Afraid to play Blackjack any longer

In reading the responses I received from my original post (Successful, Conservative Play) I've really learned a lot about the game. Thank you.

In order to save myself a lot of future agony, it is best that I stop playing now.

First I learned that I have been lucky since I'm not playing with an advantage (damned lucky as I call it).

After my first estimated 13,680 hands I was ahead by 969 units. I've now learned that by 18,000 hands I will see that I have no advantage, basically I will got bust by then. I do appreciate knowing that.

In order to keep myself from losing 3,130 hands out of the next 4,320 (the required number of losses to produce a loss of one bet at 18,000 hands) I've decided I should stop right now.

Imagine the suffering I was about to endure facing an expected loss rate of over 72% before reaching 18,000 hands! I've considered giving a small portion of my $33,000+ in winnings and giving them to the people here who have helped me see all that is wrong with my methods.

On second thought, I'm sure they have all avoided the Voodoo betting, etc and all have huge bankrolls. Should I just give some money to the United Way in the name of blackjackinfo.com instead?

P.S. The results I used above were from a couple of days back. I've now played another estimated 450 hands with a positive result of 4.75 units. I'm not even going to bother calculating how bad things were going to get - 72% expected loss rate was bad enough.

Charity?! Noooooo! Card counters never toke! :laugh:

But seriously, I think you have a few misconceptions about the math behind the game, and especially variance. I think these misunderstandings of gambling in general are the reason you cannot see the flaws in your system.

Yes, that’s a rate of over 7%. You don’t think that’s incredibly lucky for someone who doesn’t even play accurate BS? Be honest with yourself.

This is another misunderstanding. There is no magic point where your results suddenly “snap into place.” Variance, measured in standard deviations, is basically a way of measuring the confidence level of your predicted results. After 18,000 hands (One SD) you will have a 68% chance of reaching your expectation. After 72,000 hands (two SDs) you will have over a 95% chance of losing it all back (and then some). On top of that, your N0 is probably much different than AM’s who plays a very tight game. Since you don't know the math you could start that downward slide at anytime.

I’m not trying to be rude, but the fact is that you don’t understand the fundamentals of the game. You have no idea how effective your system is (if it is at all), how much you should expect to be winning, how big the fluctuations will be, or when you are going to reach your long-term goal. You don’t know how to properly size your bets or what your probability of going broke during a bad streak is. You don’t understand important concepts like EV, SD, ROR, EOR, correlation coefficients (BC, PE, IC), N0, SCORE, DI, and many other silly acronyms. You haven’t even done any sort of research or simulation of your system.

I’m sure you’re a very smart guy, but at the BJ tables you have no idea what you’re doing. Without any of this information you are just another gambler with a system. You’ve convinced yourself that you’re a brilliant player just because you’ve won some money. You don’t realize that it was just a short-term lucky streak which earned a boatload of money because you were overbetting your bankroll.

Here’s something to think about: A perfect BS player will win 43% of the hands they play. Since you are only playing 85% correctly you may only win 36.6% of the hands you play. Does that 72% loss rate sound so unbelievable now?

Actually, that’s the smartest strategy you’ve mentioned so far! Since you’re determined to give away your money to someone, why not give it to the people who are trying to stop you from giving it away in the first place?

I know that you're pissed because we keep giving you a hard time, but you seriously need to think about some of the things I mentioned before you decide to throw you money on the tables again. The decision is completely up to you but we want you to make informed decisions instead of relying on luck and assumptions.

-Sonny-

I'm down with that plan!

Glad to hear you've seen the light.

I do consider myself incredibly lucky. I plugged the numbers a probabilty calculator using a house advantage of .33% the probability result was .000001. You can call it luck but I'm not a believer in 1 in 100,000 chances.

The 18,000 hand example was my attempt at sarcasm, and my knowing use of Voodoo math.

Sampling provides a 95% confidence rate with only half the number hands I've tracked. Running extremely high sets of numbers only fine tunes the numbers - it doesn't drastically change them.

