Any successful Progression Players?
- Thread starter FUHGEDABOUDIT
- Start date
INTRO:2D
Code:
[U][B] Progression[/B][/U]
[U]1[/U] [U][B]Players at Table:[/B][/U]
-2 [B][U]7/6/5/4/3/2/1/[/U][/B]
3 [B]Bets:[/B]-6-4-2/3/5/7/
[B] -4[/B]
[B]5[/B]
-6
[U]7[/U]
.The Shceme -/+ Progression
Code:
[U][B]The Progression/10$units[/B][/U]
L Bet>10$
L Bet>10$
W Bet>30$
WW Bet>50$
WWW Bet>70$ W or L Restart(10$)The Shceme: -/+ Progression
Code:
[U][B]The Progression/10$units[/B][/U]
L Bet>10$
W Bet>30$
WL Bet>20$(-2)
WLW [B]Restart[/B](10$)
WLL Bet>40$(-4)
WLLW [B]Restart[/B](10$)
WLLL Bet>60$(-6)Wor L Restart(10$)Example1:Betting
Code:
[U][B]Flat vs Progression[/B][/U]
L +10 +10
W +10 +30
WW +10 +50
WWW +10 +70Example2:Results
Code:
[U][B]Flat Progression Difference[/B][/U]
[B] WL[/B] 0.00 -20$ -20.00$
WWL +10$ -10$ [B]-20.00$*[/B]
WWWL +20$ +20$ 0.00
[B]WWWW +40$ +160$ +120.00$[/B]Example3:Results
Code:
[U][B]Flat (Bets)Progression Difference[/B][/U]
WL 0.00 (30$)-20$ -20$
WLL -10$ (20$)-40$ -30$
WLLL -20$ (40$)-80$ [B]-60$*[/B]
WLLLL -30$ (60$)-140$ -110$(Restart)
[B] WLLLW -10$ (60$)-20$ -10$(Restart)[/B]Example4:Results
Code:
[U][B]Flat (Bets)Progression Difference[/B][/U]
WW 20$ (30$)40$ +20$
WWL 10$ (50$)-10$ [B]-20$*[/B]
WWLL 0.00 (20$)-30$ -30$
WWLLL -10$ (40$)-70$ [B]-60$*[/B]
WWLLLL -20$ (60$)-130$ -110$(Restart)
WWLLLW -0.00 (60$)-10$ -10$(Restart)Example5:Results
Code:
[B][U] Flat (Bets)Progression Difference[/U][/B]
W 10$ (10$)10$ 0.00
WL 0.00 (30$)-20$ -20$
WLW 10$ (20$)0.00 -10$[B](Restart)[/B]Example6:X2(Doubles)
Code:
[U][B]Flat (Bets)Progression Difference[/B][/U]
W 10$ (10$)10$ 0.00
W(LX2)-10$ (30X2)-50$ -40$[B](Restart)[/B]Example7:X2
Code:
[U][B]Flat (Bets)Progression Difference[/B][/U]
W 10$ (10$)10$ 0.00
W(WX2) 30$ (30X2)70$ [B]40$[/B](Proceed)
W(WX2)W 40$ (50$)120$ 80$[B](Restart)[/B]
[B]W(WX2)L[/B] [B]20$ (50$)20$ 0.00[/B][B](Restart)[/B]Example8:X2
Code:
[U][B]Flat (Bets)Progression Difference[/B][/U]
W 10$ (10$)10$ 0.00
WL 0.00 (30$)-20$ -20$
WL(WX2)20$ (20X2)20$ 0.00[B](Restart)[/B]
[B]WL(LX2)-20$ (20X2)-60$ -40$*[/B]The reason Im spending so much time on the examples is because they Dictate which hands are contingent of the count. Depending which hands they are, and wether or not we won or lost the hand will Dictate wether or not they're contingent. The Examples werent necessary, but I felt it was essential to show these examples.
Overview:
Now that Ive shown some examples, lets put it in a nut shell. 1. Flat bet until you win a hand. 2. Upon winning a flat bet(10$) proceed to 30$. 3.Win(30$) bet, proceed to 50$. Lose 30$bet proceed to -progression (20$).
