Baccarat Oscar's grind + baccarat

The more I think about it... the super six sounds like an actual advantage play. I haven’t researched it, but it should be countable. 8 deck shoe should average about 3 countable bets per shoe which would yield a pretty hefty advantage. My quick calculations come up with a little over 20% of your fixed bet. What that means is if your super six unit size was a $100 chip, you would make over $20 in profit per bet in the long run. 17 to 1 is the best payout you can get with this side bet as some casinos only offer 12 to 1. It’s something worth researching if it interests you. If you’ve never learned a counting method, I assure you they aren’t hard. Still requires a hefty bankroll though and is slower than OG, but if you have any fears on the longevity of OG, obviously an advantage play like counting would be the most suitable thing. And realistically, baccarat counters are rare. There is no heat on bac counters and you can friggin right everything down and not have to keep it memorized in secret.

 

Yup, slower than OG. I wouldn't consider dong the research and don't know if JAE estimate is correct. Before I'd spend the time I think I might really crunch some numbers. Maybe there is enough on your plate with OG ?? Just sayin'?

 

50 OG shoes from live and current shoes. Net results.

Banker Style against My Fixed Playing both sides. Betting every hand.
213.45 units 285.95 units

4.27 U/Shoe 5.72 U/Shoe

But big caveat. Banker is better because using -20 there are lots of shoes that don't play so on shoes played you'd get about double that 4 units to about 8 or 9 as I think JAE mentioned somewhere. Well, you still got to sit there and spend the time so that's easy 50 hours of work. For sure a lot less fatigue, etc.

This a small sample and I'll not go further with any testing because I don't think the numbers will change much. It seems pretty apparent that the -20 makes OG a pretty sure winner with a very low risk of ruin.

Cheers

 

I think moving to -10 might slow down the boredom.

 

Boredom and fatigue always a factor that must be overcome in any endeavor. For one who seriously wants to profit the prospect of boredom isn't going to change the method. I wouldn't recommend changing to -10 for that reason.

 

great Posts guys. Jimske wouldn't you agree that the -20 is really what gives a advantage and that perhaps if a player was to play player at said -30 or more , we would still get a advantage ? maybe Jae can give his inputs ?
I may be wrong and so I am not saying the results could be similar but it seem that overcoming the variance is the "why" it is working ?
thanks,

R.

 

Agreed. It's possible and probably inevitable for one to hit 2 or 3 drawdowns in consecutive shoes before acquiring enough profit to offset that but not real likely.

 

I am a "why" type of guy and just cant help thinking of the power of virtual betting.
I know that it has been a "for-ever" battle in all forums as to if it makes a difference or not . that being the reason for my post because looking at the results of Jae's success I cant help myself thinking that maybe he will never lose these 2000 units ,or maybe so rarely he wont even matter ?
the other thing is that when you are bringing down the size of your bet because lets said, a 20 unit bet will get you in profit and so you go from 40 or 60 units bet from 20 units, does this move could always be another "why" it really helps the drawdowns creating more lower bets to achieve your goal ? just a thought, as a friend of mind told me, "I am just full of them", lol.

God bless,

R.

 

When mechanical systems are concerned. Nothing works. It can work in the short run and even work for a longer run IF you kept chasing with bigger bankroll. Compare the many steps with Martingale. I had made a comparison of Jae's 2000 unit bankroll with an 11 step Martingale. There really are right now as I post people using 11 step Marty in Macau on those Stadium Baccarat with 600+ terminals on 3 floors at Kam Pek Casino. There are 18 games to choose from with limits as low as HK50 and Max bet at HK 800000. This range would allow an 11 step Marty.
The system is bound to bust but as a system player it's about whether you have ENOUGH wins to cover a bust. Nothing wrong with averaging 2500 units to a 2000 unit bust.

My own personal experience. I once used a 5 Marty. One series for one unit win a shoe ONLY one win a day. I look for first 5 hands of shoe to repeat anywhere after that and immediately bet PPPPP. Perfect for 9 months at the then Taj Mahal now Hard rock in Atlantic City. Then came the bust 3 times in 2 weeks. Although I did win enough to cover but those accumulated wins are spent on food and lodging for all those months. Overall bottom line is a loss. That's the last straw for me before I went into dealing. In reality I did not lose with Marty. I infact won with it to take care of all my expenses. I mainly lost on Craps & Tiles doing those SEE HOW IT GOES mindset timing when to bet high and when to bet low.

So far Jae is holding up with his chases and managed to make comebacks. That fateful day will come where he will say enough is enough and write off those hugh losses and take a long break and start all over again. Now the BIGGEST question is how much win before the next PERFECT STORM?

I can tell you with my experience of a dealer, What Jae is doing WILL END UP AS A GRIND in the end PROVIDED he is successful. People say they look at the big picture but HOW BIG? The very day you stop doing it is. The intention here is to let everybody knows that a progression is a structured bet sequence. It's not an advantage or disadvantage. If you have self confidence with bet selection, you don't need a negative progression. Then you will be playing the game with an extra burden which is EMOTIONS. If you use a system, the Human side of things is eliminated. It's all execution and if your progression is a negative one, You gain REAL probability of getting ahead in the game even though there are less wins than losses. The drawback is using more money to win less money.

The difference between my approach is I Hit & Run using Math & Fallacy based bet selection and entry points whereas Jae is Kamikaze with the mindset of Head to Head battle with the WAR CRY Catch me if you can and I bet I can't lose.

I will post another story of a patron who is a lifetime winner of 4 million betting Banker only.

 

Using OG on player would be very scary. While you may survive a few to a several sessions, and it looks like a great play on shoes where player is running heavy, player swings and down draws are consistently higher than they are on bank. I don’t think my money management methods would have been able to keep it going has I been betting on player throughout my venture.

I don’t track the player, but I have done so on days that are extremely slow. And since I wait forever virtual losses, if bank is kicking ass, then I don’t get to make as many bets. During this boredom, I have tracked player deficits before, I posted a few results in these comments, but a few that would have destroyed my 2,000 unit bankroll. I plan on seeing 2,000 units bust on banker. I’ve just been fortunate. But it will happen several times in my life. I may even start using a 5,000 unit bankroll after the first time. It depends on what I track after the first bust and get an idea of what I would have needed to fund the recovery, then I’ll double that number and make it my new bankroll.

 

fair enough my friend but now let me ask you . as much as you have played a Marty do you think your results would of been different if lets said you would of play a Marty in two chunks, or 3 bets and then 2 bets later ?
I show that playing a 6 legged Marty that is divided in two parts I get much better results. I cant tell you how easy it is to bust any neg.progression just playing static, and in any game for that matter. your thoughts ?

 

Jae when you were looking at the players during those times and as you said it would of bust that 2000 unit bank (which I believe), were you also taking in consideration the -20 or -50 virtual bets on player ?
if as a player side one could wait til he is -70 or -100 , could that make a difference in your opinion to make up for the "deeper drawdowns" that player create ?
just wonder about that, thank you for sharing your experience by the way. nothing like integrity talks on a forum.

R.

 

oh no, they definitely weren’t situations where it went over by a few, but thousands. One particular one was over -9,000. That was a few mo this back. I can’t seem to remember if I kept tracking it. I want to say I saw it recover, but my brain is a little fuzzy for sone reason. But I’ve seen it go over -3700 and recover. And over -5,000 a couple times, but can’t remember if I watched the recovery process or not. Every time I witness those big drawdowns I get distracted reminding my teammates that we should be testing my reverse grind ideas. When I see -5,000 on a player side OG, my brain sees +5,000 on a reverse type grind.

 

There are endless ways to do your Marty. I am looking at my past records to look for imbalances which I deemed substantial enough to make it as my next unit win. if for some reason I could not find something I like I might do a SPLIT UP Marty like you suggested. I could base my findings on a 6 step Marty and split it up into 2 x 3 Marty with a virtual W or L with the first unit. Endless possibilities with Marty if you do your homework.
The real secret to my success is the Hit & Run.