You state: "You don’t understand important concepts like EV, SD, ROR, EOR, correlation coefficients (BC, PE, IC), N0, SCORE, DI, and many other silly acronyms." I've taken a dozen or so advanced level math classes in college (high honors). This may pale in comparsion to your background, but it does give me a basic understanding of mathmatical concepts.

You further state: "Here’s something to think about: A perfect BS player will win 43% of the hands they play. Since you are only playing 85% correctly you may only win 36.6% of the hands you play. Does that 72% loss rate sound so unbelievable now?"

My first problem with this is that I do play basic strategy. You took the 85% figure from someone who responded to my post. I do deviate from basic strategy very infrequently, since the deviations add only an approximately 10 basis points to your advantage, I find them barely worth using. The 10 basis point figure is one I've read - not a number I calculated or guessed.

I even take insurance in extremely positive situations about once in every 1,500 or so hands (successfully I might add). More of a test than an actual betting strategy.

Your 43% figure is correct for wins, but you conviently omitted ties which account for approximately 8% of the hands. This is more of the Voodoo math I've seen on this site. Assuming a push rate of 8%, I would have to lose 4 out of every five hands which did not result in a push.

Are you suggesting that I can reasonably expect to lose 4 out of every five non push hands?

As far as knowing how to size my bets and my bankroll, I've done this from experience (with some reading and testing of theories thrown in). I'm sure you believe your simulator is more accurate than my reality, but 10 plus years of play has given enough experience to rate more than "I’m sure you’re a very smart guy, but at the BJ tables you have no idea what you’re doing.".

Your statement: "You don’t realize that it was just a short-term lucky streak which earned a boatload of money because you were overbetting your bankroll." has me curious. I've been told my spread is far too low 1 - 1.5 units. At the $10 table I was betting $10-$15 per hand with a $7,000+ total bankroll. At the $100 table I did start with only 70 units, but was playing with casino money entirely since the first round. Currently playing $100-$150 with a $33,000 bankroll. I would sure like to have a bigger bankroll, but I'm not reaching in my pocket for this game.

Successfull playjack play requires more than running a number of simulations. The variables include managing your bankroll, knowing when to stop - largest problem for most players. Knowing when to stop includes numerous variables about your personal situation, distractions at the table, your comfort with your level of risk, how bored you are. Boredom has been my greatest enemy, I've lost money in the past trying to force a win when the conditions weren't right.

I've never claimed to use some magic system, or that I find winning easy. My hope in visiting this site was to pickup some tips which could help in my play. I was also wondering if anyone was using a more conserative betting strategy than all the ones I've read. From reading this site it seems that there's only one holy way to play, and simulations are the gods. Blackjack is only the temple in which you worship.

I do consider myself incredibly lucky. I plugged the numbers a probabilty calculator using a house advantage of .33% the probability result was .000001. You can call it luck but I'm not a believer in 1 in 100,000 chances.

The 18,000 hand example was my attempt at sarcasm, and my knowing use of Voodoo math.

Sampling provides a 95% confidence rate with only half the number hands I've tracked. Running extremely high sets of numbers only fine tunes the numbers - it doesn't drastically change them.

You state: "You don’t understand important concepts like EV, SD, ROR, EOR, correlation coefficients (BC, PE, IC), N0, SCORE, DI, and many other silly acronyms." I've taken a dozen or so advanced level math classes in college (high honors). This may pale in comparsion to your background, but it does give me a basic understanding of mathmatical concepts.

You further state: "Here’s something to think about: A perfect BS player will win 43% of the hands they play. Since you are only playing 85% correctly you may only win 36.6% of the hands you play. Does that 72% loss rate sound so unbelievable now?"

My first problem with this is that I do play basic strategy. You took the 85% figure from someone who responded to my post. I do deviate from basic strategy very infrequently, since the deviations add only an approximately 10 basis points to your advantage, I find them barely worth using. The 10 basis point figure is one I've read - not a number I calculated or guessed.

I even take insurance in extremely positive situations about once in every 1,500 or so hands (successfully I might add). More of a test than an actual betting strategy.

