fuzzy count

[sagefr0g]

from:
http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/show...6&postcount=68

Originally Posted by aslan

I suppose this could go on forever...so on to something new...

When you finally get a handle on fuzzy counting, will you still call it fuzzy counting?

no danger in that. don't think i'll ever get a handle on it. maybe reach some skill level if you wanna call it that but i guess by it's nature or the idea of it you can't really get a handle on it.

[aslan]

Originally Posted by sagefr0g

from:
http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/show...6&postcount=68

no danger in that. don't think i'll ever get a handle on it. maybe reach some skill level if you wanna call it that but i guess by it's nature or the idea of it you can't really get a handle on it.

Hmmm! Maybe you should call it instinct. No skill required.

[sagefr0g]

Originally Posted by aslan

Hmmm! Maybe you should call it instinct. No skill required.

lol i thought skill is the whole idea. like shooting a three pointer or turning music notes into music. some kind of pipe dream i guess lol. but i dunno maybe instinct does play a role in all that .
like this cat. can't even tie his own shoes but wow:
http://60minutes.yahoo.com/segment/158/derek

[aslan]

Originally Posted by sagefr0g

lol i thought skill is the whole idea. like shooting a three pointer or turning music notes into music. some kind of pipe dream i guess lol. but i dunno maybe instinct does play a role in all that .
like this cat. can't even tie his own shoes but wow:
http://60minutes.yahoo.com/segment/158/derek

Just seems to me that if it's skill, then it can be acquired, improved and finally mastered, to wit, fuzzy becomes defuzzified and no longer fuzzy, if you get my drift. If on the other hand, like that fisher picture you show, it's instinct...well that opens up a whole new array of possibilities. How about the pianist who can't read music? But from the age of 3 he can sit down and play beautifully. What's that? Do we all have the prodigy hidden somewhere in us? How can we release it? Can we just unconsciously see counting and other clues without engaging our conscious minds so that we know when to hold'em, know when to fold'em? The subconscious is constantly observing, constantly working...maybe it can count and do all kinds of other mental and mathematical gymnastics that we never dreamed of. Maybe we all know when to bet high but the problem is getting in touch with out inner selves so that we can convert that knowledge into action.

It would certainly explain how this kid sitting next to me bets at all the wrong times and quickly runs a few hundred up to six thousand. He hits on seventeen and catches a four. He doubles down on seven against a dealer upcard six and the dealer busts, while he catches a five. His friends tell me that he just sold his computer business for over five hundred million. Money they say is attracted to money. Maybe it's more than what meets the eye.

[sagefr0g]

Originally Posted by aslan

Just seems to me that if it's skill, then it can be acquired, improved and finally mastered, to wit, fuzzy becomes defuzzified and no longer fuzzy, if you get my drift. If on the other hand, like that fisher picture you show, it's instinct...well that opens up a whole new array of possibilities. How about the pianist who can't read music? But from the age of 3 he can sit down and play beautifully. What's that? Do we all have the prodigy hidden somewhere in us? How can we release it? Can we just unconsciously see counting and other clues without engaging our conscious minds so that we know when to hold'em, know when to fold'em? The subconscious is constantly observing, constantly working...maybe it can count and do all kinds of other mental and mathematical gymnastics that we never dreamed of. Maybe we all know when to bet high but the problem is getting in touch with out inner selves so that we can convert that knowledge into action.

It would certainly explain how this kid sitting next to me bets at all the wrong times and quickly runs a few hundred up to six thousand. He hits on seventeen and catches a four. He doubles down on seven against a dealer upcard six and the dealer busts, while he catches a five. His friends tell me that he just sold his computer business for over five hundred million. Money they say is attracted to money. Maybe it's more than what meets the eye.

damm aslan we musta been at the same table and didn't even know it. i seen that kid do all that too! lol. i was sitting right next to him.
but yes what your talking about is i think on a way differant level than what i'm thinkin of when i imagine this fuzzy count thing. but i guess since i don't understand those phenomenon you refer to that it's not out of the realm of possibility that factors like that could be operating. just doesn't seem to have very consistent positive results when i try it lol. but the way i'm thinking of this fuzzy count idea is at this point really just card watching and if said card watcher has in the past been a counter and understands an appropriate card counting game plan then maybe you try and through on some level by the understanding of what you've seen take and try and relate that by kind of mimicing that game plan. trying to i guess really just make some intelligent (but not too intelligent lol) guess as to what the situation is and then taking a gamble on a bet or not. really tricky trying to get a handle on it as your watching the cards over some number of rounds and try and decide is the remaining pack rich to some degree or poor to some degree of aces & tens or low cards. so but i don't know of or haven't even seriously considered trying to tap into some sort of instinctial sort of way like the fishing genet does. really the fishing genet uses more of a wonging technique than i'm able to get away with lol.

