Blackjack and Card Counting Forums - BlackjackInfo.com


Go Back   Blackjack and Card Counting Forums - BlackjackInfo.com > Blackjack Forums > Blackjack - Voodoo Betting Strategies

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old November 26th, 2011, 02:34 PM
ringlejames ringlejames is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 166
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackjack avenger View Post
with kelly betting in the real world one faces a ror due to table min. If one bets fractional kelly the ror is greatly reduced.
comparing kelly to fractional kelly yes your ror is greater. But with what he suggested he WOULD have a lower ROR

Last edited by ringlejames; November 26th, 2011 at 02:43 PM.
  #12  
Old November 26th, 2011, 02:40 PM
blackjack avenger's Avatar
blackjack avenger blackjack avenger is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,267
Default your lacking some understanding

Quote:
Originally Posted by ringlejames View Post
YES YOU HAVE THE ADVANTAGE

AND YES IT IS A GOOD IDEA

AND YES IT IS AMAZING COVER FOR WONGING



I personally dont know what these jokers are talking about.

Yes you have an advantage using a 1-4 martingale bet spread. I am guessing it is 1,2,4,8, bet spread???

Its stupidity like this that has not moved this game forward.

Probably more profitable even than normal bet spreading.

But of course it is not as profitable as betting max on all TC's +2 or higher wonging

although maxbet wonging at all counts does have a higher ROR

And I am quite sure that playing like you suggested has a lower ROR THAN ALL OTHER FORUMS OF WONGING IN... BUT I COULD BE WRONG
The concept of risk vs reward
This system at times will have you betting upside down in relation to count, which is bad and why you think its excellent camo. It's not sound play.
A martingale is betting that is not based on actual advantage
Regardless when you do it
We try not to use personal attacks
  #13  
Old November 26th, 2011, 02:42 PM
ringlejames ringlejames is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 166
Default

  #14  
Old November 26th, 2011, 11:24 PM
AussiePlayer AussiePlayer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 295
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ringlejames View Post
AND YES IT IS AMAZING COVER FOR WONGING
There's a reason it is amazing cover, it doesn't work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ringlejames View Post
BUT I COULD BE WRONG
Stranger things have happened!
  #15  
Old November 27th, 2011, 11:05 AM
QFIT's Avatar
QFIT QFIT is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NO LONGER HERE
Posts: 2,884
Default

Obviously, larger font sizes do not confer veracity.
  #16  
Old November 27th, 2011, 01:11 PM
ringlejames ringlejames is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 166
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by QFIT View Post
Obviously, larger font sizes do not confer veracity.
Obviously, larger font sizes do not convey sarcasm. Or is it just typed words period.
  #17  
Old November 27th, 2011, 03:57 PM
Midnightblues Midnightblues is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 16
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zerg View Post
1.) Your advantage on any given hand would be best estimated by the count. You are best off Kelly betting according to your advantage. If you base your bet based on Martingale, you will be worse off. For example, your system was "When TC >=2 martingale up to 4X, when TC 1 or lower sit out." You would be playing with a statistical advantage. If your bankroll were large enough you would win long term. I would guess your results would be similar to flat betting 1.5 units when TC>=2. *Note that you could easily improve (win more money in the same amount of time with less risk) using this with this ramp: TC 2 - 1 unit, TC 3 - 2 units, TC 4 - 3 units, TC 5 - 4 units.

2.) I would use the word "skew" to describe your results. If you do a classic Martingale, you will have many small wins and few catastrophic losses. With your 3 level betting system you probably wouldn't notice much of a difference though.

Zerg,

So, basically the martingale with a statistical advantage isn't a "losing" strategy, but it simply isn't the optimal strategy and therefore not the best is basically what I am getting.

Thanks for the answer and explanation. It is sometimes difficult to get an answer around here without rude/arrogant comments with it. For that, I appreciate it. Information like this is why I post on here before trying anything "new" out.
  #18  
Old November 27th, 2011, 06:00 PM
Zerg Zerg is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 44
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midnightblues View Post
So, basically the martingale with a statistical advantage isn't a "losing" strategy, but it simply isn't the optimal strategy and therefore not the best is basically what I am getting.
This is a good summary, certainly true for the low spread example you gave. The main thing to watch out for is over betting. I think that is the only way you can be an expected long term loser if you are playing a +EV game.

Quote:
It is sometimes difficult to get an answer around here without rude/arrogant comments with it. For that, I appreciate it. Information like this is why I post on here before trying anything "new" out.
You are welcome . Though many disagree, I think threads like this are helpful. When you take time to think about why a system will or will not work it really helps with the overall understanding of the game.
  #19  
Old November 27th, 2011, 06:17 PM
QFIT's Avatar
QFIT QFIT is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NO LONGER HERE
Posts: 2,884
Default

NO. It is an extremely poor strategy with a huge risk of ruin. We are in the Voodoo forum. It is called Voodoo for a reason. Don't read posts in a forum which has clearly been reserved for bad ideas. If this was a medical site, would you read posts in the forum called "Voodoo?"

Sorry if some of us come off as sarcastic. Consider what it is like answering the same questions for decades. Martingale doesn't work -- period. How many times has that been stated in the century since it was first invented?
  #20  
Old November 27th, 2011, 11:57 PM
zengrifter's Avatar
zengrifter zengrifter is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 10,532
Default

Using the negative progression to camo the bet raising works well in certain circumstances and its no more voodoo than to raise bets in +EV counts under guise of a parlay, which many or most counters do to varying extent and has been advocated since the beginning by virtually all experts as a camo tactic.

I actually prefer a quasi martingale in a +EV because it can be made to look more reckless and emotional. zg
 

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 04:01 PM.


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