Blackjack and Card Counting Forums - BlackjackInfo.com

  #21  
Old November 22nd, 2011, 07:13 PM
leatherguyray leatherguyray is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Tuttle Oklahoma
Posts: 46
Default I'm confused

Quote:
Originally Posted by SBT View Post
Kewljason, yes, I was considering a voodoo strategy. I was considering raising my bet by one unit each time that I lost a hand. If one wins by the sixth bet progression, you are not behind in total losses. But one cannot protect oneself from randomness. Even though it is only a 2% likelihood of losing six hands in a row, thatís still risky. I would probably only try this system at $5 table, and only when the count was not low.
I wish I were as smart as so many who post at this site, but I am not. However, my question is a curiosity. If you were playing a nickle bet and did, as you suggested, raise your bet one unit with each loss through six losses, how would you have recovered your losses? Five losses would total $75 and the sixth bet of $30 would not negate all that loss. Hardly half unless in my ignorance I am missing something.
  #22  
Old November 22nd, 2011, 07:24 PM
tthree tthree is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leatherguyray View Post
I wish I were as smart as so many who post at this site, but I am not. However, my question is a curiosity. If you were playing a nickle bet and did, as you suggested, raise your bet one unit with each loss through six losses, how would you have recovered your losses? Five losses would total $75 and the sixth bet of $30 would not negate all that loss. Hardly half unless in my ignorance I am missing something.
I noticed that too but assumed he actually meant double after each lose. What did you mean OP?
  #23  
Old November 23rd, 2011, 04:04 AM
SBT SBT is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Northeast
Posts: 18
Default

Responding to icountntrack, I see what you mean that when one is about to be dealt the 5th hand (after say losing four in a row), the probability of loss is the same as when you are dealt the first hand. However, are you saying that it makes no sense to consider runs of losses? Certainly it is more probable that one will win or lose two hands in a row than they will win or lose 50 hands in a row. Or am I missing something here?

Leatherguyray, if I start out betting $10, then raise one unit to $20 on the next bet, and win, I have regained my first betís win as well as winning the second. If I lose the second hand and then raise my bet to $30 and win, I have not come out ahead, but I have recovered the bets of all three hands. If I lose the third hand and then bet $40, and win, I am then even with a flat betting scheme, having lost as much as I would have (2 units overall) from flat betting with losing three followed by a win. I should have said in my earlier post that things begin to go into losses greater than flat betting at the fifth bet progression. Thanks for recognizing and pointing out my math error, Leatherguyray and tthree!

My thought process when I was considering this system -- I was assuming that losing two or three in a row is much more likely than losing more than losing five or more in a row, thus one would recover oneís bets at a higher rate. Also, as one raises oneís bet, blackjacks pay more. However, if you get a streak of losing hands, then you go into much greater losses with this system, so itís risky. I havenít tried this yet, but was just considering it. Also, my local casino has surrender, which would reduce the risk somewhat.
  #24  
Old November 23rd, 2011, 07:31 AM
21gunsalute 21gunsalute is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Area 51
Posts: 1,144
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SBT View Post
Responding to icountntrack, I see what you mean that when one is about to be dealt the 5th hand (after say losing four in a row), the probability of loss is the same as when you are dealt the first hand. However, are you saying that it makes no sense to consider runs of losses? Certainly it is more probable that one will win or lose two hands in a row than they will win or lose 50 hands in a row. Or am I missing something here?

Leatherguyray, if I start out betting $10, then raise one unit to $20 on the next bet, and win, I have regained my first betís win as well as winning the second. If I lose the second hand and then raise my bet to $30 and win, I have not come out ahead, but I have recovered the bets of all three hands. If I lose the third hand and then bet $40, and win, I am then even with a flat betting scheme, having lost as much as I would have (2 units overall) from flat betting with losing three followed by a win. I should have said in my earlier post that things begin to go into losses greater than flat betting at the fifth bet progression. Thanks for recognizing and pointing out my math error, Leatherguyray and tthree!

