Strategies

[Blagger]

From my own experience (not much) and from what I have read there are three basic elements to playing blackjack:
game-play management (basic strategy);
betting management (card counting, progressive systems, etc);
money management (setting stop losses, quitting while ahead, etc).

Playing the optimal basic strategy is obviously essential at all times except in tournaments or when using negative progressions.

Card counting only works in real casinos and then only on single decks or up to four decks with high penetrations. Even then its difficult because the casinos consider it as cheating and are watching for it. All other betting strategies including progressive betting systems do not improve the edge and can be a fast and sure route to ruin.

It seems to me that money management seems to be under-estimated as an advantage. For example the freedom to quit while ahead is not enjoyed by the dealer. This then is surely a very real advantage even if it cannot be easily expressed mathematically and could help when playing blackjack at internet casinos. In 50% of sessions you will be up on the first hand. In most sessions you can expect to be ahead at some point, especially early on. Even when it goes against you from the start you should be able to grind your way back to an ahead position if you play long enough with a big enough pot. Using $10 bets and quitting when just $10 ahead and moving to another casino site you could hit many casinos each day for just $10 each. 10 casinos a day 7/52 would pay over $36,000 per annum.

Obviously my inexperience is getting the better of me and I am missing something fundamental. Please tell me before I blow my life savings.

 

[LeonShuffle]

Well, the fact is that moving on to another casino is the exact same as staying at the same one if you think about it. You win $10 at casino A, then move on to casino B for another random hand. Why not just stay at A and try to win another $10. It's all the same and it WILL grind you down eventually due to the half percent disadvantage (using correct BS) that all on-line casinos enjoy.

And card-counting in real casinos isn't quite as hopeless as you think. At least I don't think.

 

[Blagger]

Leonshuffle,

Thanks for your reply. Yes I can see that logically, assuming hands are randomised, it should make no difference whether I stay at one casino playing the same session or move on. Yet when I practice on free games using perfect BS I usually am able to get ahead at some point quite quickly if only briefly. If I keep playing I more often than not give it back and start losing. The house edge only becomes significant over many hands. The edge per hand is practically nothing so at the start of a session the dealer should have very little advantage in the first few hands.

Don't worry. I know this is flawed logic. Restricting winnings without setting a stop-loss cannot be wise. It would be great if there was a way to take just a very small sum from each of several different internet casinos each day without attracting attention. Aside from bonus "abuse".

 

[Canceler]

Blagger: You might find this thread interesting, if you haven't seen it already. http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=511

choongie went off to seek his fortune with much the same plan you have, and hasn't been heard from since!

 

[Blagger]

Canceler - Thanks for replying. Actually I was posting tongue in cheek .

I wouldn't use on-line casinos for anything except fun and a bit of bonus 'abuse'.

Using Aspinall's "play for fun" games I have detected that their software is reactive which I find alarming. For instance if you play the outer bets on roulette and try Martingaling it will consistently take you on a negative sequential run. This happens most of the time and much more frequently than could happen by chance.

 

[Liquid Chips]

Using Aspinall's "play for fun" games I have detected that their software is reactive which I find alarming. For instance if you play the outer bets on roulette and try Martingaling it will consistently take you on a negative sequential run. This happens most of the time and much more frequently than could happen by chance.

Bingo!! Yes, this is what I think happens. I believe that online casinos react to your betting strategy and/or the amount of your bet. The desired win/lose outcome is determined first THEN the cards/numbers are randomly selected to generate the determined win/lose outcome, imo.

It would be a fairer game if the win/lose outcome is TOTALLY determined by a true random selection of the cards in the case of blackjack. Then the online experience would match land-based casino outcomes, more or less.

Online blackjack can have some very questionable losing streaks. How often in land-based casinos do you have 12 losing hands in a row, then 1 win, then another 11 losing hands in a row?? How about, for example, 5 losses, 1 win, 7 losses, 1 win, 5 losses in every session of around 50 hands? Land-based blackjack has losing streaks too but not to the extent that I experience online.

So I believe the cards are indeed selected randomly but not until AFTER the casino's desired win/loss outcome is determined from player history and bet amount. I think this applies to roulette too.

 

[tedloc]

Two comments

I believe you are correct about money management. It is the biggest reason good BJ players continue to lose. Most do set a stop loss (usually all their days bankroll) but they do not set a realistic win goal. EX. Joe thinks if he wins $1000 he will either quit or put some in his pocket to go home with. But...Joe plays on a $10 table and makes a flat bet, waiting until he get double down cards or splits. In my opinion, Joe will never achieve his $ 1000, so he will stay until he loses it all. If your win amount is a high number, you must bet accordingly. In the example, I think Joe needs to be betting at least $50-$75 per hand.

 

[Blagger]

Liquid Chips - There is definitely something very fishy about the duration and frequency of losing streaks on internet blackjack games. I know some sites tell you that the 'so called' random number generator on real money games is different to the ones used for fun games. The number sequences generated are said to be audited to check they are unbiased but I have a suspicion that, even if they average out in the very long term, they are deliberately generated in a way that produces severe runs of losing hands in the short term. Enough to trigger most players' stop losses and force them to suffer the loss.