Your 43% figure is correct for wins, but you conviently omitted ties which account for approximately 8% of the hands. This is more of the Voodoo math I've seen on this site. Assuming a push rate of 8%, I would have to lose 4 out of every five hands which did not result in a push.

Are you suggesting that I can reasonably expect to lose 4 out of every five non push hands?

As far as knowing how to size my bets and my bankroll, I've done this from experience (with some reading and testing of theories thrown in). I'm sure you believe your simulator is more accurate than my reality, but 10 plus years of play has given enough experience to rate more than "I’m sure you’re a very smart guy, but at the BJ tables you have no idea what you’re doing.".

Your statement: "You don’t realize that it was just a short-term lucky streak which earned a boatload of money because you were overbetting your bankroll." has me curious. I've been told my spread is far too low 1 - 1.5 units. At the $10 table I was betting $10-$15 per hand with a $7,000+ total bankroll. At the $100 table I did start with only 70 units, but was playing with casino money entirely since the first round. Currently playing $100-$150 with a $33,000 bankroll. I would sure like to have a bigger bankroll, but I'm not reaching in my pocket for this game.

Successfull playjack play requires more than running a number of simulations. The variables include managing your bankroll, knowing when to stop - largest problem for most players. Knowing when to stop includes numerous variables about your personal situation, distractions at the table, your comfort with your level of risk, how bored you are. Boredom has been my greatest enemy, I've lost money in the past trying to force a win when the conditions weren't right.

I've never claimed to use some magic system, or that I find winning easy. My hope in visiting this site was to pickup some tips which could help in my play. I was also wondering if anyone was using a more conserative betting strategy than all the ones I've read. From reading this site it seems that there's only one holy way to play, and simulations are the gods. Blackjack is only the temple in which you worship.

+969 units in 13680 is quite impressive. That's more than 7 standard deviations from the expectation. You say you're not a believer in 1 in 100,000 chances, well they do happen. Whilst you've had a 7 sd in your favour, I know of someone that had it against them. They lost 400 units in less than 2000 hands. That's also more than 7 sd's. It happens on both sides of the equation. Rarely, but it does happen. Of course, they complained that they were being cheated. Losers always do. Winners never complain, even when they experience something equally as likely/unlikely.

Getting into 8% push 43% win etc. etc. is incorrect to begin with.

That is because there are 6 outcomes to each hand:
1:1 win
3:2 win
2:1 win
3:1 win
4:1 win
1:1 loose
Does anyone know the odds for each one?
And that is assuming you can only split once and double on each split.

Secondly you need to claify your 900+ units. Is this 900 units at all different bet sizes. For example a $100 win does not mean 10 units won. its only 1 unit. Therefore you could be as little as 90 units ahead.

It is not uncommon for someone to 'steam roll' a head. I goto the casino and often make $10 bets and get $200 up and goto $25 and get $500 or more up and go up again before I eventually loose it all back. When I am $500 up it doesnt necessarily mean I am 50 units up because I increased the size of my units.

"+969 units in 13680 is quite impressive. That's more than 7 standard deviations from the expectation."

The math of most people in this forum is extremely questionable.

For example if a game is 50/50 then after 100 the expected value is 50 and 1 standard dev is +/- 5.

In the case of 10,000 the standard devation is +/-500. So 969 up after 13680 would hardly be 3 standard devations. Infact its probably on the order of 1:100 rather than 1:100000. Obviosuly I am 0.5% off and its not a 50/50 game but the effect is MUCH smaller than people make it out to be.
\

After 13680 hands at 0.5% house edge, the expected outcome is -68.40 units. With a standard deviation of 1.15 for blackjack (can vary slightly from 1.13 to 1.17 depending on rules but 1.15 is a good average), to be +1037 units (+969 added to the 68 you should be down) away from expectations is 7.71 standard deviations.

The formula is (1037)/(13680^0.5*1.15*bet size). As we are talking units of 1 here, then the bet size is 1.

Your confidence intervals for the above at 3 sd are -472 units to +335 units. A long way from +969 so it is nowhere near 3 sd's.