4. Lose Double (30$) RESTART. Win Double (30$) proceed to 50$. Note: Win or lose 50$ RESTART!(Do not proceed to 70$).
5. Lose the 20$ Bet,(NegProgression) proceed to 40$.
6.Any time you WIN in the negative progression(-2,-4,-6)RESTART!(Including Doubles)
7.Note: If you lose Double in the first step of the negative progression(20$) ONLY proceed to 40$ if the count calls
for it. Win or Lose 40$ RESTART!(Do not Proceed to the 60$ Bet)
8.If you lose the 40$bet(Step:2 in the negative Pogression) ONLY proceed to the 60$ Bet if count calls for it.Reminder: Win or lose Step:3 in the negative progression(60$) RESTART!
9. If you win or lose ANY Doubles RESTART!EXCEPT, for STEP:1 in Both the negative and positive progressions(-20$)(+30$)See Above.
10.Reminder: If you lose the Double 30$ Restart, if you win, Proceed to 50$. Win or lose the 50$Bet Restart! Note: ONLY automatically restart the 50$ bet when you win the Double X2 30$ Bet.
11.Reminder:If you WIN Double 20$(Negative progression) Automaticaly RESTART! NOTE: IF you Lose DoubleX2, 20$ Only proceed to 40$ if the count calls for it.
Win or Lose the 40$ Bet Automatically Restart!
12. If you LOSE Step:2 in the positive progression(50$) ONLY Proceed to step:1 in the negative progression if the count calls for it.Otherwise RESTART!
13.Note: IF you win the 50$ Bet(step2+) Proceed to Step 3(70$) Win or Lose 70$ Restart!
14: The * Shows some Examples of the count(Betting count)
15: All Side Bets are Irrelevant!
16: The "Players at Table" are which Bets we let carry over on the shuffle.
17: Bets that are Contingent of the count are determinded by wether or not the Betting count is Negative or Positive!
18
oubling on a flat bet is Irrelevant!This count and Betting Shceme, Work together. I believe its supposed to be this way. Some strange Coincidences.
THE 4.5 COUNT:
Code:
1.[B]02334320-1-2-8[/B]
2.[B]02334320-1-3-4[/B]
[B](A+4/X-1)[/B][B]02334320-1-4 0[/B][B](A-4/X+1)[/B]
4.[B]42334320-1-5 0[/B]
5.[B]82334320-1-6 0[/B]
.About the count:
BC.997(Count2)
PE:.68(Count3)(.80 with other 4 counts)
IC:.93(Count4)
So by using Count 3 and one of the two secondary counts, we can use the count of the secondary to determine what the count is for any of the other four counts. Note: In order to determine count 1 and count 5 you will have to Double the secondary. Counts 2 and 4 will add a extra .8 to your PE. While counts 1 and 5 will add a extra .4 (.68+.8+.4=.80)
Unfortunately I'm just speculating here, but Im certain this is correct, since ace params add about 12% to your PE.
Also, In order to achieve the .80 PE more work is in order.
Theres actually a couple of ways to go about this, but the most efficient way is to use Peter Griffins(Theory of Blackjack) and analyze the EOR for every hand in Blackjack and determine which count has the highest efficiency for each hand.
Then, and only then could I use CVdata to Generate My Indices. Fortunately, I have a pretty good Idea which hands the aces have the most impact on through using EOR programs such as Blackjack 2021 and K_Cs program. This is my next project.In the meantime Ill keep you posted on my results.(2Deck)Check Mate!
jack said:
I was wondering if this would get your attention or not? After all, you've started three different threads regarding oppositional betting. Of course this is a mix between oppositional,negative and progressive betting, coupled with a level 4 count, which uses a secondary for betting and the play of hands. Honestly, I did'nt no wether to put this in advanced or Voodoo.
Well, Generally speaking it's just for show. Or maybe I'm tryin to outdo Licentia. Who knows?
Call my crazy, or maybe, simply misinformed(Dont care which)...lol, especially after the fact that Ive spent the last six years mastering the A02 count, and have proved to myself that I can keep winning Idefinitely at the leisure of my own Disposal. I guess you could say I've completely (lost my mind)Abandoned the A02 and have taken a chance with this new level 4, why? I dont know? Call me crazy.
