Know when to walk away

Alan

New Member
#1
I'm relatively new to blackjack. I've only played in a casino once and it was a video blackjack (not a live dealer) and I'm wanting to slowly get into it more for recreation. I'm learning basic strategy right now but am not yet ready for counting - I'll wait until I get BS down first. I've played online casinos with free or 'play' money and I've played some simulations.

I'm terrible in that I always want more than I have. When I'm up, I want $5 more, but then I start on a losing streak. I could walk away, but I want to get it up to where it was before first. Or I want to break even. I usually end up with $0.

What strategies are common for knowing what your breaking point, or walk away point is? Assuming a $5 minimum at the table, and $50 or $100 in your pocket. Flat betting all the way. Do you quit at an upper limit? Or is there an ever increasing lower limit that screams at you to leave the table?
 
#2
Alan said:
What strategies are common for knowing what your breaking point, or walk away point is? Assuming a $5 minimum at the table, and $50 or $100 in your pocket. Flat betting all the way. Do you quit at an upper limit? Or is there an ever increasing lower limit that screams at you to leave the table?
There is no scientific-math type formula/strategy for knowing when to quit. However, if you only use BS then there IS SCIENCE/MATH that states that the longer you play the more likely you will lose. zg
 

Mikeaber

Well-Known Member
#3
I used to play straight flat bets using nothing but pure Basic Strategy. The one good outcome of that era was that I learned Basic Strategy inside and out for the games that I played. I would take a predetermined amount of cash into the casino. My goal was to play until I had to leave to go home. If I busted out (and that happened but not all that frequently) I just quit. Most of the time, I would lose 10% to 25% of what I started with but there were times that I actually came out ahead. I never thought that I needed to set a loss limit other than by trip BR. As for a win limit....I never really let that come into play since I was playing recreationally and simply wanted to last until it was time to go...ahead or behind. I consider those years "training" for what came next. I had a lot of fun, learned a LOT about the game and conditions, and never got in heavily enough to impact my life-style.

I think that as a non-advantage player, you should have a very healthy attitude about regular loses though if you play reasonably, you can keep them at a minimum and still have a lot of fun doing it. Play for COMPS! The "freebies" you get just might turn out to be enough for you to justify your loses at the table.
 

TENNBEAR

Well-Known Member
#4
Gambling on any level is all about discipline, it is very easy to get caught up in the game and lose 500.00 trying to win back that first 100.00 you lost earlier, and all to common to lose what ever you gained during winning streak.
You must always go in with a plan, set bankroll, buy-in amount, and max bet limit, and stick to it. Win-loss limits can also be set, but that's up to you. The main point is to have discipline, much like drinking, if you do not have a little control it will make you sick. Self control is the key to any system, to win you have to leave the table when you are ahead. On this site there are several good books that you will find well worth the money that can help, and try http://www.hitorstand.net as a good free basic strategy training game.
 

gobbledygeek

Well-Known Member
#5
I only play BS too so I know the more hands I play in my lifetime the more money I'll lose. So I guess the key is to just play as few hands as possible in order to satisfy your gambling entertainment fix.

I do the following in order to try to satisfy both (i.e. play enough of a game where I feel I've been entertained and yet lose as little money as possible by limiting the number of hands played). I come to the casino with a set amount ($50) and only flat bet the minimum amount ($5). I don't bet any $2 or $0.50 chips (which I'll receive for surrendering and blackjacks). I leave when I've lost all of my $5 chips (total session loss will vary due to not betting the $2 and $0.50 chips). I also leave when I feel I've been entertained enough (for me that's usually 40 minutes or so, will depend on how often you go); if at this point I'm up over $20 I'll just play with $20 and when I lose that I'll go home, adding everything I win above $20 to the "take home" pile. These are just mental tricks to give myself a psychological edge only (hurrah I didn't blow my whole $50 or hurrah I'm adding money to my take home pile!); in reality, they only limit my overall number of hands and thus will limit my lifetime losses.