My thought process when I was considering this system -- I was assuming that losing two or three in a row is much more likely than losing more than losing five or more in a row, thus one would recover oneís bets at a higher rate. Also, as one raises oneís bet, blackjacks pay more. However, if you get a streak of losing hands, then you go into much greater losses with this system, so itís risky. I havenít tried this yet, but was just considering it. Also, my local casino has surrender, which would reduce the risk somewhat.
Well, you have to lose 2 or 3 in a row before you get to 50 in a row, but the problem is you don't know how long of a streak you're going to have to endure before your streak actually ends. You may have only lost 2 or 3 in a row at a given point but you don't know if the streak is going to end on the next hand or 12-15 hands down the road. What you're considering doing is still a negative progression and it still will not work in the long run.
  #25  
Old November 23rd, 2011, 07:36 AM
iCountNTrack's Avatar
iCountNTrack iCountNTrack is offline
ChemMeister
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 780
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SBT View Post
Responding to icountntrack, I see what you mean that when one is about to be dealt the 5th hand (after say losing four in a row), the probability of loss is the same as when you are dealt the first hand. However, are you saying that it makes no sense to consider runs of losses? Certainly it is more probable that one will win or lose two hands in a row than they will win or lose 50 hands in a row. Or am I missing something here?
Yes it is more probable to lose one hand in a row than to lose 50 hands in a row, but how is that useful to you, as you agree with me the probability of losing on the hand you are just about to play is not affected by previous results
  #26  
Old November 23rd, 2011, 10:12 AM
sagefr0g's Avatar
sagefr0g sagefr0g is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,141
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by iCountNTrack View Post
Yes it is more probable to lose one hand in a row than to lose 50 hands in a row, but how is that useful to you, as you agree with me the probability of losing on the hand you are just about to play is not affected by previous results
it seems a paradox, but i suspect it's really not, as would be true in all things, i suppose. maybe even quantum mechanics?. really more a matter of cognition than physics, albeit both attributes may or may not be involved.
perhaps an analogy, albeit an imperfect one would suffice. such as we think we have two types of forces, gravity & electromagnetism. which is 'stronger'? which seems 'stronger'? foolin around with a magnet & paper clip, maybe one would think gravity is stronger than magnetism, but certain academics like to say that magnetic 'force' is many orders stronger than gravitational 'force'.
here's one of many i don't know. which force is stronger, the gravitational 'pull" of a black hole, or the pull of a magnet on a paper clip? if two equal strength black holes could latch on to two magnets, could they pull the magnets apart? lol
could the apparent strength of either ever over come that of the other, errhh i mean the gravity or magnetism? lol
whatever, icnt, i think your question is really just a matter of cognition. no?
  #27  
Old November 23rd, 2011, 11:56 AM
blackjack avenger's Avatar
blackjack avenger blackjack avenger is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,267
Lightbulb a cooler froggie

Quote:
Originally Posted by sagefr0g View Post
it seems a paradox, but i suspect it's really not, as would be true in all things, i suppose. maybe even quantum mechanics?. really more a matter of cognition than physics, albeit both attributes may or may not be involved.
perhaps an analogy, albeit an imperfect one would suffice. such as we think we have two types of forces, gravity & electromagnetism. which is 'stronger'? which seems 'stronger'? foolin around with a magnet & paper clip, maybe one would think gravity is stronger than magnetism, but certain academics like to say that magnetic 'force' is many orders stronger than gravitational 'force'.
here's one of many i don't know. which force is stronger, the gravitational 'pull" of a black hole, or the pull of a magnet on a paper clip? if two equal strength black holes could latch on to two magnets, could they pull the magnets apart? lol
could the apparent strength of either ever over come that of the other, errhh i mean the gravity or magnetism? lol
whatever, icnt, i think your question is really just a matter of cognition. no?
Err Ummm
Fractional Kelly, seems I am a one trick pony

Dang guberment

I was thinking black hole also

Also, as soon as I read the OP
I thought ptogression!

I like the old avatar, other was scary
  #28  
Old November 23rd, 2011, 02:28 PM
sagefr0g's Avatar
sagefr0g sagefr0g is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,141
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackjack avenger View Post
Err Ummm
Fractional Kelly, seems I am a one trick pony
it's a sweet one though a'int it? just gotta have a nice big roll though, maybe?
Quote:
Dang guberment
heh, heh, do we even have one?
Quote:
I was thinking black hole also
hmmm, maybe in another context? such as a progression sucking up all ones loot?
but anyway, OP needs to know there is such a thing as situational plays. ie. Dubey's stuff, weak as it may be.
Quote:
Also, as soon as I read the OP
I thought ptogression!
yup, question is, is that all bad, is a progression ever of any value? we all know they will eventually hose you.
Quote:
I like the old avatar, other was scary
zg would call it ' shape shifting'
  #29  
Old November 23rd, 2011, 08:35 PM
blackjack avenger's Avatar
blackjack avenger blackjack avenger is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,267
Default a short long run

Quote:
Originally Posted by sagefr0g View Post
it's a sweet one though a'int it? just gotta have a nice big roll though, maybe?
Isn't it how you get the big roll? By staying in the game with fractional Kelly?
  #30  
Old November 23rd, 2011, 08:50 PM
SBT SBT is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Northeast
Posts: 18
Default

Responders seem to be saying that progressions are a terrible idea. Since you all have been doing this pursuit longer than I have, I will take your word for it. Also, the research I have been doing shows that it canít be a winning system over time.

Regarding the probability of losing a certain number of hands in a row, this still remains a ponderable issue to me. If a coin is flipped five times, it is true that none of the outcomes has any bearing on subsequent ones. However, the likelihood of at least one tail appearing in five flips is greater than zero tails, if a simulation were conducted of millions of series of five flips. But the random nature of blackjack hands means that a player cannot predict when he/she will have three losses, or ten, or fifteen in row, even if three successive losses is a more likely scenario than fifteen. This is the relevant factor I think icountntrack was referring to, and which makes progressive betting too risky.
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:45 AM.


Forum Software vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005-2011 Bayview Strategies LLC