Keeping it simple

pogostick

Well-Known Member
#1
I have been counting a few yrs now & started out with running count which wore me out . +1 m1 +2 - 3 . Now I wait to the end of deal & just say + or min . For ex Q2 JK A3 10-9 4-4 K5 A7 . Now I just say m 7 +5 m-2 which works for me. I am thinking about changing the way I advance my bets . Instead of waiting for that magic + C to advance , I am going to keep it simple & bet 1unit at all min C & 2 units at all + C no matter how many decks. I figure in the long run this will pay off & keep the PB in check. I am just trying to keep it simple. Feed back will be appreciated ,but no ass kicking PLEASE!! POGO
 

Sucker

Well-Known Member
#2
This will certainly keep the PC in check. :)

But if your intent is to actually win MONEY, you're just going to have to suck it in and do it the hard way. The strategy you're describing will NOT win money in the long run, but will only succeed in losing LESS money than a basic strategy player will.
 

FLASH1296

Well-Known Member
#3
wake up.

You can seek "advantage" or you can "gamble"

You cannot do both.

The former is "work".

The latter is "entertainment"
 

paddywhack

Well-Known Member
#4
Well put

FLASH1296 said:
You can seek "advantage" or you can "gamble"

You cannot do both.

The former is "work".

The latter is "entertainment"


Well put Flash!! :grin:

With that 1-2 spread you'll find yourself losing even more money than flat betting. So unless you put out the effort to bet to your advantage you might as well just flat bet it. Or forget playing at all....that's the least costly option.

paddy
 

caramel6

Well-Known Member
#5
paddywhack said:
Well put Flash!! :grin:

With that 1-2 spread you'll find yourself losing even more money than flat betting. So unless you put out the effort to bet to your advantage you might as well just flat bet it. Or forget playing at all....that's the least costly option.

paddy
Dear senior counters! A question: Hi Low gives a player efficiency, isn,t it? Not big, but still...
Why not to place a flat bet (a relatively big one, in a proportion with a bankroll, of course ) all the time when there is a TC 3 or more?

Another thing, I noticed that it works better if there is max 3 boxes open (including mine). Is it a ploppy thinking or there is something in it?
 

assume_R

Well-Known Member
#6
caramel6 said:
Why not to place a flat bet (a relatively big one, in a proportion with a bankroll, of course ) all the time when there is a TC 3 or more?
Only playing when the TC is greater than 3, will indeed give you an advantage. It's called wonging (wonging in when the count gets to +3, and wonging out out when the count drops below +3). Approximately 2% of your "flat bet" is what you will win, on average, per hand. Not optimal or lucrative, but still profitable.
 

caramel6

Well-Known Member
#7
assume_R said:
Only playing when the TC is greater than 3, will indeed give you an advantage. It's called wonging (wonging in when the count gets to +3, and wonging out out when the count drops below +3). Approximately 2% of your "flat bet" is what you will win, on average, per hand. Not optimal or lucrative, but still profitable.
O,key, but what about player efficiency? If I am supposed to win 6 out of 10 times, why just not to put a flat bet and that is it? (only if TC3)?

No one can win forever, so jusy put a target per day or per session and go home , when it is achieved?

If I have an advantage, looks like no losing game (of course, on a long run)

Another thing, is it true that TC 3 and more works best when not more than 3 boxes opened?
 

FLASH1296

Well-Known Member
#8
Sorry to be the bearer of ill tidings, but ...

Firstly, understand that you may only get 10 or 15 hands per hour, waiting for +3.
Betting a mean hand of $75 will have your expectation somewhere around Minimum Wage !

If you deliver pizza or trim lawns you may do better than that, without the specter of "going broke".

By flat-betting BIG on all hands that are T.C. +3, your "Risk of Ruin" may become so ginormous
that you will need a bankroll that is perhaps 5 or 120 or 20 times what you imagine you need..

Remember that a Hi-Lo T C of +3, depending on the rules, will mean that you will have about a 1% advantage; and that is if the rules are good.
You will do close to 2% because of higher True Counts. That is quite good, but it hardly means that you are a cinch to win.

In fact you'll be lucky to win > 45 % of your hands at that T.C.

Someone ought to mention that you are using the term "playing efficiency" completely wrong.
It is defined as the correlation that a particular counting system has with correctly directing you to deviate from Basic Strategy.
It is most often mentioned alongside of Betting correlation and Insurance correlation.

By now you are correct in inferring that we (collectively) are suggesting you know quite little about playing "21"

My advice to you is to forestall any further casino action, until you actually study the game. Yes, I am aware that that means actually reading, reviewing, practicing, and memorizing.
 

caramel6

Well-Known Member
#9
FLASH1296 said:
Firstly, understand that you may only get 10 or 15 hands per hour, waiting for +3.
Betting a mean hand of $75 will have your expectation somewhere around Minimum Wage !

If you deliver pizza or trim lawns you may do better than that, without the specter of "going broke".

By flat-betting BIG on all hands that are T.C. +3, your "Risk of Ruin" may become so ginormous
that you will need a bankroll that is perhaps 5 or 120 or 20 times what you imagine you need..

Remember that a Hi-Lo T C of +3, depending on the rules, will mean that you will have about a 1% advantage; and that is if the rules are good.
You will do close to 2% because of higher True Counts. That is quite good, but it hardly means that you are a cinch to win.

In fact you'll be lucky to win > 45 % of your hands at that T.C.

Someone ought to mention that you are using the term "playing efficiency" completely wrong.
It is defined as the correlation that a particular counting system has with correctly directing you to deviate from Basic Strategy.
It is most often mentioned alongside of Betting correlation and Insurance correlation.

By now you are correct in inferring that we (collectively) are suggesting you know quite little about playing "21"

My advice to you is to forestall any further casino action, until you actually study the game. Yes, I am aware that that means actually reading, reviewing, practicing, and memorizing.
Not get it, sorry. Why I need a bigger bankroll, if I would play only in a TC counts? If I am up 23 units of 50 (if I am lucky for a good double, than better, got money and stop till the next day.

Most difficult part is to wait for a good conditions, take time, but you suggested , it happens 10 15 hand per hour, so 3 hours, 200 quid ... and till the next time?

O key, bad variance might strike, then take it as it is, take a loss, and come next day or next session?

Sorry to be naive, I have won from February couple of grand wonging.I try to spend as less as I can time in a casino.There are bad days, of course, but good ones happen much more often so far.

After all, why it should be otherwise, if I am playing only on TC3 and higher?
 

FLASH1296

Well-Known Member
#10

Having a 0.5% or 1.0% edge means far far less than you apparently think it does.

The problem lies with your failure to grasp what I am posting, and is probably attributable

to a basic language problem;as it appears that English is other than your primary language.

That compounds the problem, especially as most (worthwhile) blackjack texts are published only in English.



*****************************************​
 

caramel6

Well-Known Member
#11
English is not my mothertongue, I live in an English speaking country for a while,I much appreciate your kind advice, may I ask you please , this advantage of 1 percent or so is an advantage counters try to get, isn, it?

A friend of mine, counter, member of this forum , suggested, that if play when TC 3 player winnig 6-7 times out of 10 in a long run.It was confirmed by quite reputable counter from this site.

What is your opinion and opinion others?
 

Nynefingers

Well-Known Member
#12
caramel6 said:
A friend of mine, counter, member of this forum , suggested, that if play when TC 3 player winning 6-7 times out of 10 in a long run.It was confirmed by quite reputable counter from this site.
This is simply incorrect. Even if playing only at TC +3 and above, you will still lose more hands than you win. That is balanced by the fact that you win more on doubles, splits, and blackjacks, so you do in fact have an edge. But if your average edge is 2%, that means over the long term you will win 2% of each bet. If you are able to bet 10-15 hands per hour, then you should expect to win approximately 20-30% of a bet per hour. That means if your bet size is $75, you will make about $15/hr with a standard deviation of perhaps $300 per hour (I'm estimating here). That requires a $9000 bankroll in order to have a 5% Risk of Ruin. You can get the same results with normal counting in a game with a SCORE of 25, and most people would consider a SCORE of 25 to be unplayable.

Your plan will be profitable in the long run, but the variance is too high for the profit you will expect to make, in my opinion. Even if you wish to wong heavily, you should still spread your bets depending on your edge. I haven't studied wonging bet spreads, but I would guess something like betting a number of units equal to the true count minus one (meaning bet 1 at TC=+2, 2 at TC=+3, etc.) would probably be fine. Your unit size here would be somewhat bigger than if you were playing all. Making an educated guess, I'd say that a bankroll of 400 units would give you an RoR of around 5% with this approach, but that's based on a lot of assumptions. We can give you more accurate numbers with more details on your game. But the bottom line is that any approach that involves flat betting, even if you only bet when you have an edge, is going to be suboptimal. If you are doing the work required to keep the count, why throw that information away when it comes time to bet?
 

FLASH1296

Well-Known Member
#13
" … this advantage of 1 percent or so is an advantage counters try to get, isn't it?

There is no magic number that we "try to get.".
1% is just fairly realistic, but it varies a great deal.

Would you rather 0.5% with an average bet of $200 on 100 hands per hour, for a projected average profit of $100 per hour OR win 2% with an average bet of $300 but only 15 hands per hour, for a projected average profit of $90 per hour ?


A friend of mine, counter, member of this forum , suggested, that if play when TC 3 player winnig 6-7 times out of 10 in a long run.It was confirmed by quite reputable counter from this site.

You are confusing the meaning of "6-7 out of 10"

That means that you will win ⅔ of your sessions, not ⅔'s of your hands played.

Do you understand now where your error came from ?
 

caramel6

Well-Known Member
#14
sorry for a possible ploppy attitude, all what I want is to get 150-200 per day in a TC 3 and above.No matter, doublings-splittings win or straight win.

Try to spend as little time as possible in a casino, as long sessions make me no good (tiredness, crowd et cetera).

When win 2 -3 units, go home and come back next day. I realise nothing change in cards, if going home and back, but it is easier for me to count in this way and feel more confident., after all me are not robots and my mood is very important.

Would you agree that wonging works better , if not more than 3 boxes open?
for me it obviously a matter of fact.
 

caramel6

Well-Known Member
#15
Nynefingers said:
This is simply incorrect. Even if playing only at TC +3 and above, you will still lose more hands than you win. That is balanced by the fact that you win more on doubles, splits, and blackjacks, so you do in fact have an edge. But if your average edge is 2%, that means over the long term you will win 2% of each bet. If you are able to bet 10-15 hands per hour, then you should expect to win approximately 20-30% of a bet per hour. That means if your bet size is $75, you will make about $15/hr with a standard deviation of perhaps $300 per hour (I'm estimating here). That requires a $9000 bankroll in order to have a 5% Risk of Ruin. You can get the same results with normal counting in a game with a SCORE of 25, and most people would consider a SCORE of 25 to be unplayable.

Your plan will be profitable in the long run, but the variance is too high for the profit you will expect to make, in my opinion. Even if you wish to wong heavily, you should still spread your bets depending on your edge. I haven't studied wonging bet spreads, but I would guess something like betting a number of units equal to the true count minus one (meaning bet 1 at TC=+2, 2 at TC=+3, etc.) would probably be fine. Your unit size here would be somewhat bigger than if you were playing all. Making an educated guess, I'd say that a bankroll of 400 units would give you an RoR of around 5% with this approach, but that's based on a lot of assumptions. We can give you more accurate numbers with more details on your game. But the bottom line is that any approach that involves flat betting, even if you only bet when you have an edge, is going to be suboptimal. If you are doing the work required to keep the count, why throw that information away when it comes time to bet?
because would better igmore TC 1 and 2 to try to get better chances.Hvae loads of patience.
 

FLASH1296

Well-Known Member
#16
caramel6 …

You may be severely confused as to just how difficult it will be for you to be
able to find empty seats when a +3 True Count or better is available to you.

A seeming contradiction is found in your posting, where you state:

"Try to spend as little time as possible in a casino"

If you can get 15 hands per hour at +3 (A liberal estimate) then
you will need to play a LOT of hours. Perhaps 10−15 hrs. daily.
 

caramel6

Well-Known Member
#17
FLASH1296 said:
caramel6 …

You may be severely confused as to just how difficult it will be for you to be
able to find empty seats when a +3 True Count or better is available to you.

A seeming contradiction is found in your posting, where you state:

"Try to spend as little time as possible in a casino"

If you can get 15 hands per hour at +3 (A liberal estimate) then
you will need to play a LOT of hours. Perhaps 10−15 hrs. daily.

Thanks for advice, may I ask you please , I noticed , that wonging better works when max 3 boxes opened (including my box), is it correct?
 

caramel6

Well-Known Member
#18
FLASH1296 said:
" … this advantage of 1 percent or so is an advantage counters try to get, isn't it?

There is no magic number that we "try to get.".
1% is just fairly realistic, but it varies a great deal.

Would you rather 0.5% with an average bet of $200 on 100 hands per hour, for a projected average profit of $100 per hour OR win 2% with an average bet of $300 but only 15 hands per hour, for a projected average profit of $90 per hour ?


A friend of mine, counter, member of this forum , suggested, that if play when TC 3 player winnig 6-7 times out of 10 in a long run.It was confirmed by quite reputable counter from this site.

You are confusing the meaning of "6-7 out of 10"

That means that you will win ⅔ of your sessions, not ⅔'s of your hands played.

Do you understand now where your error came from ?
yes, however, how long a session should last? Can I limit session till I win a unit and stop when I am up, for example?
 

FLASH1296

Well-Known Member
#20
… I noticed that wonging better works when max 3 boxes opened (including my box), is it correct?

NO it is NOT correct.

ANY time that YOU have the advantage, the fewer the players the better it is for you.

So … 3 players is better than 4 or 5, but 2 is better than 3 and playing alone is always best.

I know Pro Players who will NOT play with even one other player at the table.

“ … how long a session should last? Can I limit session till I win a unit and stop when I am up.”

Presuming that there are no issues of “heat”, fatigue, etc. There is NO optimal time to STOP.
IF you have an advantage, play until you are no longer physically comfortable or mentally alert.
Thinking that it is somehow to your advantage to simply stop because you are
winning OR losing any amount is self-destructive. Do NOT do it.
In other words, (that you may better understand), it is a very very bad idea.
It will result in many sessions where you will have a tiny profit
and some other sessions where your losses will be very large.
 
Top