Have fun at Cascades. Unfortunately you probably won't really be able to utilize any counting methods there because they use CSMs (constantly shuffling the deck every few hands or so); I'm not sure if any lower mainland casino's don't use CSMs.
 

shadroch

Well-Known Member
#6
If I recall correctly,Rick Blaine-in his Blackjack Blueprint book says that as a beginning player,you should end a session when you have either doubled or halved your bankroll. $100 Br-quit at $50 or $200.This was his advice to players learning BS and not counting. Obviously a counter should play as long as he is able and has the advantage.
All the other books I've read subscribe to the "lifetime session"theory that says money won or loss should not dictate a sessions end.
 

Alan

New Member
#7
Thanks for the replies all. I think I'll just have to go and play a session or two and see how it goes. I'm expecting I will lose the money and it's just for entertainment. I'll also try the half/double thought. That seems like a good way to go, too.

I read once that a method one person uses is to go in with half their money in their pocket. So, walk in with $50 in hand and $50 in pocket. Play BJ using BS, making flat $5 bets. If they lose their money, they break out the extra $50 and play with that. If they lose that, they walk away and call it entertainment.

If they get up to $100 from the original $50, then their break point is $50. If they get up to $150, the break point is $100. And so on. This way, you can play through losing streaks and hope luck goes in your favour eventually.

This sounds like a good idea as well, so maybe I'll try that too :)
 
#8
Alan said:
This sounds like a good idea as well, so maybe I'll try that too :)
As long as you understnd that its meaningless to your overall multi-session result. As a BS player, its just one big session. zg
 

shadroch

Well-Known Member
#9
zengrifter said:
As long as you understnd that its meaningless to your overall multi-session result. As a BS player, its just one big session. zg
This is the type of thinking I have a problem with.For a pro or a serious player,it may well be true. But for a casual player,its bullspit.If I go to Vegas and win$2,000,either I'm whooping it up bigger than I would,or I'm using the money to buy something nice back home. On my next trip,I'm using new money that I saved for that trip,not the old BR.What happened last trip,or will happen next trip has nothing to do with this trip.If I win 2,000 more In August,that money will be spent,so when I go again in Oct,its with another new BR,and my past results are meaningless.
Perhaps,for a pro who can't replenish his BR,or for serious players it's different,but not for the casual player whose need for a gambling BR ends when he hits the airport.
I'd love someone to explain why they think I'm wrong,besides just using the stock-its all one giant session cliche.
 

Mikeaber

Well-Known Member
#10
As for it being one big session...I agree with ZG simply because if you tally the money won and lost over your Black career, then it's one big session. But, there is substance to the statement Shadroch made as well. To most recreational gamblers, each trip is unique in itself. You've saved money for a vacation. If you went to Six Flags Over Texas, you would blow that money, have had a good time and then go back home and start saving for your next vacation. Same think with the recreational gambler. Each trip's bankroll is unique to that trip. You lose/win or break even. Whatever, money set aside for the trip is possibly gone just as though you went to the Amusement Park.

shadroch said:
This is the type of thinking I have a problem with.For a pro or a serious player,it may well be true. But for a casual player,its bullspit.If I go to Vegas and win$2,000,either I'm whooping it up bigger than I would,or I'm using the money to buy something nice back home. On my next trip,I'm using new money that I saved for that trip,not the old BR.What happened last trip,or will happen next trip has nothing to do with this trip.If I win 2,000 more In August,that money will be spent,so when I go again in Oct,its with another new BR,and my past results are meaningless.
Perhaps,for a pro who can't replenish his BR,or for serious players it's different,but not for the casual player whose need for a gambling BR ends when he hits the airport.
I'd love someone to explain why they think I'm wrong,besides just using the stock-its all one giant session cliche.
 

traynor

Active Member
#11
TENNBEAR said:
Gambling on any level is all about discipline, it is very easy to get caught up in the game and lose 500.00 trying to win back that first 100.00 you lost earlier, and all to common to lose what ever you gained during winning streak.
You must always go in with a plan, set bankroll, buy-in amount, and max bet limit, and stick to it. Win-loss limits can also be set, but that's up to you. The main point is to have discipline, much like drinking, if you do not have a little control it will make you sick. Self control is the key to any system, to win you have to leave the table when you are ahead.
I agree with most of what you are saying, with some exceptions. Blackjack play should be based on mathematical probabilities, not on whether an individual player is ahead or behind at any given moment. While the advice to "leave the table when you are ahead" is sound psychological advice, it is much less so strategically.

