Speaking of bad variance

[DonR]

I don't normally pay attention to how many hands in a row I win or lose, but this last experience clearly shows that anything is possible in this damn game.

Just yesterday I played this 8D shoe game, the count was around neutral for the first few decks, and then it went to +2. I raised my bet to 2 units, and from that moment on, until the end of the shoe, I lost 9 hands in a row (the count was always positive, so no real reason to leave).

On top of that, I lost the first 4 hands of the next shoe (betting singles), for the total of 13 losing hands in a row. Had a couple of double downs and one split, to make things even a little bit worse. What a terrible experience! The only "good" thing was the fact I was only betting 2 units, but still this terrible sequence cost me 28 units. It could have been much, much worse, had I raised my bets, as the count was calling for in that first shoe (it reached +4, but I decided to keep it at 2 units, as I was losing them all).

Nothing seems to work for me, lately. 9 out of last 10 sessions were losing sessions, for the accumulated losses of around 250 units. Not good at all.

How many losing hands, or sessions in a row do you guys recall, as your worst experience?

 

[Mr. T]

We all have these moments. Many times too often, much to our chargrin.
Move on and play like a Pro and look forward to your next battle.

 

[UK-21]

Sounds like you've picked up my poker bug - where the results are such that if you didn't know for sure to the contrary you'd be justified in suspecting something was amiss (how many hands in one session can someone take the pot on the river card?)

I've had similar experiences at the BJ tables - once I lost 13 units in a single 4deck shoe (I think I won just one hand out of 15), and then lost the first one of the newly shuffled shoe, at which point I left as the count on this single first round plummented to RC-13. Have also lost 13 units in just 15 hands playing BS against a CSM. My worst case was where I was playing online and I lost 45 units in around 200 hands played over 30 minutes - flat betting and playing BS. I checked on the WoO web site, and the probability of this happening is shown in one of his tables as around 1%.

There's no answer to it. Just don't fall into the trap of playing with money you can't afford to lose in chasing an "upswing".

 

[itrack]

I had a funny streak once... It started with gettin BJ or successful doubles at max bets for one whole (second hand-end of shoe) shoe. So in short, i was killing this table. Then after that shoe I went and ate. After i came back , I think I won 1 hand out of 2 whole shoes (quite a few max bets also). I decided to leave the casino and head to a new one shortly after, where I think i only won about 5% of the hands for the rest of the night, which was about 7 hours. 5% is most likely a overstatement too. There was several shoes where I would not win a single hand, and way too many of them were at max bets. I specifically remember one hand where the dealer made a mistake and missed dealing a card to a player, which would have resulted in me losing the hand, but after the cards were burned, the dealer ended up busting. This was the only hand of the shoe that I won, and I shouldn't have won it in the first place. At the end of this horrible streak, I was down nearly 1000 units I like to call this the BJ Twilight Zone.

 

[bjhack]

Variance is a bitch, isn't she.

 

[sabre]

If you're counting and spreading 1-2 on an 8D shoe ... I expect many more losses in your future.

 

[DonR]

For clarification, I only said I was betting 2 units throughout this horrible sequence, starting at TC of +2, and not raising it up (luckily for me) with higher counts, because I was losing all these hands, one after another.

The whole point of this thread was to give an example of how bad variance can be, not what the proper betting spreads are. There seems to be so many "big winners" here, so I thought that, for a change, showing that this game has two faces, might be useful for a few people here.

 

[matt21]

How many losing hands, or sessions in a row do you guys recall, as your worst experience?

I had one 6D shoe where i lost 59 units playing heads up. And I have had shoes where I have won very few hands (I dont keep count of such shoes).
My worst losing run was losing 364 units in 77 sessions (151 hours). At the risk of being labelled as 'data mining', within that stretch was one episode where i lost 379 units over 44 sessions (92 hours) whihch comprised 15 winners and 29 losers. On the flipside though I have had just as many positive sequences to counter those negative ones.

I think the key is to play as many hands as possible as quickly as possible so that you at least approach N0.

Don, losing 250 units in 10 sessions is big. That's like 1/4 of your bankroll? What's your EV and SD?

Matt

 

[JSTAT]

For clarification, I only said I was betting 2 units throughout this horrible sequence, starting at TC of +2, and not raising it up (luckily for me) with higher counts, because I was losing all these hands, one after another.

The whole point of this thread was to give an example of how bad variance can be, not what the proper betting spreads are. There seems to be so many "big winners" here, so I thought that, for a change, showing that this game has two faces, might be useful for a few people here.

I am guilty of losing a few session bankrolls. It happens. Do you use the hi-lo count? Maybe most of the aces were played before you were torched. It's not fun to lose, but it goes with the territory. If you are losing too many session bankrolls, it's time to re-evaluate your counting method.

 

[kewljason]

I had one 6D shoe where i lost 59 units playing heads up. And I have had shoes where I have won very few hands (I dont keep count of such shoes).
My worst losing run was losing 364 units in 77 sessions (151 hours). At the risk of being labelled as 'data mining', within that stretch was one episode where i lost 379 units over 44 sessions (92 hours) whihch comprised 15 winners and 29 losers. On the flipside though I have had just as many positive sequences to counter those negative ones.

Matt

There is no doubt the huge fluctuation is at times one of the more difficult aspects to deal with. I would think even more so with you matt, if you are using a 24-1 spread. Would be great when you are winning and great in the EV long run, but getting there could be trying.

 

[ihate17]

26 hands, not counting doubles, splits or pushes

How many losing hands, or sessions in a row do you guys recall, as your worst experience?

I once sat at a table, flat betted 10 hands, lost each and with a slightly negative count left the table. I then sat at another table and repeated that sequence exactly. Then I went to another casino and lost my first six hands before winning one. After that win the count continued to rise on the table and I continued to lose, now much bigger bets. Heads up with the dealer for the last 5 hands or so, playing 2 hands, the count finally began to go down as the big cards came out and I actually almost got all my money back from the current table and the two previous ones. At one point I had perhaps won 4 of 40 hands. I generally save this story for the guys who think martingale works and they can not lose over X hands in a row, but they tend not to believe it till it happens to them.

Variance does work both ways but the rules of blackjack make it much more likely that your longest lossing streak will be longer than your longest winning streak.

ihate17

 

[Mr. T]

For clarification, I only said I was betting 2 units throughout this horrible sequence, starting at TC of +2, and not raising it up (luckily for me) with higher counts, because I was losing all these hands, one after another.

The whole point of this thread was to give an example of how bad variance can be, not what the proper betting spreads are. There seems to be so many "big winners" here, so I thought that, for a change, showing that this game has two faces, might be useful for a few people here.

Yes, you can quote me on this one. " Winners like to boast about their winning and the losers will retire quietly to lick their wounds".

 

[tfg]

I had a similar experience yesterday. The first two rounds of an 8D shoe, there were about 5 10's, so there was probably like a +15 to + 20 running count at least, and there were about 6 or so 5's in that bunch. I still lost almost every had the rest of the way and won probably 2 or 3 of the remaining 10 or however many hands. It was brutal and cleaned my right out. I couldn't hit a double to save my life and every time dealer was turning over a 13 or something and making the hand. That was just that shoe, the one before it wasn't much better. It's happened before, but this was probably the worst I've ever experienced.

 

[KOLAN]

it is blackjack
bont play laik roobot not all times need take card 15vs9 15vs10 16vs9 16vs10
not all times need stand 12,13,14,15,16vs4,5,6
samples 6 deck game 3 deck played zen count +1 15vs9
if last 5 cards card 2-7 you need stand
i play laik this results maximum 4 lusing sesion

 

[dumbWinner]

Ok i went through this - this week. The week started off with extremely good variance and ended with some bad variance. Starting monday , i was + 160 units or so, and friday and saturday it went down to +100. The last two sessions i played were short enough and i lost so much that i ran far away from the casino. :grin:But still it was a good week. .

 

[UK-21]

And just to rub salt into it . . . .

Being bored on Saturday afternoon for an hour, thought I'd visit the WoO site and stay on top of my BS with the simulator there. Played for around an hour and a bit and think I would have clocked around 500 hands. Played BS whilst flat betting - so the lowest level of variance expected. Lost 55 units. Checked out the odds of this occuring on the BJ RoR page - 4% (or 24-1).

So lining up quite nicely with my poker results. At least there was none of the folding stuff on the line. I suppose an optimist would say that I'd jsut saved £165??

 

[Martin Gayle]

it is blackjack
bont play laik roobot not all times need take card 15vs9 15vs10 16vs9 16vs10
not all times need stand 12,13,14,15,16vs4,5,6
samples 6 deck game 3 deck played zen count +1 15vs9
if last 5 cards card 2-7 you need stand
i play laik this results maximum 4 lusing sesion

Unless the count and the index call for these deviations this is poor advice.

 

[Captain]

The whole point of this thread was to give an example of how bad variance can be, not what the proper betting spreads are. There seems to be so many "big winners" here, so I thought that, for a change, showing that this game has two faces, might be useful for a few people here.

I hear ya, had my absolute worst trip last week. I lost about 90% of my bankroll in 2 sessions (12 hours). The counts were high, but I just couldn't win. Everytime I lost a couple of big bets, I told myself it wasn't a big deal because there were still a couple of hands left in the shoe and the count was really high. I figured I'd get it all back and then some....I didn't. I felt like I was doing something wrong. I never thought it could get this bad.

 

[tribute]

I hear ya, had my absolute worst trip last week. I lost about 90% of my bankroll in 2 sessions (12 hours). The counts were high, but I just couldn't win. Everytime I lost a couple of big bets, I told myself it wasn't a big deal because there were still a couple of hands left in the shoe and the count was really high. I figured I'd get it all back and then some....I didn't. I felt like I was doing something wrong. I never thought it could get this bad.

OK. Now tell us about some of your good variance as a counter. Since you are playing with an advantage, most of your sessions are winners, right?

 

[monopoly]

DonR, please give my thread a visit: http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=13177

You're not alone, and read how it turned out for me with time