Okay, enough with the small talk. This is a good question and I'm glad you asked! Even though I'm afraid to answer. You see, I understand that Blackjack is about numbers, not cards with numbers printed on them. Well, to make a long story short, I believe theres only one true System in Blackjack. One that doesnt Involve fixed fraction betting. One that has the same Expectation in negative counts as well, as the positive ones. I believe it would be one that Revolves completely around the Binary System. I also believe this is why I Count the Aces and face-cards for my secondary. And why fives are counted as +four,in the main count, and why bets five and four in the progression are contingent of the count. This is also why, this count will have a PE .80. (4x5=20,4/5=80)20+80=100 which brings me back to my secondary. Like I said, call me crazy or call it mere subjective opinion but until I can prove this theory, it will simply have to remain in the Voodoo section
Well, Generally speaking it's just for show. Or maybe I'm tryin to outdo Licentia. Who knows?
Call my crazy, or maybe, simply misinformed(Dont care which)...lol, especially after the fact that Ive spent the last six years mastering the A02 count, and have proved to myself that I can keep winning Idefinitely at the leisure of my own Disposal. I guess you could say I've completely (lost my mind)Abandoned the A02 and have taken a chance with this new level 4, why? I dont know? Call me crazy.
Okay, enough with the small talk. This is a good question and I'm glad you asked! Even though I'm afraid to answer. You see, I understand that Blackjack is about numbers, not cards with numbers printed on them. Well, to make a long story short, I believe theres only one true System in Blackjack. One that doesnt Involve fixed fraction betting. One that has the same Expectation in negative counts as well, as the positive ones. I believe it would be one that Revolves completely around the Binary System. I also believe this is why I Count the Aces and face-cards for my secondary. And why fives are counted as +four,in the main count, and why bets five and four in the progression are contingent of the count. This is also why, this count will have a PE .80. (4x5=20,4/5=80)20+80=100 which brings me back to my secondary. Like I said, call me crazy or call it mere subjective opinion but until I can prove this theory, it will simply have to remain in the Voodoo section
So what else is new? Why do you think the perfect system should revolve around the binary system? Why not a system based on 11, since there are only eleven values in cards used in blackjack, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. How many 1's are there? 4? or 2, since half the time an Ace is used as a 1, the other half as an 11? Hmmm. Maybe it's used as an 11 more than as a 1. Anyway, I don't see why binary is superior, at least not intuitively. I use progressions just to mask my play; hopefull it will even out. I read about betting more when the count is falling and vice versa in BB in BJ, but I don't believe in it because I don't think you can know when the count is rising or falling except in retrospect.
jack said:
Ya thats me When I was nine years old I strapped a bunch of bottle rockets to the back of my bicycle thinkin it would make it a rocket bike. Well to make a long story short, I ended up burning my leg pretty bad:cry: . I wont even bother tellin you about my helicopter bike I made:cry: MOMMY!
When I was nine years old I strapped a bunch of bottle rockets to the back of my bicycle thinkin it would make it a rocket bike. Well to make a long story short, I ended up burning my leg pretty bad:cry: . I wont even bother tellin you about my helicopter bike I made:cry: MOMMY!
Aslan :dog:
PS--If I didn't know better from recent news, I'd swear your real name was Evil Knievel.
aslan said:
Believe it or not, I can't quite follow you. So what else is new? Why do you think the perfect system should revolve around the binary system? Why not a system based on 11, since there are only eleven values in cards used in blackjack, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. How many 1's are there? 4? or 2, since half the time an Ace is used as a 1, the other half as an 11? Hmmm. Maybe it's used as an 11 more than as a 1. Anyway, I don't see why binary is superior, at least not intuitively.
I use progressions just to mask my play; hopefull it will even out. I read about betting more when the count is falling and vice versa in BB in BJ, but I don't believe in it because I don't think you can know when the count is rising or falling except in retrospect.
So what else is new? Why do you think the perfect system should revolve around the binary system? Why not a system based on 11, since there are only eleven values in cards used in blackjack, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. How many 1's are there? 4? or 2, since half the time an Ace is used as a 1, the other half as an 11? Hmmm. Maybe it's used as an 11 more than as a 1. Anyway, I don't see why binary is superior, at least not intuitively. I use progressions just to mask my play; hopefull it will even out. I read about betting more when the count is falling and vice versa in BB in BJ, but I don't believe in it because I don't think you can know when the count is rising or falling except in retrospect.
Could you understand the scheme part?? All I ask is you try it once!(at home of course) If you have any Questions feel free to ask.
Had a pretty good run today.
PS. I just edited this post. How come Im no longer allowed the option to edit my previous posts???Anybody? I Deleted my previous post assuming you were only allowed to edit the two most recent. This wasnt the case.
Love it.
Using progressions of some kind, as an AP move, in certain situations, with virtually no risk, doesn't seem to be anything anyone talks about per se.