 

I don’t advocate the martingale, but I do use it as a method to test triggers.

if anyone feels like testing this one, feel free, I think I tested about 200 shoes once and didn’t see it lose, but I’m sure it is a loser.

it’s a two legged six tier Marty.

you wait for 6 players IAR or more you don’t bet against that streak, once it breaks you are looking for more 3 players IAR at which point you do the first 3 tiers betting that it will go to bank. If it goes 6 IAR again, you wait for it to break and wait for 3 more players IAR and play out the last 3 tiers of the Marty for a 1 unit win that you’ll probably catch in 40% of the shoes you play.

it’s essentially a 9 tier, 3-legged martingale, but using using a tier of 6 Marty with 3 virtual losses.

again, definitely not advocating this for real play, lol.

 

oh ma, oh ma, never mind then doing the player side. so that little difference in banker's hand won ratio can be a monster !
I dont think anyone realize the gravity of it. that may save lots of dough to anyone trying the player side.
I was thinking maybe a few hundred at most but thousands is way too much to overcome.
the minute we play one side, at time, it seems that the other side is much stronger. I often wonder why we, humans remember so easily the negative experience as opose to the good ones ? maybe we are wire and have beliefs that we are not good enough in some subconscious level but it makes remember the bad stuff more. probably when we play banker and win, day after day, it seem normal, but the one time we play banker and we see tons of players maybe the impact in our memory bank goes PTSD. ??? then we start believing into the illusion that player side just wins a little less then banker, all that because of the trauma we experienced those few times. funny how we respond to "lies" just because of our emotional make-up,lol.
R.

 

I think you hit it on the nail. Whenever someone starts playing OG similar row I do, betting on bank only, it’s like Murphy’s law kicks in. Their first few or few dozen shoes end up being heavily player shoes. So they experience big swings, or drawdowns and their natural reaction is, “why am I not doing this on player instead?” Or they’ll start thinking, “I should be betting on banker and player.” Which also seems like it makes sense. But essentially then it’s a guessing game where sone of their guesses are on the side with slightly less chance of winning. Which short term can work. Just like only betting player can win short term. But we aren’t counting cards because that doesn’t work for player/banker bets, this could be a full blown discussion about trending, but the quick response to that is anti-trending and the reality is, that even if you are a trended and want to utilize that skill that you believe makes you a better guesser, then I think you’ll see bigger swings and bigger drawdowns by betting both in the long run as well versus just betting banker. That’s just my opinion, I think it’s backed by a little math, but I’m not trying to challenge anyone’s betting strategies, just informing them that by any additions of player bets into the grind will require a bigger bankroll to cover the drawdowns. And I have no idea what a good amount would be as I do not play this way.

 

I once tested a few ideas, one of them being OG on a follow the winner thing. Since streaks help you recover a grind quickly, it would seem like it makes sense to jump on a streak, so after a P I would bet on P to continue winning, if it goes B I follow B. And as you can probably guess, chops are your enemy on that one. My results did not go good. In testing, I blew through a 1,000 unit bankroll twice in a 1,000 shoe test. Can’t remember if it burned through 2,000 or not as during the time of these tests I was using a 1,000 unit bankroll. I believe any method you test that has player in the equation will perform worse in the mid to long term than just betting on banker.

 

Do you know where the problem is? Why wait for PPP Where is the value of this trigger IF YOU LET IT HAPPEN ANYWHERE IN THE SHOE? It is bound to come. I describe this as Baccarat is playing you and not you are playing Baccarat. Hope you catch the meaning.

 

Err... Did not understand this. What you are doing right now is heavily dependant on B runs of 3 or more. everything else is fair or bad. Chops are bad too. Single banks are DEVIL in disguise. At least with follow the shoe P runs and B runs do help with chops as losses in a row and terrible 2's as the devil in disguise.
My take is we have to suppress the devil in disguise which essentially jacks up your bet amount. Perfect Chops are MORE than terrible 2's? I guess. Anyway with follow the shoe, single P's are bad too.