Blackjack Manual by Jay Moore

[ukdave]

I know most of the AP wisdom on this forum will give me a tough time on this, because it is a progression betting system. However, I will ask the question anyway.

Has anyone had any experience in using the delayed and up method of betting proposed by Jay Moore in his book The Most powerful Blackjack Manual?

All replies welcome !

 

[aslan]

I know most of the AP wisdom on this forum will give me a tough time on this, because it is a progression betting system. However, I will ask the question anyway.

Has anyone had any experience in using the delayed and up method of betting proposed by Jay Moore in his book The Most powerful Blackjack Manual?

All replies welcome !

Shouldn't this go in VooDoo, since admittedly it is a progression betting system?

 

[KenSmith]

Moved.

 

[Sonny]

There have been a few discussions about this book:

http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=2959

Basically he is trying to cash in on the “non-random card clumping” craze that Jerry Patterson started back in the 80’s. In short, a delayed betting progression will perform exactly the same as a regular progression. The book and system have no value whatsoever.

-Sonny-

 

[ukdave]

Sonny thanks, the thread it was useful. Apologies to Ken for putting in general instead of Voodoo

 

[SPX]

I bought Jay's book a few months ago and have corresponded with him a bit via e-mail. I think his system is a very interesting one and deserves to be given a second look a) due to his background in mathematics, and b) because it is just an interesting system that varies a good bit from standard progressive methods.

As far as experience, I have run some tests at home by hand-dealing shoes and recording the results, but I never got around to testing it in a casino until recently.

In my previous two trips to Wendover I used what is an approximation of his system (I say approximation because I would lose track of the results of the series from time to time and would have to start over) and had good luck with it so far.

My first trip I bought in for a hundred, was up about $100 at one point, and then lost a good bit back to them before calling it quits for the night. The second trip I again bought in for $100, won about $130, stopped playing for a while, start playing again and lost $20 and called it quits for a profit of $110 for that trip.

APs: No need to go into any discussions of the math or how two trips aren't the long term. I am aware of this. He just asked about people's experiences and I offered what little experience I have.

 

[ukdave]

spx

thanks for the feedback. Similar experience to myself on this. There is ultimately little point in simulations, the cold hard cash in the casino is the only true acid test.

Good luck

ukdave

 

[aslan]

spx

thanks for the feedback. Similar experience to myself on this. There is ultimately little point in simulations, the cold hard cash in the casino is the only true acid test.

Good luck

ukdave

"Cold hard cash" over a very long period of time would be the next best thing to a true acid test. Theoretically, 10 people could go out using the same system and 3 of the 10 make money for several days or weeks and the other 7 go broke. I wouldn't want to encourage others to use such a system based on my own personal observations if I were one of the elite 3 who made money. In cards, mathematics is the only true acid test. There are no mysterious or unquantifiable forces at play with cards. If it's logical, it can be reduced to math. If it is a real advantage, it can be reduced to math. The only unseen force that might be worth exploring is prayer.

 

[SPX]

spx

thanks for the feedback. Similar experience to myself on this. There is ultimately little point in simulations, the cold hard cash in the casino is the only true acid test.

Good luck

ukdave

In a sense, I definitely agree with you. I don't know that I would say simulations are ultimately worthless, but despite the fact that everyone here will tell you there's no reason to do so, I continue to harbor doubts that a computer's randomly generated numbers are exactly comparable to actual hand-dealt physical cards.

I wish that just once someone, or perhaps a group of someones working in a team, would go through the trouble of hand-dealing a million hands and recording the results. That would be an invaluable resource.

As is stands, regardless of having a mathematical edge, what's important is that you have whatever edge is necessary to walk away ahead on that night. When you discredit non-counting systems out of hand, in a way you are completely disregarding the experience of the author. You are saying they are either a) exceedingly lucky, or b) a liar.

I've talked just a bit with Jay Moore via e-mail and I think he's sincere. He says he's been making money with his system for 20 years playing about 10 hours per week. And, despite the fact that he used to be a counter, his own system has proven to work for him.

In the end, regardless of the math and regardless of whether or not it would work for anyone else, all that is important is that your system works for YOU . . . for 20 years . . . two days a week . . . or however often you play.

 

[SPX]

"Cold hard cash" over a very long period of time would be the next best thing to a true acid test. Theoretically, 10 people could go out using the same system and 3 of the 10 make money for several days or weeks and the other 7 go broke. I wouldn't want to encourage others to use such a system based on my own personal observations if I were one of the elite 3 who made money. In cards, mathematics is the only true acid test. There are no mysterious or unquantifiable forces at play with cards. If it's logical, it can be reduced to math. If it is a real advantage, it can be reduced to math. The only unseen force that might be worth exploring is prayer.

I don't know, I'm at least open to the possibility that there maybe some elements that factor into the game that we are not currently aware of and that science does not currently acknowledge. Maybe it has to do with some sort of psychic energy. Hmm, I don't know. Maybe not.

It is sometimes really strange to win shoe after shoe with a certain dealer and then AS SOON as a new dealer comes in everything changes. Coincidence, perhaps. But sometimes "coincidence" is a just a word we use when we don't really understand what's going on.

 

[zengrifter]

I don't know, I'm at least open to the possibility that there maybe some elements that factor into the game that we are not currently aware of and that science does not currently acknowledge. Maybe it has to do with some sort of psychic energy. Hmm, I don't know. Maybe not.

It is sometimes really strange to win shoe after shoe with a certain dealer and then AS SOON as a new dealer comes in everything changes. Coincidence, perhaps. But sometimes "coincidence" is a just a word we use when we don't really understand what's going on.

Many elements come into play that cannot be utilized by counting -

Karma
Astrology
Biorithym
Intent
Chaos Theory
Etc.

But I don't think Jay Moore has figured it out. zg

 

[ukdave]

spx and asian. I am grateful for the debate on this one. I am totally convinced that the maths give the AP players the edge, you simply cannot argue with wisdom on this site, elsewhere and the evidence in the litrature. I particularly like authors like Ian andersen and Arnold Snyder.

What I have still to be convinced of though is that a faultless basic strategy player with a workable progession method cannot with impeccable discipline, not take the natual streaks in the game and regularly walk away with a profit. I know in the fullness of time the in-built edge will grind the profit away, but my personal study and play of this fascinating game leads me to believe that only the absolute best blackjack players can really make a living out of this. I am talking here about a small fraction of one percent. I salute those professinalss, you are the top of your game and you deserve your rewards. However, what about the rest of the 99% + of us, the ones the casinos make their money out of and the reason why those professionals can take their share and not hurt the casino bottom line. I am sure there must be another method of play which allows us part-timers to take a little bit of the action, without needing to be a 'professional' counter. I may be wrong, but I think Jay Moore has created and shared an effective method with us.

All I know is that nothing is simple in blackjack. Counting takes study and discipline. Using a progression method also needs absolute discipline. When you consider the ups and downs in Blackjack, it's hard to believe that any method works conisistently. I just love a story Ian Andersen tells in Burning the Tables.... where he lost consistently in one casino and started to question if he was doing anything wrong. He wasn't!

 

[ukdave]

whoops meant aslan - sorry

 

[SPX]

Many elements come into play that cannot be utilized by counting -

Karma
Astrology
Biorithym
Intent
Chaos Theory
Etc.

But I don't think Jay Moore has figured it out. zg

Zen-

That wasn't really a Jay Moore thing, it was more of a Me thing. While I haven't had any experiences in life that are truly unexplainable, there are people close to me that I trust (my father, a very close friend) who have told me stories of their own experiences regarding instances of precognition that are definitely unexplainable by today's scientific understanding.

I am intensely skeptical about most everything, but also open-minded. Quantum theory at least opens up room for discussion about whether or not things such as the energy or intentions of an individual (e.g. the dealer) can affect the behavior of physical reality (e.g. the cards).

Again, as a disclaimer, I should say that I don't BELIEVE IN such a thing, but I don't necessarily disbelieve in them either.


-SPX

 

[SPX]

spx and asian. I am grateful for the debate on this one. I am totally convinced that the maths give the AP players the edge, you simply cannot argue with wisdom on this site, elsewhere and the evidence in the litrature. I particularly like authors like Ian andersen and Arnold Snyder.

What I have still to be convinced of though is that a faultless basic strategy player with a workable progession method cannot with impeccable discipline, not take the natual streaks in the game and regularly walk away with a profit. I know in the fullness of time the in-built edge will grind the profit away, but my personal study and play of this fascinating game leads me to believe that only the absolute best blackjack players can really make a living out of this. I am talking here about a small fraction of one percent. I salute those professinalss, you are the top of your game and you deserve your rewards. However, what about the rest of the 99% + of us, the ones the casinos make their money out of and the reason why those professionals can take their share and not hurt the casino bottom line. I am sure there must be another method of play which allows us part-timers to take a little bit of the action, without needing to be a 'professional' counter. I may be wrong, but I think Jay Moore has created and shared an effective method with us.

All I know is that nothing is simple in blackjack. Counting takes study and discipline. Using a progression method also needs absolute discipline. When you consider the ups and downs in Blackjack, it's hard to believe that any method works conisistently. I just love a story Ian Andersen tells in Burning the Tables.... where he lost consistently in one casino and started to question if he was doing anything wrong. He wasn't!

I'm always up for a good debate and I stay open to the possibility that blackjack can be beaten, if not on paper, then in the real world on a session-by-session basis. To refer back to a point I made earlier, while I do believe that there is plenty of charlatanism in the gambling world, I do not believe that every writer who has written a book that advocates progression play is a liar and if they have been using their method to win consistently for 5 years or 10 or 20, then it works for them and that's probably all that's important to those guys regardless of all the mathematical analysis in the world.