Guess no surprise to anyone I think any BJ player should know and understand progressions.
But, then again, things like card-sequencing, clumping, steering bust-cards, if one even can, but, assuming one can, not even knowing where to steer it or why, is a lot more "voo-doo" to me than use of progressions.
Using progressions of some kind, as an AP move, in certain situations, with virtually no risk, doesn't seem to be anything anyone talks about per se.
Guess no surprise to anyone I think any BJ player should know and understand progressions.
But, then again, things like card-sequencing, clumping, steering bust-cards, if one even can, but, assuming one can, not even knowing where to steer it or why, is a lot more "voo-doo" to me than use of progressions.
see like i was saying before it's almost as if you are chasing loss's and coasting on gains. well i guess the nature of the game is such that you have to overcome loss's inorder to ever get ahead or break even. but i guess what i'm wondering is are you actually keeping tabs of how many units you are down and then making higher 'sized' bets so as to 'hopefully' get back even or ahead?
that sort of approach is something i actually try to avoid with the fuzzy count. admittedly it is very tempting. but what i try and do is just model my bets according to what the ideal optimal bet would be if i knew the actual count instead of what my fuzzy idea of the count is.
that sort of approach is something i actually try to avoid with the fuzzy count. admittedly it is very tempting. but what i try and do is just model my bets according to what the ideal optimal bet would be if i knew the actual count instead of what my fuzzy idea of the count is.
I guess you could pretty much say I do coast on gains and chase losses to some degree - especially since I really do want to at least break even in a session. Or come close lol.
And yes I try to relate everything as if I had flat bet every hand while knowing how many units "bigger" bets have made-up or lost. Quite often I do not try to make it all up in one bet.
So how do you figure your "optimal" bet?
And yes I try to relate everything as if I had flat bet every hand while knowing how many units "bigger" bets have made-up or lost. Quite often I do not try to make it all up in one bet.
So how do you figure your "optimal" bet?
so as far as we've boiled it down here (and i suspect i've over simplified it) it seems to me that you are making bet size decisions based upon what degree of risk your willing to take inorder to get back even or hopefully a little ahead measured against how you know a basic strategy player who does employ departures according to the count can expect to experience negative or positive fluctuation. and playing a 'good' double deck game as i think you like to do then you are playing in about as close to a fifty-fifty game as is relatively easily found. so it's like you know in the long haul that if you are moderate with your bets that the damage is relatively minimal so that knowing that for what ever reason you can poke those larger bets out there as a gamble and just maybe hit some good ones. but overall your expecting your results will fluctuate and you may end up in the long run down some but not down so much that it's going to negatively influence your financial well being. time being your having some fun and realizing the ups and downs of taking a gamble.......?
bet hedging
so Kasi maybe what you are doing uses the idea of hedging one's bets?
it's too me an interesting concept. really one i actually know nothing about i guess lol. but i think it means to know the worst case risk and deciding if that is acceptable while also knowing how good things could turn out and then going for it.
guess i'll have to look up the definition of hedging bets, ect. and see if i'm even close to right.
so Kasi maybe what you are doing uses the idea of hedging one's bets?
it's too me an interesting concept. really one i actually know nothing about i guess lol. but i think it means to know the worst case risk and deciding if that is acceptable while also knowing how good things could turn out and then going for it.
guess i'll have to look up the definition of hedging bets, ect. and see if i'm even close to right.
Kasi said:
Was wondering what you've been doing
Affirmative.
Thats a pretty good question, unfortunately I didnt keep track of the win/loss ratio. If I had to estimate, I would say, I would of lost about 100 units anyway flat-betting. Thier were-on several occasions where I lost every hand on the shoe. Hardly any splits,doubles or Blackjacks. It was a frozen wave of cards, thats words cant describe
Nevertheless, it was some great practice! Using count #2,with a secondary, I could determine counts #1 and #3.
1. 42334320-1-5 0/ IC.93
2.02334320-1-4 0(A+4/X-1)
3.02334320-1-3-4/BC.997
I would use count 3 for betting, and count 1 for Ins. And as far as the play of hands are concerned. I would use one of the three counts depending on the hand. For example: I would use count 3 for all hands of 7-10, A8-A9,Splitting tens, and 99s. Because I knew count 3 has the highest efficiency for these paticular hands. Like count 1 has the highest efficiency for insurance.
Likewise: When using count 2,(with the secondary) I would add the primary and secondary together to form count 1, when I had hands of 11, A2-A5 vs bust-card, 12-16 vs bust-card,88vsX, and Insurance.
So as you can see I had a pretty fun time using this count and learned alot.
And with this technique I believed I enhanced my PE. to around .80
It also taught me about the value of wonging with ace-reckoned counts. And why your PE is even less significant in positive counts.
Nevertheless, after the betting scheme failed, I used proper betting, with steady success, only to revert back to the A02.
Stay tuned for the Million dollar run. Coming soon to a message board near you.:cool2:
Sorry to hear about your comp problems. I get them too but end up with a smaller, lesser box from the attic and more transplanted parts lol.
You probably don't even half to cut holes in your lid so full-height cards can fit into half-height slots lmao.
Anyway, on what basis do you rate your system a failure?
That you're down an estimated 20 min units compared to flat-betting? When, in all liklihood, your average bet is alot more, maybe 2 to 3X?, than min bet? What EV were you expecting anyway?
How many hands do you think you played anyway? 40,000? How much wagered?
So, again I ask, what's your definition of "failure"?!
You probably don't even half to cut holes in your lid so full-height cards can fit into half-height slots lmao.
Anyway, on what basis do you rate your system a failure?
That you're down an estimated 20 min units compared to flat-betting? When, in all liklihood, your average bet is alot more, maybe 2 to 3X?, than min bet? What EV were you expecting anyway?
How many hands do you think you played anyway? 40,000? How much wagered?
So, again I ask, what's your definition of "failure"?!
Scavenger play, from Hole-carding + Scavenger play
When our flashing dealer ended his stint the table was still filled to capacity, but The Grifter wanted to continue playing anyway, and indicated that I should watch. This table was filled with some of the worst players I’ve ever seen, but Grif had been giving them solid advice. He swung into action when the ploppy at first base picked up hard eleven. The Grifter boldly asserted, "Flip it over - we're going partners on that." He tossed the player the other half of the double down amount as the ploppy replied "Let’s ride!" They won the hand when the dealer busted.
Grif worked the table for the next hour, getting a slew of partner-doubles and splits (including tens), demonstrating what Grosjean calls "scavenger blackjack." More often than not the others he was exploiting would thank him for "sharing the risk." I wandered off to another table for awhile and played solo, breaking even. Returning to The Grifter’s table towards the end of the hour, I watched the master in action as he advised everyone - the life of the party as always, as he took advantage of one of his new "table partners" who was declining insurance. The Grifter took the insurance bet and won and when the table partner asked how much he owed Grif he was told by a smiling Grifter, "all of it," whereupon the happless accomplice just shrugged and said, "better you then them because, Dude, your my advisor!" Shortly thereafter Grif colored up another 20 unit win at an otherwise unplayable table by any expert's evaluation - his style and outgoing personality allowing him to get away with things that I and most other counters would never even consider trying.
Grif worked the table for the next hour, getting a slew of partner-doubles and splits (including tens), demonstrating what Grosjean calls "scavenger blackjack." More often than not the others he was exploiting would thank him for "sharing the risk." I wandered off to another table for awhile and played solo, breaking even. Returning to The Grifter’s table towards the end of the hour, I watched the master in action as he advised everyone - the life of the party as always, as he took advantage of one of his new "table partners" who was declining insurance. The Grifter took the insurance bet and won and when the table partner asked how much he owed Grif he was told by a smiling Grifter, "all of it," whereupon the happless accomplice just shrugged and said, "better you then them because, Dude, your my advisor!" Shortly thereafter Grif colored up another 20 unit win at an otherwise unplayable table by any expert's evaluation - his style and outgoing personality allowing him to get away with things that I and most other counters would never even consider trying.
ZG... That's the stuff I'm always looking for to improve my game. Not the fact that you can make money with scavenger play but to try to work the entire table and get everyone to submit. I love it and I'm going to try it. Thanks that is good stuff.
P.S. Progession betting is not a long term winner but is very useful during a 6/8 deck shoe as the count climbs...the pit loves progression bets. It's good cover and will not normally hurt your bankroll even during nuetral/negative counts. Just keep the progression small and play tight.
P.S. Progession betting is not a long term winner but is very useful during a 6/8 deck shoe as the count climbs...the pit loves progression bets. It's good cover and will not normally hurt your bankroll even during nuetral/negative counts. Just keep the progression small and play tight.