You’re exactly right. I was looking at Doktorhook’s post by accident. In fact, you mentioned that you have BS for DD and 8D totally memorized in your first post. My apologies. We get so many posts every week about new systems that it’s easy to get people confused.

In fact, just ignore everything from that post. My original posts on your original thread still apply, but the last one was about Doktorhook, not you. Again, my apologies for the mistake.

Stanford Wong initially suggested using a flat bet to beat the game by only playing positive counts (sometimes only +3 or more based on your bankroll). That’s about as conservative as it gets. However, the ratio of earnings vs. risk tends to be low, as does the hourly win rate (due to fewer hands played). You will be taking a larger risk to earn a relatively small amount of money and it will take you much longer to have a reasonable chance of approaching your expected results.

We discuss many different ways to beat the game. The only requisite is that they be legitimate techniques that can be mathematically validated and/or simulated. You can search these forums for techniques like shuffle tracking, front loading, cutting/steering, sequencing, opposition betting, consolidation betting, team play, beatable side bets, beating CSMs, comp counting, flashing, spooking, reading warps, rider playing, etc. We’re happy to talk about any methods that exist. The problem is that we often get stubborn ignorant people who rely on progression systems or other worthless “streak” systems. You’ll have to excuse our curt reaction to your sarcasm. We’ve developed a short-fuse for people divulging “homemade” systems.

As I said before, your system is probably effective but we cannot be sure because your counting is vague. The shortcomings of such a system (increased variance, less accuracy, suboptimal betting, longer N0, smaller SCORE) might outweigh the benefits (a small +EV). I’m glad to hear that it has worked for you, but many other players may not experience similar results using your system.

Las Vegas has about 36.7 million visitors every year. How many of them hit a 100,00:1 shot?

-Sonny-

I just won 66,000 nickels on a slot machine. Pretty sure the odds had to have been close to 100,000 to 1.
NY Lottery has made over 1900 people millionaires.The odds of winning $1,000,000 on lottery must be staggering,yet 1900 folks have done it.

Did you find a way to beat slots?

Excellent Response!

Your comments about Stanford Wong having initally tried a similar system is exactly the type of feedback I had hoped to receive intially. I accept that criticism as totally valid.

My suggestion, however, is that there MAY be a way to use a similar system - which incorporates some other techniques to produce a method which would work at least for the recreational player.

One thing I have never mentioned is that I love the game. My "system" has allowed me many hours of play, thousands of dollars in comps, and a fair amount of cash. I have no illusions about quitting my day job and going pro.

In fact, I would say that my "system" is no system at all because I have not quantified what I am doing in many areas. To qualify as a system I would have to count the cards, give an exact ramping strategy, and a set of exit strategies (for both winning and losing sessions) based on a number of variables.

The following is and has been my goal in developing my personal playing:

1) Use a method which is not taxing mentally. Certainly maintaining an exact count is more effective than my neutral, positive, very positive, negative, very negative. My reason for using this method is that if I don't enjoy my play I doubt I will continue.

2) Minimize the swings in my bankroll. It's a valid argument that I may not be taking full advantage of positive situations, and run a greater risk of total ruin. My position, however, is that I've tried more aggressive ramping my bets more in the past and have encountered large losses as a result. There is a trade-off in terms of aggressive ramping versus more conservative play. The aggressive ramping produces a higher overall return, but carries with it a SHORT TERM higher risk of ruin (ROR for current session). More conserative ramping allows you to stay in the game longer when encountering consistent losses. If my bankroll were unlimited, and I had no fear of getting barred, I'd probably be ramping more aggressively (I may even try this some time at distant casinos).

3) Avoid raising red flags with casino management. Large session wins, aggressive ramping of bets, and varying from basic strategy after hours of following it, draws attention to your play. I don't argue that the agressive ramping and an occasional divergence from basic strategy based on card count is less effective than my style of play. In fact, I would agree that these techinques would produce a higher rate of return!

I'm having fun, winning money and comps, and maintaining a positive relationship with casino management. I have noted, however, that I have been a topic of discussion amongst the pit crews. Certain comments which the pit bosses have made indicate this. To date, there have been no problems.

On the other hand, I had had a pit boss say "Let's hit it, _____", when I started to play the other day. The pit crew and dealers all seem to enjoy seeing me win (I'm a member at my favorite casino, and I allow my play to be tracked). More than once they have made the comment "It's not my money", when discussing players winnings. They see the casino making huge sums on the game.

Ya got me! My statement that I don't believe in 100,000:1 shots was stupid! More appropriately I should have said something like the following:

My difficulty in accepting that I have just been extremely lucky is a result of the following observations:

1) My bet ramping is very conservative. Had I hit some sessions where I ramped my bet 10X and raked in large sums it would seem more likely that it has just been luck. Along the way I have reached a new total high over 60 times, which means I am sitting at a new high over 25% of the time. This appears to me as a sign that my win total has progressed somewhat steadily.

2) Luck to me is short term. I have encountered both lucky and unlucky streaks. I lost 9 straight hands from the start the other day - bad luck. Down another 6 units in the following session before going through another deck - more bad luck. Threw my last $175 of the session up on another day only to have to reach in my pocket to cover 3 splits. Won the 3 hands as the dealer busted. Got 3 blackjacks in a row immediately following this - damned lucky!

3) My results are based on over 10,000 hands of play (I know you consider this small). At 1,000, 2,000 or 3,000 it would be much easier to accept that it's been all luck.

In hopes of devloping a constructive discussion, I pose the following question:

What possible other methods (shuffle tracking, etc) are there to enchance my chances without maintaining an exact count, being more aggressive in ramping, taxing my mind, or raising any red flags with casino management?

Shuffle tracking has some appeal to me as it seems to offer the above, as I do have a simple cutting strategy that I currently use. Much of my play is heads-up so I frequently have the opportunity to use it. Is shuffle tracking really effective? How much should you expect it to add to your return? Can someone reference a good article on it?

-Buzzer

Possible Outcomes for each hand - caluclating wins

I don't understand your possible outcomes. My interpretation of your table suggests there is no possibility of a push. Perhaps you are playing a game in which the dealer wins all pushes. I got the 8% figure from a mathmatical analysis, which did support the 42% player win rate - we were probably basing our arguments on the same article.

My unit win rate was calculated using the following method:

1) Unit wins with a $10 base bet were calcualted by dividing the total dollars won by 10 (i.e., $320 win would equate to 32 unit win)

2) Unit wins with a $100 base bet were calcualted by dividing the total dollars won by 100 (i.e., $1,950 win would equate to a 19.5 unit win)

Unit losses were calculated using the same method.

Whether or not you vary your bets you need to maintain some basis for tracking your outcome. A more accurate method would include tracking bet return on each level of bet. This is not practical as I don't believe most casinos will allow you to sit there with a notepad to keep track. Since the goal of playing blackjack is to increase you bankroll (units), the method I am using is (I believe) acceptable.

In the example you gave above, I would calculate that you won 20 units (200/10=20), when you reached the $200 mark, and 12 more units (300/25=12) when you reached the $500 mark. When you went bust I would calculate that you should have quit while you were ahead!

-Buzzer

You have to maintain an exact count when shuffle tracking and it is pretty taxing. Pretty taxing that is...pretty taxing compared to card counting.

Your system involves keeping an approximate running count to adjust your bets. Your system is perfect for recreational players because it is easy to use and doesn’t take the fun out of the game. But, frankly, you could gain quite a bit without adding much work.

I think you may have gotten off on the wrong foot with card counting. You mentioned that you started with the Hi-Opt I system. That is a very difficult (and obsolete) system to start with. It involves keeping an accurate running count as well as an ace side count, using the side count to temporarily adjust your RC, converting the adjusted RC to a true count for all betting decisions, then reverting back to the regular RC for playing decisions. To make the system work you have to keep two separate counts, estimate the ace density by quarter-deck, estimate the number of decks remaining and convert the RC to a TC. That’s a whole heck of a lot of work to be doing at the table and it’s easy to make mistakes or lose the count during play. It’s pretty obvious why most recreational players (and even most pros!) would not want to take the time to learn such a difficult system.

