Why are we doing this?

#1
I've been reading K-O the Casinos and Play Blackjack like the Pros. I've come across some numbers that make me question why I should continue with learning to count:

With the most advanced K-O strategy in Atlantic city (6 decks) my expectation is 0.73% That's not even a single percentage point in my favor. Both books say that K-O is about as effective as other counts in shoe games so everybody probably has an expectation of about 0.73%? Why do people put in so much effort for such small margins? I understand learning BS gives you a huge edge compared to unskilled play but 0.73% seems rediculously small payoff for the amount of practice time it will take for me to be able to pull off counting in a casino. On average that's $7.30 profit for every $1000 I put down? That doesn't jive with the money management numbers in the book but they never connect the dots to explain how the expectation relates to money management except a few blurbs about Kelly betting.

So why do we do this? It seems like we're relying on standard deviation to make most of our money. Is it only media hype that got the casinos knickers in a twist over the counters advantage? Am I missing a formula? Should I get a different book?

I have a headache from trying to figure this out. Any help would be much appreciated.

~~Good Luck!~~
 

BlackDog

Well-Known Member
#2
I can't speak on the books you are referencing but I will say this. Any advantage is better than a disadvantage. Counting is really not as tough as I thought it would be and knowing when the odds are in my favor is a great thing :D Having said that, I do understand your frustration. With all of the hype and mystique surrounding card counters, professional gamblers and all that THAT implies you would hope to walk into a casino and take them down over night. Unfortunately that is not the case. You have to whittle them down slowly...patience is quite important from what I am finding out.

I am hoping we will hear from the more experienced numbers guys on this as I am curious about what those books have to say and what they have to say about those books...
 
#3
Well i'll just say this, I use the KO count and it works pretty well. As far as percentage advantages goes if you played some of the worst blackjack games there were out there to play, the casinos advantage on those games would only be about 2 percent at best. 2 percent doesn't sound like much, but over the span of thousands upon thousands of hands it's ALOT of money.
 
#4
Its all in time

Think of it this way.... overtime, playing basic strat, YOU WILL LOSE. No if or and buts you will lose... might not be the first time or the 5 th time, but even if the casino has a 0.00000001 % advantage they will make money.

sooooooo.... if you have the advantage... over time.. YOU WILL MAKE MONEY.... if your bet size is being played properly.
 
#5
bubblesort said:
I've been reading K-O the Casinos and Play Blackjack like the Pros. I've come across some numbers that make me question why I should continue with learning to count:

With the most advanced K-O strategy in Atlantic city (6 decks) my expectation is 0.73% That's not even a single percentage point in my favor. Both books say that K-O is about as effective as other counts in shoe games so everybody probably has an expectation of about 0.73%? Why do people put in so much effort for such small margins? I understand learning BS gives you a huge edge compared to unskilled play but 0.73% seems rediculously small payoff for the amount of practice time it will take for me to be able to pull off counting in a casino. On average that's $7.30 profit for every $1000 I put down? That doesn't jive with the money management numbers in the book but they never connect the dots to explain how the expectation relates to money management except a few blurbs about Kelly betting.

So why do we do this? It seems like we're relying on standard deviation to make most of our money. Is it only media hype that got the casinos knickers in a twist over the counters advantage? Am I missing a formula? Should I get a different book?

I have a headache from trying to figure this out. Any help would be much appreciated.

~~Good Luck!~~
I'm not an expert, but if you read about Ken Uston, Tommy Hyland and that book "Bringing Down the House", you'll see that the slight advantage you have by counting is enough to win lots of money- if everything is done right.
 

BlackDog

Well-Known Member
#6
apriorist said:
I'm not an expert, but if you read about Ken Uston, Tommy Hyland and that book "Bringing Down the House", you'll see that the slight advantage you have by counting is enough to win lots of money- if everything is done right.
True...if you have a BIG enough bankroll ;)
 
#7
BlackDog said:
True...if you have a BIG enough bankroll ;)
For Uston and the MIT people, but I don't think Hyland started with a particularly big bankroll ($16,000, I think). The key, I guess, is to either start very small if you're by yourself, or to get several people together and combine your money for a big bankroll.
 

BlackDog

Well-Known Member
#8
apriorist said:
I don't think Hyland started with a particularly big bankroll ($16,000, I think)
I think for most this would be considered big. :D Escpecially when you consider that $16000 in the 1980s was worth a lot more than it is today. Not trying to argue just defining the word BIG in my post :)

I don't want you to think that I am saying it is impossible to take a few hundred dollars and increase it to a large enough amount that you can take down the house. BUT...it will be a long slow journey...with many ups and downs.

Also, the rules have changed A LOT since Uston, Hyland, Thorpe et al...so be prepared ;)

I do still believe your post....

apriorist said:
I'm not an expert, but if you read about Ken Uston, Tommy Hyland and that book "Bringing Down the House", you'll see that the slight advantage you have by counting is enough to win lots of money- if everything is done right.
...to be true...you just have to have the money, patience and training.
 

Mikeaber

Well-Known Member
#9
Agree Stipulated

BlackDog said:
...to be true...you just have to have the money, patience and training.
Cannot argue with that statement BlackDog....however, there is one other factor you must possess: The TIME to exploit the knowledge and skill that you've acquired. You won't do it by hitting Vegas for one weekend a year.
 

BlackDog

Well-Known Member
#10
Mikeaber said:
Cannot argue with that statement BlackDog....however, there is one other factor you must possess: The TIME to exploit the knowledge and skill that you've acquired. You won't do it by hitting Vegas for one weekend a year.
Absolutely true...I guess I just figured that as a "given" ;)
 

KenSmith

Administrator
Staff member
#11
Why are we doing this?

Some do it for the profit. Others do it for the challenge. Still others would play anyway in the casino, but it's so much more fun to have an expectation of winning.

In short, there is not just one answer to that question. But I think almost everyone will agree that winning is more fun than losing.

It is true that the edge that counting provides is small. Fully understanding that fact is often difficult for new players.

bubblesort said:
It seems like we're relying on standard deviation to make most of our money.
That's definitely not the right way to think of this. Over the long run, the luck part evens out, and what you are left with is just the real expectation of your play. While it is true that every big win you have (and every big loss you suffer) will be because of variance, you MUST look long-term and don't let the swings convince you that your profit expectation is higher than it really is.
 
#12
KenSmith said:
Why are we doing this?

Some do it for the profit. Others do it for the challenge. Still others would play anyway in the casino, but it's so much more fun to have an expectation of winning.

In short, there is not just one answer to that question. But I think almost everyone will agree that winning is more fun than losing.

It is true that the edge that counting provides is small. Fully understanding that fact is often difficult for new players.



That's definitely not the right way to think of this. Over the long run, the luck part evens out, and what you are left with is just the real expectation of your play. While it is true that every big win you have (and every big loss you suffer) will be because of variance, you MUST look long-term and don't let the swings convince you that your profit expectation is higher than it really is.
I think seeing it as "only" a 1% advantage doesn't do the benefits of counting justice. We see the number "1" and think "not much", but considering how many hand you're (theoretically) playing, it is a lot. I've heard that if you have a particular bankroll and play with perfect counting and BS until the bankroll either doubles or runs out, you'll double it 95% of the time and lose it 5% of the time. I'm sure it doesn't work out this way for most people (or hardly anyone), and this is assuming you don't get kicked out of the casino, but if it can be done by one person (or group), then it can be done by anyone(with enough practice and team play, of course).
 
Top