deserve to know the details. I just deleted the entire material I posted in regard to my betting method.
  • Now you're gonna take your ball and go home?

    :roll:
  • Buffarino said:
    Now you're gonna take your ball and go home?

    :roll:

    No, but I will not post anymore the key details of my system. For sure I will not post the self adjusting mechanism related to how to figure what next bet should be in special circumstances when the first assumption of house edge was not close enough to reality at the table. Suppose, I assume that for the next 100 hands or so the house will probably have against me a 10% edge and I bet accordingly. Well, I have to be able to asses that situation very soon in the game and readjust the betting ASAP in order to overcome. Else, you are going nowhere. That is one of the major key of the system.

    That alone is a big blow to the very core of BJ. Because it disintegrates the very fundamental fact that the house wins more hands then the player does. The entire BJ concept is based on that fact that the player must hit first and that alone creates the imbalance between the numbers. ( Ws vs. Ls) If you can attack the foundation, the core and the root of the game you've got it by the balls!

    Always
  • Alex-
    Just heard a huge sigh of relief coming from all the casinos on the strip-they were going to have to close down if your system got to the general public. Whew!!!
  • Alex- I understand the theory behind your system and to be fair to you,
    I will agree that in theory it will overcome some large house advantages.
    You have demonstrated that it can overcome a 6:4 disadvantage in clear
    terms and I agree with the results. However, I don't beleive that we can
    implement your method in any practical way. I'll do my best to explain:

    Take the case of 40% of 25: If you start off with your sequence being
    4 wins followed by 6 loses you will quickly be below the min $5 bet and
    forced to flat bet $5 or return to the $25 dollar level. In both cases the
    outcome is altered. Also you will find that you have a need to make very
    strange bets, like 2.75 or 11.25 which is not in your best interest. Further,
    you don't have much money in the game, your bets are too small and
    you wasting a lot of time for a very small payoff possibility. Add to all that your need to do all these mental calc's. Not a practical implementation.

    Taking all of that into consideration, I changed to 40% of 100 and started
    off with the six loses. At the top I was betting $301 and started to think
    about BR and the possibility of one of those 4 card splits with a couple of
    doubles. I can well understand why you would want to temper basic to
    eliminate some of the risk. The business of strange bets is another thing
    that would have me going as well as the dealer and pit.

    At best I'll say your system works in theory, but implementation does not appear likely in my opinion.

    Ray
  • AlexD30 said:
    [quote=Buffarino]Now you're gonna take your ball and go home?

    :roll:

    No, but I will not post anymore the key details of my system. For sure I will not post the self adjusting mechanism related to how to figure what next bet should be in special circumstances when the first assumption of house edge was not close enough to reality at the table. Suppose, I assume that for the next 100 hands or so the house will probably have against me a 10% edge and I bet accordingly. Well, I have to be able to asses that situation very soon in the game and readjust the betting ASAP in order to overcome. Else, you are going nowhere. That is one of the major key of the system.

    That alone is a big blow to the very core of BJ. Because it disintegrates the very fundamental fact that the house wins more hands then the player does. The entire BJ concept is based on that fact that the player must hit first and that alone creates the imbalance between the numbers. ( Ws vs. Ls) If you can attack the foundation, the core and the root of the game you've got it by the balls!

    Always[/quote]

    Like I said before, write a book. You'll be rich.
  • This is unfortunate. I have been frequenting this site more than usual to read every post on the subject of your system. I enjoyed your defense and proof of your system......its part of the scientific method.
  • Ray said:
    Alex- I understand the theory behind your system and to be fair to you,
    I will agree that in theory it will overcome some large house advantages.
    You have demonstrated that it can overcome a 6:4 disadvantage in clear
    terms and I agree with the results. However, I don't beleive that we can
    implement your method in any practical way. I'll do my best to explain:

    Take the case of 40% of 25: If you start off with your sequence being
    4 wins followed by 6 loses you will quickly be below the min $5 bet and
    forced to flat bet $5 or return to the $25 dollar level. In both cases the
    outcome is altered. Also you will find that you have a need to make very
    strange bets, like 2.75 or 11.25 which is not in your best interest. Further,
    you don't have much money in the game, your bets are too small and
    you wasting a lot of time for a very small payoff possibility. Add to all that your need to do all these mental calc's. Not a practical implementation.

    Taking all of that into consideration, I changed to 40% of 100 and started
    off with the six loses. At the top I was betting $301 and started to think
    about BR and the possibility of one of those 4 card splits with a couple of
    doubles. I can well understand why you would want to temper basic to
    eliminate some of the risk. The business of strange bets is another thing
    that would have me going as well as the dealer and pit.