However, there are several “unbalanced” counts that are almost identical to your system which are very powerful and simple to use. They don’t involve side counts, deck estimations or TC conversions at all. Systems like KO, Red 7 and Unbalanced Zen only require an accurate running count to be effective. Essentially, they are the same as your current system except they are much more accurate and can be expanded easily. The accuracy is important because it will reduce your short-term variance as well as allow you to create a more optimal bet spread (which will earn you more money and shorten the time it takes you to approach the long run). The expandability is helpful because you can use these counts to vary your playing based on the deck composition which will be the “icing on the cake” if you become a serious player down the road.

I would suggest that you look into unbalanced systems before you develop your system much further. You may find that you are reinventing the wheel. Here’s a link to some popular card counting systems:

http://www.qfit.com/card-counting.htm

You also mention that you had problems using a larger bet ramp, but that will depend on how you use it. Increasing your bet ramp should not involve raising you top bets. Rather, it should involve lowering your small bets. For example, you currently use a $100 bet in “bad” situations and up to a $150 bet in “good” situations. What if you used a $25 bet in negative counts and a $150 bet in positive counts? You would be losing less on the bad hands which would increase your earnings. Taking that further, what if you bet $25 in very negative situations, then $50 in neutral situations, then $100 at good times and $150 at great times. In that case you would be further reducing your risk by not making big bets in any positive count regardless of their magnitude. A small advantage should only get a small bet while a large advantage should get a large bet. Making a large bet with only a small advantage is risking a lot of money for a small return. When your bets are properly adjusted to match your advantage you will optimize your rate of return (the log returns of your assets). Also, a gradual “parlay” style of betting will make you look more like a typical gambler or progression player.

As far as the advanced techniques go, I wouldn’t recommend them to a recreational player. They are very difficult and require lots of skill, practice and discipline. These techniques are capable of producing large advantages if done correctly but can easily cause even larger disadvantages if done improperly or inadequately. I don’t think that recreational players will find them very useful.

-Sonny-

Thanks!

Willing to give another counting system a try. I'll look into it.

Your advice on the betting levels is good, but I have a couple of problems.

One, I can't do it in my current game. I'm playing 2 deck pitch with $100 minimum. House advantage on this drops 14 basis points at the $100 level versus the regular games. If I switch back to the lower level tables I will pick up another .0014% disadvantage.

Secondly, If I use your proposed ramp at lower limit tables, I'll be hearing "Checks in play" frequently. Willing to try this at distant casino, but fear big brother at my home casino. Current drive time to casinos is 2-3 hours each way. I would hate to move it up to 3 or more.

On second thought I could use a $10, $20, $40, $60 ramp at the lower limit tables to compare the returns, and not have to worry about the "Checks in play". For comparsions sake, what would be an expected hourly rate of return betting the $10-$60 and using an easy unbalanced count? I guess my question is: Will the modified bet ramp offset the 14 basis point loss in advantage and will it offset the decreased return fro playing at lower stakes?

Planning a distant trip (Vegas maybe?) within the next month, I'll give it a try a that point. With any luck I may find a good double deck game with a lower minimum.

At any rate - thanks fo rthe help.

-Buzzer

Certainly did. Put in $20,pulled out $3200 and quit.

In general a good card counter expects to win about 1.5 minimum bets per hour. A $10-$60 spread would earn about $15/hr and a $25-$150 spread would average around $37/hr. With that kind of advantage you could raise your bets to around $300-$400 based on your large bankroll and still have a negligible chance of ever going broke.

Compared to your current 1-1.5 spread, a bigger spread could easily double or triple your expected hourly return.

-Sonny-

this brings to mind a question related to Kelly betting i suppose.
that being say one has a given bankroll and we want to play at some ROR.
things don't go well and the bankroll goes down 'substantially' .
the question being when according to Kelly betting do we say ok i need to reduce my max bet and adjust my bet ramp. i'm thinking it's when half the bankroll has been squandered but i'm also thinking one might want to take a more conservative tact than that.

best regards,
mr fr0g