or you could use math to analytically prove it
lol at simulations by hand. spend 1 day learning to code and you can do a billion shoes in 5 seconds.

This is the best legal method of a 100% winning strategy at baccarat. Still need an absolutely astronomical bankroll to do it, though, or suffer a tremendous ROR.

And the payoffs are better, too. If I'm going to chase near impossible odds, I'm going to do it with a $2 Powerball ticket, not an asinine Martingale system. At least that way if I do beat the odds I have something real impressive to show for it.

Gotta nitpick and point out that if you had the power of foresight, you wouldn't be playing losing games; unless you were an idiot, your options at any one time would be win or don't play, and games where you can bet either side would be unloseable. Short of choosing to win the lottery, casinos would be your greatest ROI opportunity in the short term, especially if you had a limited bankroll. Roulette numbers, hop bets, and longshots in the sports book would crush any other investment you could make in the same time span.

people ask this kind of question must be a dumb.

There are two ways, 1) cheating 2) supernatural power.

Or 3) advantage play.

That's tautological.

Came back to see if there is any input from anyone. So far 18 successful sessions. $180-$400 winnings.


Hand simulate to get a feel of how to handle losing hands. Not everyone is smart enough to code. I don't know how but I do know the huge advantage of simulating with codes. I do know friend that can code for me if I wanted to. After checking out the strategy, I don't think you can simulate that with code. Even my friend said it can't be.

If you understand the system and know how to code, maybe you can help out to prove if that system works or not.

There's no need for anyone to prove that betting systems have no effect on the EV in a game of fixed odds, it's true by the definition of EV and simple arithmetic.

yeah this sounds like an extremely difficult coding project that could take months, maybe even years, to complete.

A genius once said, in order to prove something you must do the following:

1. Ask the question
2. Provide and answer
3. Use math or something to prove that it is right

BUT

It is only right until it is proven wrong.


Can't find the video. Post a link to it when I find it. ---> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgraCYOQJl4

For me, it will probably take forever.

Your friend is probably not very good at math if he can't envision the ability to simulate your strategy in code. Jacobson does it for a variety of strategies all the time, for games more complex than baccarat.

Congratulations, you've had some short term positive variance. I'm up lifetime at craps because of some killer wins, so I must have an amazing craps strategy. I will be selling my system for $995.99 in the coming weeks. No need to verify it with math, my short term experience proves it works.

My friend codes for a living with 15 years so I believe is a good coder. I don't code but I understand that something so random can't be coder. The person who came up with the strategy is thinking outside the box. Check it out and tell me if you can code that.

I don't recall that I said it was a killer system. Remind me if I have forgotten. I just said that it's working for me so far. I'm in fact trying this out myself.

Do you know 100% that there isn't away to win? If you are sure, I see that it's pointless for everyone to come here and tell each other that there is no way to beat it.

Baccarat is plenty beatable. Ask the Borgata about it.

But it isn't a betting system that lets you come out ahead. No matter how you add negative numbers together, you still end up with a negative. In that sense, yes, I know 100% that your system isn't beating it. On a long enough timeline you will lose.

And "catching a streak" is easy enough to program in, and I suck at programming much more than the standard "Hello, World!". You make it a conditional, where your program simulates a change in betting based on a preset condition. It's done all the time for blackjack simulation -- how do you think simming bet sizing with count works? Here you'd just be making your condition a set number of wins in a row, or a set number of losses, or whatever criteria you're using to determine that you're "on a streak" or "due for one" (which, as pointed out previously, is a ludicrous concept in anything but hindsight).

I too have a friend who codes. He assures me he could do it.

Unless you want me to program in "playing a feeling". That's even easier than the above - just use a ****in random number, since that's what you're really doing anyway.

What's a Borgata?

"It's not the betting system that lets you come out ahead"
That's exactly the key. The system itself includes the human factor.

What the hell are you talking about? I'm not talking about some campy "system" -- and if you're arguing semantics, all systems are betting systems, so it's a moot point -- I'm talking about a known, very rarely occurring means to gain an edge that is mathematically verifiable, in the range of ~6-24%. Can your system claim that?

And the Borgata is the largest and most expensive casino in Atlantic City.

Yes, the "playing a feeling" is the hardest to simulate. Maybe your friend is better than mine. I can't tell you who is really better. At this point I'm not even sure if I really get what he's really doing. I'm really assuming a lot. If I really understood what he's saying, it's been working. Most people try to beat it with a conventional way. They use fix money management system. NOthing in his system is methodical.

Yeah, you can easily simulate "playing a feeling". It's called using a random value for your variable, since that's all it is.

Playing a feeling = random guessing. It's no different. The only reason it seems different in gambling is because there are discrete outcomes and confirmation bias kicks in. If you had to play roulette to fifteen decimal points or pick the hex value for the shade of red or black those "feelings" would quickly be exposed for the pure guessing they are,

I am still doing well with the campy system. Worse session was $80


Just came across this and see what people here make of it. This is some guy name Ellis' system. He sells it for $600. The link below is to a blog of a guy that was challenging Ellis and later became one of his students. I find it funny how this guy came to call Ellis the Master of Baccarat just after one or two session.

http://imspirit.wordpress.com/2011/0...-ellis-shadow/

Below link has videos:
http://imspirit.wordpress.com/2011/0...field-trip-ac/


Any awesome coder out there willing to prove this? You can search for Ellis NOR system on youtube and you will come across his video. There are videos in the blog as well. As far as how the system goes, you will have to read through the blog and do some research.

don't need to code to prove his system doesn't work.

Though you could argue that his 'system' involves finding idiots to pay him $600. In that regard, it's possibly marginally effective, but it would not surprise me if any and all testimonials are fake and actually nobody has ever paid. Or he could have found tons of suckers and he may have made hundreds of thousands. Doesn't really matter though.

Are you really that gullible that you have convinced yourself that a betting system can beat a negative EV game, math be damned?

As pointed out repeatedly, it doesn't take any testing whatsoever to prove that you can't, so get that out of your head. Testing can't make 1-1 =2.

Was that directed towards me? No, I'm not as gullible as you think. I don't believe that a system works just because someone said it was. People throw out so much about this system that I thought I throw that out for conversation. That's why I said it was funny how that guy in the blog calls Ellis a master just for two session.

As for the "campy" system, I am still out to see if it works. Everyone is looking for a conventional way to beat it. Maybe there isn't and that's why you have to use an unconventional way.

I suspect most people here say it's unbeatable yet they are STILL spending their precious time trying to find a way to beat it.

I am aware that the blog and comments can be fake. I wouldn't pay a penny for any system that isn't proven.

I personally don't think his system works but I don't know all the details. I'm certainly not as smart as all of you here. This is not just for you but all the Math and Coding wiz here that think they are so smart and knows everything. I dare them to go challenge Ellis and prove that his system is a scam with all your math and coding skills. If you know for a fact, why let this scammer scam people. Until then, talk is cheap.

Yeah yeah yeah, I don't have the time or interest or don't have to do anything to prove it works.

Cheap! cheap! cheap!

Pay me and I'll code it for you.

The problem is no matter how flawlessly my code performs and how accurate it is, you won't believe it.