Giving it a rest

[aslan]

Ladies and gentlemen our brother Aslan has a problem. Like Sagefrog said, what the hech happened to the nickle tables. And for that matter the quarter tables!!!!. Ya had to play a 50$ table to "get even"??
This was a fun trip?? Reading it I felt I was on Mr Toads wild ride!!!!
Starwars???? Geeze 300 bucks??? 300 bucks to me is still a lot of money,,,,
That's like a fill and a half of diesel fuel in my truck....
Here's a suggestion Aslan, bring 500 bucks with ya and play nickles, heck maybe 300 would do it.
Me thinks this sounded more like a "gambling trip" than an AP trip.
But hey,,,,,ya couldn't sleep soooooooooooo

Mac

Very observant, Machinist. I guess I could say I was "gambling" with the casino's money, since I was $700 or $800 winner at the time, but that would be kidding myself. I'd be the first one to say that once you win it, it's your money, not theirs. Still, it's a tiny bit justified by that fact-- but the deep, empty feeling inside when I blew that $300 told me that I should never try that stupid move again.

Now the $25 table bit. Maybe I should only play $5 or $10, but my experience in the past is that those low bets do not hold my interest much. I actually play a lot better at the $25 level, not that there isn't more risk, but I don't get as sloppy figuring it's only $5. Lack of discipline I suppose. Yup, you caught me gambling. :cry: But the way I was playing did seem to lower the variance considerably, so that I was never in danger of losing a humongous amount. Also, I played a lot of two hands, which seemed to lower variance even more. It seemed like hands tened to cancel out a lot buying me more time to wait for those super good shoes where you make a lot of money on doubles, splits and blackjacks. But should I really get in trouble, I still do keep the count and I can still revert to my old standby, an 8 to 10 unit spread. It's not that I can't afford to play-- it's just that I want to avoid the wide swings in variance as much as possible so that I don't get drawn into those ugly, drawn out fire fights. I'd rather make a little bit than make a lot if I have to go through all those changes and emotions engendered by the large swings in variance. Do I make any sense at all? :laugh: It's hard to explain. It's something like having your cake and eating it, too. :laugh::laugh: My wife is calling. I have to go. To be continued. :grin:

 

[Most Interesting Man]

A 100% ROR indicates to me that the spread is not sufficient to overcome house advantage.

It seems to me that you want to avoid the pain of negative variance that exceeds a certain comfort zone. If I understand your post, in the past you have been overbetting; not your BR but that comfort zone.

Many things drive that variance such as cover plays. Max bet plays a big part too. What if you fixed your max bet, maintained a 10x spread, but adjusted your minimum bet instead? Let's say that 2x150 is at the top of your comfort zone. You can have a spread of 10, but you would need to push your minimum down to 2x15. Assuming play from the top of the shoe, 2x15 - 2x150 should get you lower variance than 2x50 - 2x150 as well as a higher win rate just from being able to bet smaller on disadvantagous hands.

If you're aggressively backcounting and wonging out then your effective spread is huge: 2x0 - 2x150


I guess what I'm wondering is maybe it isn't the spread that's causing trouble but the max bet...

 

[sagefr0g]

Man, I don't like the sound of that 100% RoR. Does that mean that I have no, zero, nada, 0% chance of succeeding? Dang! That seems pretty doggone serious if you ask me. Did the sim factor in that I skedaddle when the count goes south and I also use the basic index plays? I think I can live with a 2.6% risk of ruin... but let me ask you, what bankroll amount was that based on? If $500, I could care less. If $5,000 or $10,000 or $25,000, then I am in that deep, stinky stuff for sure.

oopsie, good point aslan......... the life time bankroll used for the sim was $26,000 .
and it wasn't set for wonging out.
it was set for I18 .
the unit was $5
edit: h17daslsr rsa six deck two decks cut off
........ count used hi/lo one deck resolution

 

[metronome]

Aslan, good to know you will continue to post here. Like others have said, I never scroll past your posts. You always conduct yourself in a civil fashion, that is well thought out. Your responses to my PMs were genuine and kind.
You're welcome at any red chip table I will be inhabiting :grin:
Maybe during your self-imposed lull at higher stakes BJ, you will chalk up the ole' cue and slap some AP billiard play on some young whipper-snappers, for green money of course.
See ya 'round my friend.

 

[aslan]

A 100% ROR indicates to me that the spread is not sufficient to overcome house advantage.

It seems to me that you want to avoid the pain of negative variance that exceeds a certain comfort zone. If I understand your post, in the past you have been overbetting; not your BR but that comfort zone.

Many things drive that variance such as cover plays. Max bet plays a big part too. What if you fixed your max bet, maintained a 10x spread, but adjusted your minimum bet instead? Let's say that 2x150 is at the top of your comfort zone. You can have a spread of 10, but you would need to push your minimum down to 2x15. Assuming play from the top of the shoe, 2x15 - 2x150 should get you lower variance than 2x50 - 2x150 as well as a higher win rate just from being able to bet smaller on disadvantagous hands.

If you're aggressively backcounting and wonging out then your effective spread is huge: 2x0 - 2x150


I guess what I'm wondering is maybe it isn't the spread that's causing trouble but the max bet...

Thanks for your comments. They are greatly appreciated. I'll try to clarify better where I'm at.

To gain his maximum long-term advantage a card counter must have a sizable betting spread within the limitations of his bankroll. The risk for large session losses is great due to having large maximum bets out during extended losing streaks in +4 and above counts. But this evens out over time and only the steady gain of maximizing one's advantage remains. I have no problem with going for the long haul, but you're right, the large short-term losses that appear every so often are outside my comfort zone. What bothers me most is the threat of several large short-term losses back to back, a risk that is always looming close. It is not likely, but it is entirely possible, to have two or three (even more) large short term losses in a row. Just because it has never happened to me yet, does not mean it will not someday appear. Every time I get my back against the wall on a trip and come within one or two or three max bets of losing my trip bankroll, I become very cognizant of this possibility.

My thinking is that because I am more a recreational player than a professional player, why not settle for a lower win rate in exchange for reduced variance, and the higher risk of those large trip losses. I certainly don't want to play a negative EV game, but I would like to reduce the risk of large individual losses even at the cost of a greater number of small losses, so long as the overall expectation is positive. Does that make any sense? I hope I made it clear enough.

On the lowering of my minimum bet, where I have been playing, I generally must sacrifice S17 for H17, and at least, 6-deck for 8-deck, and often, decent penetration to play the lower limit game. When I am cutting back my betting spread, these differences are magnified, so I look for the best game rules and pen possible. I have been finding this first at the $25 min betting level (the $50 and $100 levels are even better pen-wise, but too high for my purposes). Believe me, I would not have persisted at the $50 table very long if things had gone south. The fact is, of 12 hours I played, 10 1/2 hours were at $25, 1/2 hour at $10, and 1 hour at $50.

 

[Syph]

Hi Aslan,

Would you like to know the truth, or would you like to hear more stories?

I think you'd like the truth, but maybe not. I don't want to be presumptuous. Some prefer to feed off the rose of illusion. Most, actually. Maybe you are different, maybe not. It's your choice:

The red or blue pill.

Red we go down the rabbit hole, blue we return you to your regular scheduled programming.

Your call. No pressure.

Best,
Syph

 

[aslan]

Hi Aslan,

Would you like to know the truth, or would you like to hear more stories?

I think you'd like the truth, but maybe not. I don't want to be presumptuous. Some prefer to feed off the rose of illusion. Most, actually. Maybe you are different, maybe not. It's your choice:

The red or blue pill.

Red we go down the rabbit hole, blue we return you to your regular scheduled programming.

Your call. No pressure.

Best,
Syph

You've pretty much indicated what is coming, but, yes, I would rather hear the truth than have my ears tickled by well-meaning friends. The truth is the best gift a friend can give, but it's also the most rejected one. I can already tell you are well-intentioned, so I don't see how I could be angry, even if I don't agree with what you tell me, which is unlikely, since I consider you to be in a better position to see than myself. So fire away. :laugh:

 

[kewljason]

Hi Aslan,

Would you like to know the truth, or would you like to hear more stories?

I think you'd like the truth, but maybe not. I don't want to be presumptuous. Some prefer to feed off the rose of illusion. Most, actually. Maybe you are different, maybe not. It's your choice:

The red or blue pill.

Red we go down the rabbit hole, blue we return you to your regular scheduled programming.

Your call. No pressure.

Best,
Syph

Oh boy! This isn't going to be pretty. :laugh:

I think we all know where this is headed. Maybe it's good thing. I can't say that I disagree. I kind of hinted at my thought in that direction already, in another thread, but just didn't feel it my place to say so. I figured somebody would. I thought it would be CP or Maz, but Maz doesn't like to participate any more and the big cat is a kinder and gentler breed these days. Thank god we still have syph to tell it like it is. :laugh:

 

[Sharky]

let's fix your game

.. my experience in the past is that those low bets do not hold my interest much. ... I don't get as sloppy figuring it's only $5.

this indicates to me that $5 should be your unit bet...my unit bet is small that it is, frankly, meaningless to my session br...lay in the weeds son, (erh, alSON), you are not there to bet 1 unit...it SHOULD be boring to you :joker: at -ev before wonging out...we are there to lay down several units (not throw down :laugh

...I still do keep the count and I can still revert to my old standby, an 8 to 10 unit spread.

WEAK spread....instead of capping at $250, ramp that fin x 50 AT LEAST

clearly, WAY more obvious to PC..push the limits as you are a rec player that gets around

all the best, my friend

 

[aslan]

Oh boy! This isn't going to be pretty. :laugh:

I think we all know where this is headed. Maybe it's good thing. I can't say that I disagree. I kind of hinted at my thought in that direction already, in another thread, but just didn't feel it my place to say so. I figured somebody would. I thought it would be CP or Maz, but Maz doesn't like to participate any more and the big cat is a kinder and gentler breed these days. Thank god we still have syph to tell it like it is. :laugh:

Hey, I'm just trying to have my cake and eat it. Now someone wants to tell me it doesn't work that way. :laugh: Why do you think I haven't run any sims... besides laziness... I probably don't want to find out. But better to face up to whatever now than on the green felt. Card counting gets the money so slow! I can't stand it. When I win a big one I want to keep it. This steady $10 or $25 an hour is sheer torture. :cry: :whip: It's sure not like pool where you can win every time you match up. :cool2:

 

[aslan]

this indicates to me that $5 should be your unit bet...my unit bet is small that it is, frankly, meaningless to my session br...lay in the weeds son, (erh, alSON), you are not there to bet 1 unit...it SHOULD be boring to you :joker: at -ev before wonging out...we are there to lay down several units (not throw down :laugh



WEAK spread....instead of capping at $250, ramp that fin x 50 AT LEAST

clearly, WAY more obvious to PC..push the limits as you are a rec player that gets around

all the best, my friend

I hear ya. Boring is the name of the game. But, hey, 50X is not boring.:grin: Don't you think that is a little bit out of line. I mean, what would Blackjack Avenger say? What's the RoR on 50X for max bet anyway?

 

[Machinist]

Hey, I'm just trying to have my cake and eat it. Now someone wants to tell me it doesn't work that way. :laugh: Why do you think I haven't run any sims... besides laziness... I probably don't want to find out. But better to face up to whatever now than on the green felt. Card counting gets the money so slow! I can't stand it. When I win a big one I want to keep it. This steady $10 or $25 an hour is sheer torture. :cry: :whip: It's sure not like pool where you can win every time you match up. :cool2:

Whoaaaaaaaa big boy!!!!!! Ya want to keep your +Variance!!!!!.!! It's called a F***n fluctuation, a short term loan.... That's it ,nuthing more nothing less. A - fluctuation is a temporary deposit in a store. Your win is your stinkin couple a % !!!!.!
You know all this,,,,,, so quit your friggin bawling!!!!. Piss baby.....:grin:
Now bend over and take it like a man!!!!
Besides what would do with this new found wealth if you could win every time???? Gamblers keep betting bigger and bigger to "get that high they oh so need".
On par with a drug addict I would think..
Go play some pool, or golf,,,,,,
:grin::grin:

Machinist

 

[aslan]

Whoaaaaaaaa big boy!!!!!! Ya want to keep your +Variance!!!!!.!! It's called a F***n fluctuation, a short term loan.... That's it ,nuthing more nothing less. A - fluctuation is a temporary deposit in a store. Your win is your stinkin couple a % !!!!.!
You know all this,,,,,, so quit your friggin bawling!!!!. Piss baby.....:grin:
Now bend over and take it like a man!!!!
Besides what would do with this new found wealth if you could win every time???? Gamblers keep betting bigger and bigger to "get that high they oh so need".
On par with a drug addict I would think..
Go play some pool, or golf,,,,,,
:grin::grin:

Machinist

All I can say is :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: !

 

[Machinist]

All I can say is :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: !

Yea me too!!!

Mac

 

[victorino]

aslan,

i wish you well in your new venture, and i look forward to your stories closer to the recreational side of bj.

victorino

 

[aslan]

aslan,

i wish you well in your new venture, and i look forward to your stories closer to the recreational side of bj.

victorino

First, I have to figure out "how" to be a recreational player. :laugh: From some of the feedback, I'm becoming a g-a-m-b-l-e-r. That can't be good. I'm starting to feel like one of those voodoo progression players who argue that they are winning so it must be good. Don't wanna go there.

I'm trying to learn poker, but that is not a quick learn.

 

[Syph]

Whoaaaaaaaa big boy!!!!!! Ya want to keep your +Variance!!!!!.!! It's called a F***n fluctuation, a short term loan.... That's it ,nuthing more nothing less. A - fluctuation is a temporary deposit in a store. Your win is your stinkin couple a % !!!!.!
You know all this,,,,,, so quit your friggin bawling!!!!. Piss baby.....:grin:
Now bend over and take it like a man!!!!
Besides what would do with this new found wealth if you could win every time???? Gamblers keep betting bigger and bigger to "get that high they oh so need".
On par with a drug addict I would think..
Go play some pool, or golf,,,,,,
:grin::grin:

Machinist

Gee, I'm not sure if there's anything for me to add.



Actually, I fully appreciate where Aslan is coming from, and I've always felt it a touch negligent that counting is promoted so recklessly. It is a winning strategy, to that there is no doubt ... but the people employing it are not succeeding. It's estimated that 99% of all counters end up losing money. Obviously, the old learning model isn't working. We need a new approach, or at least a stronger foundation to build on.

I came across this quote sometime ago:

"Poker is a game of people played with cards, not a game of cards played with people."
-Tom McEvoy

And the same is true of blackjack:

Blackjack is a game of people played with cards.

So let's start there.

***

And I apologize for cutting this short. I must sleep, long night. Busy weekend. However, give me a couple days to collect my thoughts and I'll get back to you.

Best,
Syph

(ps And KJ, I've mentioned this before, but it deserves repeating. You do not give yourself nearly enough credit for having succeeded to the extent you have, with the tools you possess. It is rare.)

 

[creeping panther]

Aslan

First, I have to figure out "how" to be a recreational player. :laugh: From some of the feedback, I'm becoming a g-a-m-b-l-e-r. That can't be good. I'm starting to feel like one of those voodoo progression players who argue that they are winning so it must be good. Don't wanna go there.

I'm trying to learn poker, but that is not a quick learn.

You really need to make the BASH, it is not too late and I think it would be great for you on so many levels..you have the money and the time, just come on,,,bring the wife,,you will not regret it!

CP

 

[ohbehave]

Gee, I'm not sure if there's anything for me to add.



Actually, I fully appreciate where Aslan is coming from, and I've always felt it a touch negligent that counting is promoted so recklessly. It is a winning strategy, to that there is no doubt ... but the people employing it are not succeeding. It's estimated that 99% of all counters end up losing money. Obviously, the old learning model isn't working. We need a new approach, or at least a stronger foundation to build on.

I came across this quote sometime ago:

"Poker is a game of people played with cards, not a game of cards played with people."
-Tom McEvoy

And the same is true of blackjack:

Blackjack is a game of people played with cards.

So let's start there.

***

And I apologize for cutting this short. I must sleep, long night. Busy weekend. However, give me a couple days to collect my thoughts and I'll get back to you.

Best,
Syph

(ps And KJ, I've mentioned this before, but it deserves repeating. You do not give yourself nearly enough credit for having succeeded to the extent you have, with the tools you possess. It is rare.)

Syph, if you don't mind, start a new topic on your thoughts. I think it could be a very important thread.

 

[aslan]

this indicates to me that $5 should be your unit bet...my unit bet is small that it is, frankly, meaningless to my session br...lay in the weeds son, (erh, alSON), you are not there to bet 1 unit...it SHOULD be boring to you :joker: at -ev before wonging out...we are there to lay down several units (not throw down :laugh



WEAK spread....instead of capping at $250, ramp that fin x 50 AT LEAST

clearly, WAY more obvious to PC..push the limits as you are a rec player that gets around

all the best, my friend

So you're suggesting I bet $1,250 at +4 and above? By my calculation I'll need $125,000 bankroll to sustain that kind of max bet. What am I missing here? Or does everyone here believe that Aslan is Donald Trump in disguise? With all due respect, Sharky, I definitely don't have that kind of money to throw at a blackjack bankroll. But I can see your point at $5 min bet. That would be $250 at 50 X, but still require a considerable bankroll to sustain, that is, if RoR means anything to you. How many here employ a 50 times max bet? Please, don't all answer at once. :joker:

PS-- It has occurred to me that maybe you were kidding. :laugh: