Blackjack and Card Counting Forums - BlackjackInfo.com

  #21  
Old February 18th, 2008, 10:29 PM
Kasi Kasi is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonny View Post
That kind of counting system is really not applicable to blackjack.-Sonny-
Thanks Sonny - as always I appreciate your input because I'm never quite sure myself most of the time when I actually have to figure something out myself lol and didn't want to mislead the poster.

Anyway, makes it alot easier for him to answer his own questions of how likely it is to lose 180 or more hands or whatever over whatever hands or how likely to get the needed wins to achieve the ratio he wants.

Of course it's not applicable to BJ - this is the Voodoo section
  #22  
Old March 31st, 2008, 01:52 PM
Alythezon Alythezon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 11
Default

i understand what you are saying but as said above that is a gamblers fallacy but you can look at it this way. Say you are flipping a coin and it matters what side it starts on. Says if heads is facing up it is more likely to come up heads and tails it is tail. You always bet on heads but you can look at the person and tell by their facial expression somewhat weather it is head or tails....Wow that makes no sense but that is what in essance card counting is i think of it as trying to figure out how the coin starts its flip. I can flip a coin pretty well and get heads most of the time....I'm going to stop talking now lol....
  #23  
Old April 16th, 2010, 06:26 PM
Grasshopper Grasshopper is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 23
Default I'm not so sure Adventureboy has it wrong.

I was just re-reading this thread and decided to chart out some play to see what it looks like.

I play online and track everything. I selected one round at random. Really! What are the odds of selecting this round? The one round I absolutely most wanted to forget?



This is a chart of a cumulative win / loss record of the first 300 hands out of a 600 hand round that I played on April 4. So, if the count is -5 and I win the count becomes -4. Ended up at about -20 count, which is about the largest I can recall. The dark line is a trend line. Numbers or left are cumulative wins losses. Down the center are hand numbers.

Before I post the remaining 300 hands of this round...Anybody want to place a wager for or against the trend line going up or down in the next 300 hands if I post it? Imagine it is against board rules to bet money but we can bet for bragging rights or if I lose I promise to wear a silly hat for a day and post photos.

Any takers? If nobody wants to bet that it will stay at - 20 or worse then there must be a little something to what Adventureboy is talking about. Not saying he has described the best way to deal with it. Not even sure it can actually be dealt with effectively, but, in the words of Mark Twain, "Where there is smoke there is a smoke making machine."

This is a real round, picked at random, I played April 4 and got my clock cleaned. Picked at random No idea I was pulling up my Personal Round From Hell. This one cost me some money. I can provide the original data if you are interested.

Last edited by Grasshopper; April 16th, 2010 at 07:02 PM.
  #24  
Old April 16th, 2010, 10:20 PM
Canceler's Avatar
Canceler Canceler is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,625
Default

Things we could say…
If it continues down: Duh, you’re on a losing streak.
If it goes up: Duh, you were due to win.
Both of those are nonsense.

All we know for sure is that short-term results are meaningless. (You may have heard this before.)

You won’t soon be snatching the pebble from anyone’s hand with this kind of stuff.
  #25  
Old April 16th, 2010, 10:45 PM
SuperSmash SuperSmash is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 17
Default

The other thing to remember, is that it could always stay negative. It might never become positive again. But if we view more hands, and the "viewframe" is zoomed out, even if it were to stay at -20 (or around there), it would start to look like it was "leveling out," just because more hands are present.
  #26  
Old May 15th, 2010, 05:37 PM
adventureboy adventureboy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: southern US
Posts: 40
Default

Thought I would give a little update to this thread. Yes, I count cards. Yes, I incorporate mean regression into my play. If you run 10,000 sims of 100 rounds each (1 million hands) you will see that the occurance of dealer wins greater than 62 (10 hands over 'expectation') is pretty infrequent. When the count is in my favor and I am well below my win expection, I ramp more aggresively. In contrast, when I am well above my win expectation and the count goes high... I will be a little more conservative. I know a lot of people think this is pure crap. I have spent a lot of time looking at mean regression and its potential as an added "tool" to the game. I have come to the conclusion that it has some added benefit to my game. I am not suggesting anyone else go out and use this technique. For one thing, it is not easy keeping the count (with conversions), making indices adjustments, and dividing wins by total hands to convert to a % that can be compared to expectations. I am good at math, and it took me over a year to become comfortable with all of those spot calcuations

The bottom line is, mean regression exists and is a mathematical fact. Is it a stand alone system? No way. Is it a viable tool that can be added to a player's box of toys to help win more money at a faster rate? I believe it can be. I know most of the forum members will disagree. I respect your opinions. I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. I am not selling anything. The only thing that really counts for me is my bankroll and the amount over that that I have been able to pull out to help clean up my personal balance sheet as I approach retirement. To that end, things have been going very well.