In the initial learning stages, self-confidence is directly related to performance; players who lose tend to lose both bankroll and self-confidence. That leads to mistakes, and more losses. However, you should never confuse making mistakes with "losing streaks." One of the most difficult things for serious players to accept is that their present fortunes do not affect the deck in the least bit. The "winning streaks" and "losing streaks" are a perception only, based on a short-range view of long-range events.

Walking away from a table when you are losing seems sound, but it is based on faulty decision-making, and the perception that short-term events should always replicate (almost exactly) long-term probabilities. That misconception is so prevalent that it is referred to as the Law of Small Numbers in decision theory. As far as external reality is concerned, there are no "winning streaks" or "losing streaks"; there are only random variations from a baseline that create the illusion of "streaks."

Casinos leverage that misconception into millions. Take a good look at the next roulette table you pass; especially the display of the last 10-20 coups. The purpose is to activate the knee-jerk reflex in people to believe in the Law of Small Numbers; if the last 5 coups were all red, black must be "due." It is not, any more than the outcome of the next hand of Blackjack dealt depends on whether or not you are up or down for the evening.

Blackjack is popular because, with perfect play, it is possible to gain a small statistical advantage over time. "Over time" can be hours, days, or even weeks for the individual player. There is no advantage or disadvantage to leaving a table when winning, OR when losing. When an individual deck or shoe is seriously negative, yes. But that is a decision based on real-world feedback, not on subjective emotional states or bankroll fluctuations.

How do I know this, you may ask? Because the biggest win of my life came after the biggest loss, at a time when I should have given up and gone home to lick my wounds and wallow in self-pity. Instead, I got really angry, and decided that the whole mind-trip of believing that I was on a "losing streak" was close to delusional. I played perfect Blackjack, and in a little less than four hours won back every dollar I had lost in the previous two weeks of negative sessions, plus a tidy profit.

That was the point that I actually became a professional; rather than believing it to be a "winning streak" or that I "got lucky" I realized that both winning and losing were simply random variations from a baseline.

For a good introductory work on decision-making (that should be required reading for every prospective wagering professional) you might try, "Decision Traps," by Russo and Schoemaker.
Good Luck
 

Alan

New Member
#13
Traynor makes a very good case! Winning and losing streaks are all in the mind. A streak in blackjack can only be proven mathematically and (in my limited experience) through card counting. To know that the deck is in the dealer's favour, hand after hand, and will continue to be so is proof that you're in a losing streak and it's time to walk away. Without card counting or when working with CSMs, a losing streak is imaginary.

On another note, I also have to agree with Shadroch's statements. As a casual player, I don't plan on keeping a running tally of my blackjack trips. If I go in with $100 and lose it, I'll feel terrible, but I will chock it up to an 'entertainment' expense similar to going to the movies and getting popcorn with extra butter and playing on the arcade games afterwards. If everybody in the family gets their own popcorn and drink, the total comes out roughly the same.

If I go in and break even, then I'll say "Great! I played for free!" and if I come out ahead for that day, that's even better. I'll probably have my winnings spent by the end of the week.

I think the best analogy is someone who wins $1000 on the lotto. They feel they won $990 more than they spent and they're happy. Most people won't even think how much the ticket cost, just that they won $1000. No one thinks to ask the "lucky" person how much they've spent on the lotto before winning, over the course of their lifetime. And no one thinks to ask them how much of the $1000 they plan on giving back over the next year or two.

I am that lotto player. With the one exception that blackjack has better odds.
 

E-town-guy

Well-Known Member
#14
Alan said:
On another note, I also have to agree with Shadroch's statements. As a casual player, I don't plan on keeping a running tally of my blackjack trips. If I
You should keep track of your records, especially if you are counting. It only takes a few seconds to record when you get home.

A lot of gamblers say they're "up" in the long run. Are they? Most aren't but do they think so because they don't keep results or because they're ignorant I'm not sure and I'm sure both scenarios occur. By keeping track you have the hard facts in front of you so you can see exactly how things have went.
 

ortango

Well-Known Member
#15
This only applies because I live close to a casino and can go back anytime. I take a certain amount with me, say $100. If I win $150, I pocket $100 which is NEVER to be touched during the same trip, and play with the 50$, sometimes winning with or losing that. But I never dig in for more than the $100 I brought.

What does this mean? No, it is not some betting method that will give you more wins (no such thing, other than counting).

This only ensures 2 things:

1. I can only lose the money I went with, and
2. I will occasionally go home a winner

both make me feel good, which is a big deal since I do this for recreation, not a living. If you stay in the casino long enough you will lose all the money you came with if you can't walk a winner. In the long run of course it is all the same wins and losses but it makes me feel safe knowing I cant lose more than $100 but can win much more than that.

Once again, this is only now that I live close to a casino. It is almost impossible to do this if you have to make a long journey to a casino every time with expenses and everything, because you feel like you "wasted a trip". I hope no one flames me for this if my logic is flawed.
 

sagefr0g

Well-Known Member
#16
Mikeaber said:
As for it being one big session...I agree with ZG simply because if you tally the money won and lost over your Black career, then it's one big session. But, there is substance to the statement Shadroch made as well. To most recreational gamblers, each trip is unique in itself. You've saved money for a vacation. If you went to Six Flags Over Texas, you would blow that money, have had a good time and then go back home and start saving for your next vacation. Same think with the recreational gambler. Each trip's bankroll is unique to that trip. You lose/win or break even. Whatever, money set aside for the trip is possibly gone just as though you went to the Amusement Park.
for my self this is the constant nagging question i'm faced with. i think when it comes to me this is a double quandry since i'm neither a recreational player or a professional. i play blackjack because it is recreation but the fun for me is all about the benjamins baby. intellectualy i accept the idea that a counting blackjack player makes the dough over time (or the long run) and in the final analysis i'm happy with that. so here is the rub, i find myself unable to abandon that negative feeling one has after a negative fluctuation session and i really like the positve feeling experienced after a positive fluctuation session.
from my perspective being able to play is a 'premium' situation ie. there is a substantial cost associated both for time and money. looking from the perspective of the overall gambling public i should imagine it is a relatively rare experience. so i don't take having the opportunity to play advantage balckjack lightly and i do put in a lot of time at the tables.
the thing is i'm torn between the enjoyment of making money in the long run and the 'high' experienced after winning sessions and making money in the long run and the 'downer' of losing sessions while all the time knowing in the long run i'm favorite as a winner as long as ROR doesn't get me.
here is what i've been doing lately to cope with the dammed if you do and dammed if you don't scenerio. i know i got an overall win rate per hour. i know that the results of an hours play is going to fluctuate in the short run by a given standard deviation. so what i do is to limit my play accordingly:
if i'm within one standard deviation above my expected hourly rate i will usually quit for the day or at least take a break for a while and feel the glory.
if i'm within one standard deviation below my expected hourly rate i'll keep on playing until i come out winner or lose my trip bankroll. the way i figure it the only negative affect this has is that i short myself a little bit of that premium playing time:( but i still get to carry home that high when i have winning sessions:) .

best regards,
mr fr0g :D
 

EasyRhino

Well-Known Member
#17
Last week I was on a business trip in St Louis, with riverboat casinos nearby. I'm not playing advantage, so when I walked in, I set the max amount that I was willing to lose. I decided on $400 for the week, and $100 on any given night. (By my standards, these were high numbers, but I wanted some slack to adjust for a quick negative streak). The "night bankroll" was smaller than the "trip bankroll" just so I'd have the opportunity to come back on a later night and play if I wanted to.

When I'd sit down at the table, I'd drop my cash near the table, but wait until the shoe was finished before coming in. When the dealer would ask me if I'd like to jump in right away, I said "no, I'm saying goodbye to my money". It was a joke, but it's probably the right attitude to have for a non-advantage player. The money you put out is gone from the money you buy chips with it.

Now, unless I lost my nightly limit, I'd just play until I had to stop for some random reason (tight schedule, mealtime, fatique, etc). I ended up with two up sessions, so getting that high was a nice little bonus.

