Successful, Conservative Play

[Buzzer]

I have been successfully playing BJ for about 10 years, more seriously for the past 3 years, and very seriously for the last 7 months. I have faithfully kept a log of all my play for the past three years.

I have not been in an overall negative position since I started my log. I won $300.00 the first time, been up and down from there but never dropped back to zero.

First off, I should mention my counting. I learned the Hi-opt system but found it was too much work. I have just used a basic watch of the cards to determine if they are positive or negative.

I have basic stategy totally memorized for both 8 deck and 2 deck play.

When really negative I leave - unless there are few hands left before the shuffle. A slight negative I ignore, but keep my bet to a minimum.

I have no problem leaving before a "streak" has ended. If the remaining cards are really negative I leave - even if I just won five hands in a row. This really takes discipline (and I have failed at this more than once)!

When positive I bet 1.25 to 1.5 times my normal bet.

My lower level play ($10-$15/hand) netted me about $7,500 over 2 1/2 years (72 sessions). This year I decided to try higher stakes with more favorable advantage ($100-$150/hand). After 80 sessions (7 months), I am up another $25,000 plus.

Does anyone else use a conservative betting strategy like this? My concern about the ones I see here is that they can produce huge swings in your bankroll - I hate losing! The other problem I see is that with 5X your basic bet you may be in a "super loaded" position and see no gains when you are assuming the maximum risk.

The other question I have is about getting barred. One pit boss knows my player card number by heart. Secondly, when the dealer was counting out my chips this morning a dealer from another table yelled over: "Why don't you just give him another thousand and let him go." (I frequently leave with $1,000.00, never more than $3,000 in any one seating)".

To date I have had no problems - all rooms and meals are comped, plus some other stuff. When do I have to start worrying?

-Buzzer

[KenSmith]

It sounds like you have the beginnings of a successful plan here, and you've definitely taken the first step in realizing that streaks have nothing to do with a winning game. Also, knowing basic strategy is a prerequisite that you have down pat it sounds like. But, I must caution you in a couple of areas:

A 1 to 1.25 or 1 to 1.5 spread just isn't nearly enough to actually beat the games, ESPECIALLY the 8 deck game. Certainly it's better than nothing, but your success so far is more about luck than math. The problem is that your big bets must have enough profit in them to offset the negative expectation of all your waiting bets.

"Card watching" can work, but it's definitely weaker than any true counting system. If you're uncomfortable with Hi-Opt or Hi-Lo at first, why don't you give KO or Golden Touch a try. They're easier, yet effective. (Please don't derail this thread into a Golden Touch diatribe. I know it's controversial, but I think it has an appropriate target market, and this sounds exactly like what is called for here.)

You've identified the biggest challenge in playing a winning system. It's staying welcome. You ask when you should start to worry. The easy answer is this... If you keep your bet spread where it is now, you'll never have to worry about being barred (unless this particular casino's personnel are inept!). That's because you're still not playing an overall positive game.

Once you increase your bet spread though, you'll be running new risk in two areas. First, you accurately identify the fact that your losses will be bigger when they occur. Second, the casino now has something to worry about, especially at the black chip level.

It's a tricky proposition.

[Buzzer]

At the lower limit tables I figure I've played approximately 6,480 hands. At the higher limit tables I've played approximately 7,200 hands. I'm not sure when the law of large numbers kicks in, but 13,680 hands seems like at least a good start.

My idea of luck is winning 7 hands in a row, or the 17 straight sessions I once won. My other observance of luck is that it changes, my play log is fairly consistent in it's ups and downs.

In terms of units returned per hand played I was actually MORE successful on the 8 deck games. I attribute this to my being more conservative about going from 1.25 to 1.5 units on the high limit ($100.00 min) 2 deck games. It was never a concern throwing in another $5.00 chip, but I am a bit more timid when throwing another $50.00 on top of the $100.00 I already have up.

What number of hands would quailfy as a large number in terms of the law of large numbers?

In regards to getting barred - I've read that some casinos will bar a player simply because he does not lose, or does not lose enough.

Appreciate your response to my post!