Regards to all,
  #27  
Old May 16th, 2010, 03:28 PM
Sonny's Avatar
Sonny Sonny is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 4,748
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by adventureboy View Post
When the count is in my favor and I am well below my win expection, I ramp more aggresively. In contrast, when I am well above my win expectation and the count goes high... I will be a little more conservative.
Those short-term results have no bearing on what will happen in the future. Just because you are below expectation does not mean that you are due for a win. That is the gambler’s fallacy.

The times that you are underbetting are probably offset by the times you are overbetting so it may not affect your EV much, but it will increase your variance and therefore your probability of going broke. You are increasing your risk without increasing your profit. That is something you need to consider. As long as it doesn't bother you, everything is fine. It's not something that most people would consider a beneficial tool though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by adventureboy View Post
The bottom line is, mean regression exists and is a mathematical fact.
It is a mathematical fact but it is not what you think it is. The percentages will regress towards the mean but the individual results probably will not. The second post in this thread explains the difference. It's a very common misconception, which is why I made this a sticky thread in the Voodoo forum.

-Sonny-
  #28  
Old May 17th, 2010, 08:46 AM
rrwoods rrwoods is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 329
Default

Just to throw yet another way of saying the same thing on the pile (you never know what phrasing will make something "click") --

If you look at a chart of some number of wins and losses -- past wins and losses -- it is easy to say that the total number of losses "probably" won't exceed X over Y hands, or similarly that a streak containing X losses "probably" won't happen over a Y-hand session. Using that statistical information, it's also easy to extrapolate this to a future session, and say that if the session is Y hands, your total/maximum-in-a-row losses "probably" won't exceed X. You can even assign a certainty to those numbers, if you have the mathematical knowledge.

However, the Gambler's Fallacy is conflating statistical predictions about a large number of hands with statistical predictions about a single hand. Predictions about large numbers of hands are derived from predictions about single hands -- *not* the other way around!

When you have lost X hands (in a row, if you so choose), the likelyhood of you losing the next hand is *exactly* the same as it was before you started playing. It is *because* of this -- not in spite of it! -- that the Law of Large Numbers is true (what is being referred to as "mean regression" in this thread). See Sonny's example about the number of heads and tails on a series of coin flips, where despite the *number* flips of difference increasing, the *ratio* representing that difference decreases.
  #29  
Old May 18th, 2010, 06:13 PM
adventureboy adventureboy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: southern US
Posts: 40
Default

I hesitate to keep this going... I don't want to offend anyone. I will try to wrap up my thoughts with this:

I have spent A LOT of time studying this. It is not only mean regression, but also streak theory, retracement theory, and elliot wave anlysis. A lot of this has applications in the financial markets as well. The people who I have looked at this with are well qualified in their fields (1 phd in statistics and 1 phd in combinatorial mathematics). I say this only to convey that I have given this serious consideration, not to try and change your minds. Some important conclusions we have reached are:

1) From an EV perspective of a straight counter, there is really no harm.

2) As it affects an individual player, Mean regression may not occur, but it certainly may occur. It is more likely than not that it will.

3) Of course no one knows the outcome of the next hand, next stock tick, or next currency pip. Or the next 10 for that matter. However, if after 50 hands you are 10 wins below expectation, it is more likely than not that some regression (or retacement) will take place within the next 50 hands. No guarantee, of course.

Given these statements (taken together), there is no reason not to be more aggresive in good counts if potential mean regession warrants it. If mean regression occurs, as explained, it should give a good boost to earnings. If it does not occur, the downside risks are limited.

Regards
  #30  
Old May 18th, 2010, 06:58 PM
WRX WRX is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Looking over your shoulder
Posts: 321
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by adventureboy View Post
It is not only mean regression, but also streak theory, retracement theory, and elliot wave anlysis.
There's a reason this is in the Voodoo Betting forum.
 

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 09:11 PM.


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