    At best I'll say your system works in theory, but implementation does not appear likely in my opinion.

    Ray


    No, Ray,
    #1. When you have reached the table minimum you have made a bunch of profit already. You reset to -25 again and go from there. You don't have to bet under minimum in real life. The bets are to be rounded up to the nearest dollar.

    # 2. Let's assume you estimate for this discussion that the house will have
    a 5% against you and you start betting 10% of the hole at all times as long as you are in red. When you reached the table minimum you reset the hole. Now, If the game in that session was at 0% instead of ?5% you will make more money then a flat bettor will do betting with the same average bet like you do. If the game in that session is worse then you estimated and your betting cannot recover like you betting 10% of the hole but the house has 6% against you then you losing less then a flat bettor that would bet the same average bet like you do. If you play in a session where the house edge is exactly half of your percentage bet, like you bet 10% of the hole and the house has 5%, then you will be breaking even but a flat bettor will lose at a rate of 5% of his action while betting the same average bet like yourself. If for that session the hands come out with an edge for you like say 2% in your favor instead of 5% against and you have been betting 10% of the hole assuming "wrongly" house advantage then you will be making a killing while the flat bettor will win 2% from his action based on the same average bet.

    #3. The conclusion is that even if you are "wrong" estimating the house edge and the percenrage of betting increase/decrease you could do no harm but only to gain on final outcome compared with a flat bettor.

    #4, This system beat 10% to 17% house edge because it strikes at the heart and core of the entire BJ philosophy. The BJ game is based on the concept that you must hit first and if you bust you lose regardless if the dealer busts later in the round. This alone is the CORE of the BJ game. In order to demolish this fundation you must bet the way I told you.

    Just test #1,2,3 and 4 and see for yourself. Play any sequence the way I told you. Have a sequence for 0% edge, then one for -5% while you betting 10% or more of the hole, then one that you have the edge of say 2% but still betting 10% or 20% of the hole ..,Now, figure the average bet. Then play the same sequences by betting flat with the same average bet. Compare the results between you and the flat bettor. You will see what I'm talking about. You will be making a killing of about or at least DOUBLE if not more of a card counter. Always :!:
  • Alex- correct me if I'm wrong. Your at a table at the start of a shoe and
    start your bet at some percentage of the hole and continue in the usual
    way. How do you know when the odds change, good or bad? If you're a
    card counter you have some good information that may support some
    judgement. But, consider the task at hand: You're keeping tract of the
    hole status, plus or minus, you're doing some math to determine the bet
    amount, you're playing your hand, you're assessing the game odds and
    your counting cards. If you can do all of that, you're a better man than I am by far. This is what I mean by practical implementation. In theory a
    martingale appears to be the best possible answer to BJ because you
    effectively eliminate loses and leave only the wins. Sounds good, but as
    we know implementation is another thing.

    I know how your system works and you don't have to explain. There is
    nothing wrong with the theory.....it works. Rounding to the nearest $$
    doesn't help much. I think you need to round to the nearest $5 and
    have the current bet act as a storage device that is incremented base
    on a win or a loss and thus eliminates the need to track the hole amount.
    If it were me I think I'd base the design on a hole of 80 @ 33% which
    produces a good average bet, but does not go too high when you have a
    losing streak.

    Just some thoughts Alex and I'll say right off that simplification may not
    be possible and still maintain the accuracy of the method.

    Ray
  • Ray said:
    Alex- correct me if I'm wrong. Your at a table at the start of a shoe and
    start your bet at some percentage of the hole and continue in the usual
    way. How do you know when the odds change, good or bad? If you're a
    card counter you have some good information that may support some
    judgement. But, consider the task at hand: You're keeping tract of the
    hole status, plus or minus, you're doing some math to determine the bet
    amount, you're playing your hand, you're assessing the game odds and
    your counting cards. If you can do all of that, you're a better man than I am by far. This is what I mean by practical implementation. In theory a
    martingale appears to be the best possible answer to BJ because you
    effectively eliminate loses and leave only the wins. Sounds good, but as
    we know implementation is another thing.

    I know how your system works and you don't have to explain. There is
    nothing wrong with the theory.....it works. Rounding to the nearest $$
    doesn't help much. I think you need to round to the nearest $5 and
    have the current bet act as a storage device that is incremented base
    on a win or a loss and thus eliminates the need to track the hole amount.
    If it were me I think I'd base the design on a hole of 80 @ 33% which
    produces a good average bet, but does not go too high when you have a
    losing streak.

    Just some thoughts Alex and I'll say right off that simplification may not
    be possible and still maintain the accuracy of the method.

    Ray

    Ray,
    You setup a betting percentage increase/decrease of say 20%. Start your first bet at 5. If you lose then your next bet will be 6, that is a 20% increased from previous. If you win then you start over from beginning with another 5. Now, let’s say you lose the second bet again, your next bet will be 7.5 that is a 20% increase from the previous 6. You lose again, next bet will be 9, that is an increase of 20% from the previous 7.5. Lose again, the next bet is 11 that is 20% increase from the previous 9. This is the equivalent of keeping a hole and calculating everything from there. Yes, the bet is to be considered as a storage/counter that gets increased or decreased by 20% that is a function if you won or lost the previous hand.

    Estimating where you are during the game. Self adjusting mechanism for bet percentage setup: Suppose you start with 20%. That alone is sufficient to break even a 10% house edge for any number of hands where the house enjoy that edge. If after say 20 hands you see that you are not at even or in profit then it is obvious to you that the house has a greater edge then 10%. You increase the percentage to 25%. After some more hands if you are not at even or in profit it tells you that you are playing against a worse edge then 12%. Increase to 33% percent. This probably will take you to even or into profit. If not you increase the percentage to 40%. If you are in this situation as soon as you get back to even you drop down to minimum again and start over. I can guarantee you that at 33% or 40% you will break any BJ game. I never played at 33% rate in years. The most I did this year was 25-30% couple times the rest I used 20% and it does the job great.

    Look what could happen if you do not setup the percentage precisely at double then the house edge against you.
    Setup betting index percentage to be 20% for the start.
    You play any sequence of W/L as well as another player that is betting flat using same average bet as you do. You both play the same sequence of hands. Right?

    Set up 5 sequences as the following:

    #1) House edge = 0%
    You get: 4-5%, Flat gets 0% (You WIN BIG, Flat gets NOTHING)

    #2) House edge is at 5%
    You get: 1-2%, Flat gets –5% (You WIN, Flat LOSE)

    #3) House edge is at: 10%
    You get 0%, Flat gets –10% (You BREAK EVEN, Flat LOSE BIG)

    #4) House edge is at 12%
    You get –1%, Flat gets –12% (You lose little, Flat LOSE BIG)

    #5) House edge: -6%
    You get +7%, Flat gets +6% (You win MORE then 6% , Flat wins 6% ONLY)

    Now, which one does better or wins more :?:
  • AlexD30 wrote:

    You setup a betting percentage increase/decrease of say 20%. Start your first bet at 5. If you lose then your next bet will be 6, that is a 20% increased from previous. If you win then you start over from beginning with another 5. Now, let?s say you lose the second bet again, your next bet will be 7.5 that is a 20% increase from the previous 6. You lose again, next bet will be 9, that is an increase of 20% from the previous 7.5. Lose again, the next bet is 11 that is 20% increase from the previous 9. This is the equivalent of keeping a hole and calculating everything from there. Yes, the bet is to be considered as a storage/counter that gets increased or decreased by 20% that is a function if you won or lost the previous hand.



    Alex:

    There's one point I want to make sure I'm clear on. When we have a string of losses and then have some wins to get us into some profit, do we still continue betting the progression in steps all the way back down to to our 5 starting point?

    For example, we work our way up to say 18. We then work our way back down to say 11 and at that point we show a profit. Do we then bet 9, 7.5, 6 and then 5 as we are winning? Or do we drop back to the 5 starting point when we show a profit?

    I'm crunching some numbers on some Bac data and I want to make sure I'm doing it right.

    Regards,

    Win1
    :wink:
  • Win1 said:
    AlexD30 wrote:

    You setup a betting percentage increase/decrease of say 20%. Start your first bet at 5. If you lose then your next bet will be 6, that is a 20% increased from previous. If you win then you start over from beginning with another 5. Now, let?s say you lose the second bet again, your next bet will be 7.5 that is a 20% increase from the previous 6. You lose again, next bet will be 9, that is an increase of 20% from the previous 7.5. Lose again, the next bet is 11 that is 20% increase from the previous 9. This is the equivalent of keeping a hole and calculating everything from there. Yes, the bet is to be considered as a storage/counter that gets increased or decreased by 20% that is a function if you won or lost the previous hand.



    Alex:

    There's one point I want to make sure I'm clear on. When we have a string of losses and then have some wins to get us into some profit, do we still continue betting the progression in steps all the way back down to to our 5 starting point?

    For example, we work our way up to say 18. We then work our way back down to say 11 and at that point we show a profit. Do we then bet 9, 7.5, 6 and then 5 as we are winning? Or do we drop back to the 5 starting point when we show a profit?

    I'm crunching some numbers on some Bac data and I want to make sure I'm doing it right.

    Regards,

    Win1
    :wink:


    Win1,
    If you set up a starting hole of –25 and play at the $5 minimum.
    L, 5, –5, -30
    L, 6, –6, -36
    L, 7.5, – 7.5, -43.5
    L, 9, -9, -52.5
    L, 11, - 11, -62.5
    L, 13, - 13, -75.5
    L, 15, -15, -90.5
    W, 18, +18, –72.5 ( you are still in red)
    W, 15, +15, -57.5 ( you are still in red)
    W, 12, + 12, –45.5 ( .. still in red)
    W, 9, +9, -36.5 ( still 11.5 to be even)
    L, 7, –7, –43.5 ( .. still red ..! )
    W, 9, + 9, –32.5 ( still red ..!)
    W, 7, + 7, –25.5 ( .. still red)
    L, 5, -5 = -30.5
    W,6, +6 = -24.5 ( EVEN)

    Next bet is 6 or 5 makes not much difference at this point. If you’ve reached the 18 you will be at even probably one or two bets before reaching minimum in normal circumstances.

    In my example you lost 9 and won 7 for a huge house edge of 12.6% but you didn’t lose a penny.
    This is POWER :!:

    Make sure you understand this: When you bet 7.5 and lose then you increase by 20% and that is 7.5 + 1.5 = 9 Right? Now, if you win the 9 then you decrease by 20% and that is 9 – 1.8 = 7 ( you lost one and won the next but you made money .., not much but the point is to understand how you cancell losing bets during the game) You won more money in less number of hands that you lost in more hands. Do you understand :?:
    :arrow: You lost less in more hands and won more in less hands :!: ..., :wink: That is the key :!:

    If you plan for baccarat then do first some tracking of real bacc hands for player and banker together. Go over and play them both on paper or in your Excel. See how is done. See for yourself how you can play that game both ways and make serious money.

    Don’t ever play Roulette on Red or Black because you could lose both hands when the 0 or 00 comes out.
  • Alex- So you don't count cards...that helps. If you're not doing well, just
    adjust the percentage and the hole is implied by the bet percentage, that
    helps. I still don't like the dollar bets, and may try to get around that
    before I do some "real" testing. If my software test validate, then I'll risk
    some $$ at the boat..............

    Ray
  • really, ray, is this right? after schooling me so thoroughly... i pegged you for die-hard counter. lo and behold, you think htere is mathmatical certainty for alex's "system". isn't this really just based on the labouchere principle that the series must end eventually, because fewer larger bets will cancel out the more numerous smaller ones? or is there something more?
    you are saying that if the hoel grew to where 20% wasn't cutting it, you would adjust the % ... say to 33% or something, requiring fewer bets. right? have you tested this?
  • No....No money management system can give you an edge, but
    some are less of a risk and may extend your playing time. That's
    about it.
  • phineas said:
    isn't this really just based on the labouchere principle that the series must end eventually, because fewer larger bets will cancel out the more numerous smaller ones?


    I might be off topic for this thread, but I just gotta say, call me an idiot, but I love Labbys. I don't play them anymore, and I won't again, but you just gotta love that "cancellation" method. If you can follow it to the end the result is always there. But there lies the problem. If you think counting is tough, try and keep an ongoing and constantly changing "string" of your bets (past, present and future) running at all times in your head. And sometimes the string can be ten to twenty units long (or more). To say nothing of the wide spreads necessary. I remember going from $25 to $250 at one point. Talk about drawing attention. Keeping up a normal banter with dealer, waitress or players is nearly impossible. I literally used to get headaches.

    As I said, I would never use it again. It's a beautiful (betting) system, but too impractical for regular play. The best book on read on the Labby was a mid-60's or maybe mid-70's title by Bruce Irwin. Really good read if anybody gets the chance, and can find it.

    Just my thoughts,
    John

    (PS: nowadays I'm perfectly happy with Walter's ideas and BS)
  • Have I tested this?...........only to the point of finding out what is
    wrong with it. like you say, you rob peter to pay paul and the result
    is zero or less. At the high end, you bet a truck load of money, which
    you don't have or control the high bets and null any advantage you
    may gain via the % increment. Pie in the sky.............

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!