-Buzzer

[Canceler]

Here's a quote from this article by Fred Renzey:

"A perfect basic strategy blackjack player has a 1/2% disadvantage to the house. But that 1/2% is so small and gambling is so volatile that there's still a 10% chance of his being a winner after 80,000 hands —- even though he's playing a losing game!"

[EasyRhino]

So, are you using any particular counting system? If not, and you're just keeping an eye out for cards, are you actually maintaining some sort of running count?

I would like to make sure I've got your bet spread right... you're talking about a $10 little bet, and a $15 max bet (or $100 min and $150 max?).

I know know it for KO off the top of my head, but even a full 1 to 2 spread is a negative expectation game, and barely positive in single deck.

I would expect that using no particular counting system with a 1.5x bet spread would result in a game which is still -EV. I won't quibble with your results though, I hope mine can be as good.

[ScottH]

I don't like the idea of "card watching". I think it's a very unreliable form of card counting, expecially in 8 deck shoes. Since you found Hi-Lo too hard, give KO a try. Read Knockout Blackjack by Ken Fuchs and Olaf Vancura.

If I were you I wouldn't fall into the trap thinking, "It's worked for me so far, so I'll just keep doing it." I think you should at least give the easiest counting systems a try. If they are still more than you want to learn, then keep doing what you're doing, and hope the luck keeps going your way.

[Sonny]

It looks like you’ve already gotten most of the advice that you need, but I’ll throw in a bit as well.

Originally Posted by Buzzer

I'm not sure when the law of large numbers kicks in, but 13,680 hands seems like at least a good start…What number of hands would qualify as a large number in terms of the law of large numbers?

It will depend on your playing style (EV, SD and bankroll size). In general, you should start to see reliable results around 40,000 hands (about 400 hours of play). After 80,000 hands you have a good chance of overcoming the variance. Those numbers are just ballpark figures but they will give you an idea of how massive the variance is.

Originally Posted by Buzzer

Does anyone else use a conservative betting strategy like this? My concern about the ones I see here is that they can produce huge swings in your bankroll - I hate losing!

I’m afraid you’ll have to get used to it. You will lose the about 53% of the hands you play no matter how good you are or what the count is. You are going to lose a lot and be disappointed the majority of the time. The swings are going to be huge in both directions. That’s just a fact of life in the gambling world.

Originally Posted by Buzzer

The other problem I see is that with 5X your basic bet you may be in a "super loaded" position and see no gains when you are assuming the maximum risk.

If you have sized your bets properly then you don’t have to worry about being super loaded (except from the martinis! ). Keeping your max bet at around 1% of your bankroll and adjusting your bet size often will allow you to maintain a reasonable risk of ruin so that you will always be able to make a comeback no matter how many consecutive losing sessions you have. A good player will use a betting strategy that maximizes his gains while minimizing his risk.

These are all fairly advanced topics but you can find more information at www.bjmath.com if you want to know the formulas. Look for topics like Risk of Ruin (ROR), optimal betting (Kelly Criterion/proportional betting) and Brett Harris' N0 (number of hands needed to overcome variance).

-Sonny-

[QFIT]

Originally Posted by KenSmith

Please don't derail this thread into a Golden Touch diatribe.

Ken, I'm not sure what you mean by "diatribe." The GT advertising is false. No diatribe - just a simply stated fact.

[Automatic Monkey]

Buzzer if you like conservative play with a flat or nearly flat bet, backcounting might be for you. What you do is simply watch a table without playing until the count goes up, then you put your black chip down. When the count goes to negative EV, you stop playing.

The wonder of this technique is every hand you play has positive EV, so it doesn't matter what your spread is. You won't need a spread at all. It's a popular technique in AC where the games are poor and there is little if any heat so you never need play a negative EV hand.

[Dr. Feelgood]

Careful QFIT that sounds like diatribe. Golden Touch does not advertise being anywhere as strong as some of the other more complex systems. And Ken, I thought that since you sold that book through Bayview Strategies that you stood behind it as accurate gambling advice. I bought it and it seems to be pretty much what it advertised.