WILSON METHOD REVISITED | STEARN | IMPROVEMENT – Baccarat Strategy Review

Welcome back to Casino Game Strategy Reviews.
Thanks to a Subscriber request we are returning to our favourite Baccarat strategy, The Wilson Method.
Baccarat player, Darren Lee, asked to apply The Stearn Money Management approach to Wilson.
Thanks for the request Darren.
So, we will take a look at what’s involved with the Stearn Method,
apply it to our results and see how effective it is.
Also, I will be showing how to improve one of the existing methods we have looked at
to bring our balance further into profit.
Lets dive in….
I won’t go into the specifics of The Wilson bet selection Method here
as I covered it in detail in a previous video.
Feel free to catch up on that one before continuing here.
In general terms, the Stearn Method is a stretched version of Martingale that overcomes
some of the shortfalls but also introduces its own issues when deep into the sequence.
There are, as always, a variety of implementations of this method
but I will be focusing on the standard 9 step model.
The nine steps of Stearn are;
10, 10, 10, 20, 20, 40, 40, 80, 80
The way you utilise Stearn is as follows;
We start on the first 10

and bet that amount.
If we lose, we move to the next position and bet that amount.
We continue to move right each time we lose.
If we win, we re-bet that position.
If the re-bet position wins, then we restart the sequence otherwise we move on to the next position.
This graph show the balances from the Martingale and Fibonacci approaches that we achieved in the original video.
I have removed the Flat Bet results due to their ineffectiveness.
Both these results showed short term growth potential
but occasionally suffered from all six bets in a series losing.
Ok, so how did the Stearn method fare.
Overall, it tracked a similar path to that of the Fibonacci but with its 9 steps
it simply doesn’t have the capability of recovering from the six loss situations.
It should be noted that I did try a 20 step Stearn approach
but the numbers got beyond crazy and certainly wiped out bankrolls.
So Fibonacci is still the preferred approach at this point, but those losing streaks are still deep.
Is there any way we can get similar results without these deep recovery points?
In a word, Yes.
When designing an testing systems and strategies you have the benefit
of being able to analyse long term trends and view the data from various angles.
One very interesting piece of information that came out of our analysis is;
that the average number of bets before we attain a win is 1.9
(or 2 to make things simple).
This tells us that we don’t necessarily need to commit to up to six bets but could say, halve that.
If we were to follow the Wilson Method and only bet three of the post trigger
sequence with Martingale, we would get the result we see here.
As you can see, we can still maintain positive balance growth
without the deep recovery points.
The system still remains simple, and with a bigger base unit value, larger profit could be attained.
Overall, the Wilson Method remains a good trigger based approach for Baccarat.
We have shown previously that you cannot flat bet Wilson,
so a form of progression is required.
Martingale, Fibonacci and now Stearn have been shown to have reasonable
growth periods with the inevitable total losses on the six bet.
I would certainly recommend you test the 3 bet Martingale approach yourself
as it has shown similar balance growth and eradicates deep losses.
Thank you for your continued support of this channel.
If you found this video helpful or would like to suggest other strategies
for me to review then please leave a comment in the section below.
Remember to Like, Subscribe and Hit the Bell Icon for more videos.
With that, I’ll see you in the next video and remember,
enjoy the casino, but play sensibly.
[Music]

%d bloggers like this: