Semi-Voodoo System

[psyduck]

Now for the real kick in the teeth: You won't win a higher percentage of hands during high counts than you do during low counts!

At higher TC, you do win slightly more hands than at lower TC. Here is the break down for the 6-deck shoe game I play (HiLo):

TC              %hands win          %hands lost             %hands pushed
5                  43.5                 45.6                        10.8
4                  43.3                 46.3                        10.4
3                  43.1                 47.3                         9.6
2                  43.0                 48.5                         8.6
1                  42.8                 49.0                         8.2
0                  42.8                 49.0                         8.2
-1                 42.9                 48.8                         8.3
-2                 42.8                 48.8                         8.3
-3                 42.7                 49.0                         8.3
-4                 42.5                 49.3                         8.2
-5                 42.2                 49.6                         8.2

 

[zengrifter]

What I'm thinking of is why not to have the best of both worlds.

Thats the kind of out of the bun thinking we need around here. zg

 

[justme]

Of course I'm right... My system uses Card Counting to make money, and uses a martingale system as cover... The martingale system does NOT make money. You seem fixed on using your martingale system, and want to find a situation in which it will make money... It will make money if you only play positive counts, sure, but not as much as the theorhetical 1-10 spread I've presented.

I haven't research martingale that much all I know you suppose to increase 1 unit after each loss, correct? I prefer to play like this: $10 $20. After 2 losses in a row (-60) - $10 $25. After 2 losses in a row (-70) - $10 $20 $60 (-180) and when start all over again. Since streaks do happen, there's a good chance sooner or later things will go your way. Such system can be adjusted to the count. For instance: you play $10 $20, count is increasing but if you win, you don't raise the stakes. Keep making some money and you'd be amazed how much you can win sometimes playing such simple progression even without counting. If you lose this progression 2 times in a row and count is high you start playing $10 $25. If count goes down you leave if not you continue and so on... You can add $5 or $10 to both steps in progression as count growth but only if you lost 2 hands before that. Casino management can watch you playing all the time - all they will notice is that you play progressions Is it something similar to your proposal?

 

[justme]

At higher TC, you do win slightly more hands than at lower TC.

IMHO, the point is not how many hands you win or lose but that you play with advantage. Correct me if I'm wrong: let's say you play while count is neutral you suppose to lose xx cents from each $10 bet you make in the long run.The same logic applies to the time when count is high. You may lose more hands than win. But on average, in the long run you make more money than lose. That's why I think progressions are very suitable to counting. You adjust it in the way that your average bet on high counts exceeds your average bet on lower counts. You lose some opportunities to make big bets but win in security. There's a little chance casino will suspect you are card counting or at least they won't be sure.

 

[justme]

Thats the kind of out of the bun thinking we need around here. zg

Thank you

 

[Machinist]

ZG. "Bum thinking?"

Mac