[aslan]

Originally Posted by sagefr0g

damm aslan we musta been at the same table and didn't even know it. i seen that kid do all that too! lol. i was sitting right next to him.
but yes what your talking about is i think on a way differant level than what i'm thinkin of when i imagine this fuzzy count thing. but i guess since i don't understand those phenomenon you refer to that it's not out of the realm of possibility that factors like that could be operating. just doesn't seem to have very consistent positive results when i try it lol. but the way i'm thinking of this fuzzy count idea is at this point really just card watching and if said card watcher has in the past been a counter and understands an appropriate card counting game plan then maybe you try and through on some level by the understanding of what you've seen take and try and relate that by kind of mimicing that game plan. trying to i guess really just make some intelligent (but not too intelligent lol) guess as to what the situation is and then taking a gamble on a bet or not. really tricky trying to get a handle on it as your watching the cards over some number of rounds and try and decide is the remaining pack rich to some degree or poor to some degree of aces & tens or low cards. so but i don't know of or haven't even seriously considered trying to tap into some sort of instinctial sort of way like the fishing genet does. really the fishing genet uses more of a wonging technique than i'm able to get away with lol.

That is the best description of fuzzy counting that I've heard so far. But it does seem to be what I would call lazy counting. I mean,

why base betting decisions on I think if my impression is right that there are probably more tens and aces in the remaining undealt cards but I'm really not sure if that is so and if it is I'm really not sure to what degree so it's really very hard to know how much to raise my bet but if my impression is correct and since it is late in the deal and only a few rounds are left it is probably a fairly high positive count so I will spread 8 or 10 times and hope that my impression is right,

when all you have to do is keep the count (second nature after a while) and make the right decisions at the right times and bet the correct proportion of your bankroll that is justified by the well established mathematics of advantage play.

I think what drives your fuzzy counting is the same thing that drives my stubborn refusal to apply the well established principles of wonging in and out. It's more fun to play without all the uncomfortable and hard-work practices of true advantage play. I guess it's a matter of whether one views Blackjack as primarily a business or primarily a pleasurable activity.

I would suggest that if it's the latter, it might be more profitable and just as pleasurable to keep the count but limit the spreading to low multiples or flatbetting. In this way, you will not be faced with the prospect of that demon monster, negative variance, rearing its ugly head when you have maximum bets on the table. It's a fairly carefree, fun way to play blackjack.

[sagefr0g]

Originally Posted by aslan

That is the best description of fuzzy counting that I've heard so far. But it does seem to be what I would call lazy counting. I mean,

why base betting decisions on I think if my impression is right that there are probably more tens and aces in the remaining undealt cards but I'm really not sure if that is so and if it is I'm really not sure to what degree so it's really very hard to know how much to raise my bet but if my impression is correct and since it is late in the deal and only a few rounds are left it is probably a fairly high positive count so I will spread 8 or 10 times and hope that my impression is right,
when all you have to do is keep the count (second nature after a while) and make the right decisions at the right times and bet the correct proportion of your bankroll that is justified by the well established mathematics of advantage play.

yeah, i dunno. it's like what you wrote there brought something out that's been in the deep dark recesses of my mind lol. something to do with the idea of accuracy and effectivness and maybe efficiency and maybe what your goals are and how often one might play, ect.. and maybe something to do with the idea of luck and trying to get some but maybe trying to avoid bad luck as well lol. i think. but what ever it's the idea that say for some hand that you are a favorite to win or even more significantly some hand that you are likely to succeed at a double down or even more significantly some hand that has a good chance at being a blackjack well those are the three goodies that we are all really after. if you can achieve those three things or a couple of them with a good sized bet out well however you did it or achieved it is pretty much a moot point. i mean it doesn't really matter what the count is if you can achieve those three. i mean yeah you gotta have it so that your waiting bets are relatively insignificant to the desireable result of the achievement of those three or some combination of them. but if it happens you don't really care was the true count plus one or plus ten. but if you keep the count and make the right decisions at the right times and bet the correct proportion of your bankroll that is justified by the well established mathematics of advantage play then none of those three can happen with a significant bet out at the wrong time unless you make a mistake. it can happen though with the fuzzy count approach. i guess the point is that with the fuzzy count approach you have the potential to win for the right reasons and for the wrong reasons lol. it's not like your purposely aiming to make it happen. your not saying i'm gonna bet my max at tc=1 instead of tc=4. but it's gonna happen and as far as i know not predictably but more in a random or at least unknown way. let's just say this, let's suppose that with the fuzzy count you can keep it so that only a negligible number of raised bets will ever be made where the true count is zero or less and that further more you can keep it so that the majority of your raised bets fall within the prescripts of some valid bet scenerio of some valid positive advantage simulation. and but yes some very small number of those raised bets are going to fall within a positive true count but not the proper optimal count for that sized bet. and let's say we are betting all this according to some bankroll in some supposedly optimal fashion. but let's also say that bankroll isn't really our bankroll lol but our bankroll is really some higher value roll such that maybe those off bets at the lower tc's could be a proper optimal bet (but we really would prefer not to make those bets at that level). but ok maybe it's gonna happen sometimes with the fuzzy approach. no big deal, nothing life changing and for the most part we are slogging along with the bets tailored for the lower bankroll that we're really most comfortable with. so yeah the ride might be a bit wilder up or down. but maybe in the long run not so catostrophic. lol i dunno just speculating here. this is the voodoo forum right?

Originally Posted by aslan

I think what drives your fuzzy counting is the same thing that drives my stubborn refusal to apply the well established principles of wonging in and out. It's more fun to play without all the uncomfortable and hard-work practices of true advantage play. I guess it's a matter of whether one views Blackjack as primarily a business or primarily a pleasurable activity.

I would suggest that if it's the latter, it might be more profitable and just as pleasurable to keep the count but limit the spreading to low multiples or flatbetting. In this way, you will not be faced with the prospect of that demon monster, negative variance, rearing its ugly head when you have maximum bets on the table. It's a fairly carefree, fun way to play blackjack.

lol you got it aslan. all i wanna do is have my cake and eat it too lol. you know score a free lunch. lol.
but yeah i mean the counting thing while flat betting and playing matrices doesn't sound so bad. so what would you think of that with firing out a few bigger bets here and there maybe?

[blackjack avenger]

I swear I still can't figure out if reading your posts makes me stoned or I need to be stoned to read your posts

Sure there are savants. However, don't worry I am not one and neither are you. If you were you would not have to work at being fuzzy. My friends say I stagger around with a fuzzy look on my face anyway. What is more likely to happen for us of just below average intellect is if we do something long enough it becomes second nature. Then it becomes counting without counting. An olympic gymnast first thinks about their routine a lot but once mastered there is no thought at all.

seeing without thinking
not thinking while calm
calm while seeing

when you can snatch this pebble from my hand you are ready.

[aslan]

Originally Posted by sagefr0g

yeah, i dunno. it's like what you wrote there brought something out that's been in the deep dark recesses of my mind lol. something to do with the idea of accuracy and effectivness and maybe efficiency and maybe what your goals are and how often one might play, ect.. and maybe something to do with the idea of luck and trying to get some but maybe trying to avoid bad luck as well lol. i think. but what ever it's the idea that say for some hand that you are a favorite to win or even more significantly some hand that you are likely to succeed at a double down or even more significantly some hand that has a good chance at being a blackjack well those are the three goodies that we are all really after. if you can achieve those three things or a couple of them with a good sized bet out well however you did it or achieved it is pretty much a moot point. i mean it doesn't really matter what the count is if you can achieve those three. i mean yeah you gotta have it so that your waiting bets are relatively insignificant to the desireable result of the achievement of those three or some combination of them. but if it happens you don't really care was the true count plus one or plus ten. but if you keep the count and make the right decisions at the right times and bet the correct proportion of your bankroll that is justified by the well established mathematics of advantage play then none of those three can happen with a significant bet out at the wrong time unless you make a mistake. it can happen though with the fuzzy count approach. i guess the point is that with the fuzzy count approach you have the potential to win for the right reasons and for the wrong reasons lol. it's not like your purposely aiming to make it happen. your not saying i'm gonna bet my max at tc=1 instead of tc=4. but it's gonna happen and as far as i know not predictably but more in a random or at least unknown way. let's just say this, let's suppose that with the fuzzy count you can keep it so that only a negligible number of raised bets will ever be made where the true count is zero or less and that further more you can keep it so that the majority of your raised bets fall within the prescripts of some valid bet scenerio of some valid positive advantage simulation. and but yes some very small number of those raised bets are going to fall within a positive true count but not the proper optimal count for that sized bet. and let's say we are betting all this according to some bankroll in some supposedly optimal fashion. but let's also say that bankroll isn't really our bankroll lol but our bankroll is really some higher value roll such that maybe those off bets at the lower tc's could be a proper optimal bet (but we really would prefer not to make those bets at that level). but ok maybe it's gonna happen sometimes with the fuzzy approach. no big deal, nothing life changing and for the most part we are slogging along with the bets tailored for the lower bankroll that we're really most comfortable with. so yeah the ride might be a bit wilder up or down. but maybe in the long run not so catostrophic. lol i dunno just speculating here. this is the voodoo forum right?

There's something in all of us I think that just wants to be lucky. I don't know where it comes from--do we think maybe we're a special person--the exception to the rule--or somebody up there likes us--or why not me--or someone's going to get lucky, might as well be me--or Lord please send me this one--or good things happen to good people--or whatever, people seem to think they are different form the others and luck should come their way. Maybe it comes from all those dumb movies we were reared with where the good cowboy always gets four aces, James Bond always gets his man and wins at baccarat, roulette, and poker to boot, and all our heroes just seem to have an endless supply of that positive variance stuff. I understand fully what you said above, and you said it yourself, after pointing out that even when you count and bet perfectly, you will not always win, but with fuzzy counting "it's gonna happen and as far as i know not predictably but more in a random or at least unknown way." You are hoping that by fuzzy counting you might miss those instances where perfect counting still loses, and fall into those happy times when perfect counting indeed does win. In other words, you're hoping to get lucky, but the fact remains, you have a much higher chance of being unlucky when you do it this way, since you not only have an equal chance of randomly hitting all the losers as you do of hitting all the winners, but to compound your bad luck, you will not even be sure that the count justifies a larger bet, or what the bet should be, win or lose. I think you are deliberately stacking the cards against yourself. Lol

Originally Posted by sagefr0g

lol you got it aslan. all i wanna do is have my cake and eat it too lol. you know score a free lunch. lol.
but yeah i mean the counting thing while flat betting and playing matrices doesn't sound so bad. so what would you think of that with firing out a few bigger bets here and there maybe?

I think this is better than the first paragraph in that you are not risking as much, but then to get your kicks you throw a few bigger bets out there to see if you can get lucky. The easiest way of course to get lucky is to play it by the book, because we all know that the luck factor will yield to the house edge in the long run. You've got gamble, and you are expressing some deep-seated need to test your luck, to be Ken Maynard with a ten gallon hat and the inevitable four aces perhaps--I'm no psychoanalyst--I can't even figure myself out. Lol But gambling is fun, who doesn't like to do it, and at least you know that if anything good is going to happen it is more likely to happen when the count is in plus territory, so you're not completely throwing caution to the winds, although you do seem to be trying to throw what certain edge you do have to the winds while at the same time hoping it comes back to you. Lol All I can say is, "Good luck!"

[aslan]

Originally Posted by blackjack avenger

I swear I still can't figure out if reading your posts makes me stoned or I need to be stoned to read your posts

Sure there are savants. However, don't worry I am not one and neither are you. If you were you would not have to work at being fuzzy. My friends say I stagger around with a fuzzy look on my face anyway. What is more likely to happen for us of just below average intellect is if we do something long enough it becomes second nature. Then it becomes counting without counting. An olympic gymnast first thinks about their routine a lot but once mastered there is no thought at all.

seeing without thinking
not thinking while calm
calm while seeing

when you can snatch this pebble from my hand you are ready.

Is that you, Grasshopper?