For me anyway, the important part is mentally "spending" that money before starting to play. That's how I budget properly.
 

sagefr0g

Well-Known Member
#18
Alan said:
I'm relatively new to blackjack. I've only played in a casino once and it was a video blackjack (not a live dealer) and I'm wanting to slowly get into it more for recreation. I'm learning basic strategy right now but am not yet ready for counting - I'll wait until I get BS down first. I've played online casinos with free or 'play' money and I've played some simulations.

I'm terrible in that I always want more than I have. When I'm up, I want $5 more, but then I start on a losing streak. I could walk away, but I want to get it up to where it was before first. Or I want to break even. I usually end up with $0.

What strategies are common for knowing what your breaking point, or walk away point is? Assuming a $5 minimum at the table, and $50 or $100 in your pocket. Flat betting all the way. Do you quit at an upper limit? Or is there an ever increasing lower limit that screams at you to leave the table?
woke up in the middle of the night last night (had to pee, i know thats more information than needed). went out on the back porch and had a cigarette. the subject of when to quit was buzzing in my mind. the thought ocurred that knowing when to quit and when to commense play is perhaps the essence of card counting advantage play. nonsense i thought. the thought came back. i started to see some analogies with respect to that nagging question 'when to play and when to quit'. the accepted 'counter culture' saw is play as much as you can, getting in more hands means more opportunities to play at the advantage that is sure to come. when to quit is also covered by if you are too tired to continue, lost your trip bankroll to the point of not having enough in case of double down, split, insurance or opportunity to place your max bet.
the game is just one long haul, a roller coaster ride to the long run point where lo & behold you find you've random drift walked your way to a fortune.
can't argue with that but i sense there is more. so here are the analogies that i percieved in the twilight hours last night:
the very act of employing basic strategy is an attempt to decide when to play when to quit. it's a statistical foray into the future with respect to the likelyhood of events that may or maynot occur. why do want to use basic strategy? it's an issue of control over future events. it gives us a statistical edge in the long run even though basic strategy is a long run loser in all except the best of the single deck games. but the point is basic strategy is a decision tree that in essence helps the gambler to decide not only the best play but in essence when to play (make that crucial move ie. bet up by doubling or splitting) and when to not play (ie. lay back and bet as low as possible).
card counting holds the same analogy as basic strategy. with card counting we again have a statistical edge in the long run even though our ROR may defeat our hopes of reaching the long run. it's still a gamble. but card counting lets us know when to play (ie. make that crucial move by betting up) or when not to play (ie. lay back and bet as low as possible). once again it's an issue of control over future events.
employing our understanding of risk of ruin hold the analogy also. risk of ruin lets us know do we have a sufficient bankroll to play or not play. again contol of what happens to that bankroll in the future is the issue.
wonging in and wonging out? once again we find the same analogy only even stronger. definately a decision of when to play and when to quit. again what are we trying to do? control future events.
so what? really i dunno but i find it interesting. the thing is with the aforementioned advantage play techniques we gain some control and have a really good chance of making knowing when to quit and when to play bring us out ahead. it's a statisical thing. do the statistics rule. not really i should think. after all risk of ruin is a reality. one may be ruined but then again probably not if your ROR is low enough. will one reach ones ev in the long run? probably but not necessarily. the thing is the statistical bell curve we consider our chances by has two infinite sides and we only have a finite life. so what this means is anything can happen not only in the short run but also in the long run. likelyhoods not with standing i sense the issue of when to quit and when to play still holds promise for us in our hopes of exercising more control over future events.:juggle:

best regards,
mr fr0g :D
 

Mikeaber

Well-Known Member
#19
My question is, "Did you pee off the back porch?" :eek:

woke up in the middle of the night last night (had to pee, i know thats more information than needed). went out on the back porch and had a cigarette.
 

sagefr0g

Well-Known Member
#20
Mikeaber said:
My question is, "Did you pee off the back porch?" :eek:

woke up in the middle of the night last night (had to pee, i know thats more information than needed). went out on the back porch and had a cigarette.
:p naaw man i didn't want the cigarette that bad.....

uhmm i did walk into the sliding door plate glass window earlier that evening. darned near broke my snouzer.

best regards,
mr fr0g :D
 
Top