I spreadbet the stock markets and know that this tactic of deliberately forcing temporary negative swings to fish for stop losses is done every day by market makers. It generates enormous wealth for them.

Tedloc - I would never set a target of $1000. With a $500 roll and $10 bets I wouldn't target more than $50 as a point to quit. 10% profit in a few hours is huge. Most financial fund managers don't manage that in a year.

 

[Mikeaber]

You must have a casino within a relatively short distance of where you live. I mean when I go to a casino, it is a 3 hour drive and we normally get a room. If I stopped at $50 target in wins, what would I do the rest of the time I was there? Of course, I do not look at BJ as a profession.

Liquid Chips - There is definitely something very fishy about the duration and frequency of losing streaks on internet blackjack games. I know some sites tell you that the 'so called' random number generator on real money games is different to the ones used for fun games. The number sequences generated are said to be audited to check they are unbiased but I have a suspicion that, even if they average out in the very long term, they are deliberately generated in a way that produces severe runs of losing hands in the short term. Enough to trigger most players' stop losses and force them to suffer the loss.

I spreadbet the stock markets and know that this tactic of deliberately forcing temporary negative swings to fish for stop losses is done every day by market makers. It generates enormous wealth for them.

Tedloc - I would never set a target of $1000. With a $500 roll and $10 bets I wouldn't target more than $50 as a point to quit. 10% profit in a few hours is huge. Most financial fund managers don't manage that in a year.

 

[Liquid Chips]

Liquid Chips -
I spreadbet the stock markets and know that this tactic of deliberately forcing temporary negative swings to fish for stop losses is done every day by market makers. It generates enormous wealth for them.

Having been a commodities speculator previously, I know what you mean. One vivid example was when I, by my lonesome, moved the world's soybean oil market with my lonely little 1 contract order. I put in a sell order some ten units below the trading range that soybean oil was in almost all day. TWO minutes later, the market moved down lock-step one unit at a time until my order was hit, then it turned straight around right back into the trading range! How in the f***ing world did they suddenly *find* ten straight sell orders to hit MINE then ten straight buy orders to move back up to the trading range? The intra-day trading charts for the three days around my order showed no other movement like this. Of course, it eventually moved above the trading range and I had to get out at a big loss. I know now to get out with a smaller loss if the market doesn't confirm your analysis.

I always read that the markets are too big for the average joe to be concerned about stop-loss running. I know now that market movement it is just as "random" as online gambling.

I believe in "fun" mode of play, most casinos use the random number generator on your computer that comes with most operating systems. In real money mode, to ensure that the player isn't manipulating his own rng, the casinos use the rng on their own servers, away from potential manipulation. If you play at a casino long enough, the overall win/loss percentages would fall within the expected ranges. BUT manipulating the HOW those win/losses line up in a given session is what I believe the casinos are doing. The cards can be randomly selected but the win/loss outcome likely isn't dependent on it.

 

[Blagger]

Mikeaber,

Yes, there are several casinos near to where I live in the UK Midlands. Gambling, including internet gambling, is totally tax free in the UK at the current time. Casinos are booming with many super casinos planned in most cities.

I only used 50$ as an example. My point was that, whatever size my starting capital, I would quit while ahead if I reached 10% profit. I consider that a very good result and don't want to give any of it back.

If I want to just play recreationally then I can do that with £1 bets. If you are not doing it for the money then surely the size of the bets doesn't matter. Except of course that you get a bit more deference and psuedo respect if you bet larger.

The fact that casinos hate nothing more than seeing a punter leave a table with a pocket full of chips or cash, especially if he is also a winner, reinforces my conviction that the freedom to quit while ahead is the really the biggest edge a player has. Most punters are unable to take advantage of it because of their own psychology.

 

[Split8s]

You must have a casino within a relatively short distance of where you live. I mean when I go to a casino, it is a 3 hour drive and we normally get a room. If I stopped at $50 target in wins, what would I do the rest of the time I was there? Of course, I do not look at BJ as a profession.

Good point, Mike. Most of my BJ action occurs when I visit my parents in northern Michigan. The closest casino is 3 miles from their house. So, when they start winding down around 10, I drive over to play for a couple of hours. If I win $40-50 and have a few beers....I'm happy. The last four times up have been pretty good to me. Twice I turned $30-40 into $200+ (good luck with doubling and splitting and hit a few larger than normal bets) and the other two trips I lost less than $50. My stop loss would be around $50 a session so I'll be ahead for awhile........but odds are odds. You can beat them in the short run but they even out over time.

 

[Mikeaber]

I don't think there is any disagreement here. I do agree that quiting while ahead is far better than running out of money However, I come back to the delima of what to do if you love to play the game but are comitted to either playing BJ, slots or something similar, or heading to the hotel room for a pre determined number of hours cuddled up with a book and watching soap operas?

I can attest that more often than not my BR starts out at one point, generally within the first couple of hours rises to some amount above that and then takes downward swings and then upward swings. If I'm lucky, they even out over an 8 hour shift. That is a situation I consider a win because of the entertainment value received. But I also admit that there have been trips where they do not even out!

This would not be such an issue with me except that I do not live close to any "real" casino so the excursions cannot be 1 or 2 hour ordeals.

I think that is why I do not take BJ as a hit and run operation. Other's situations can be and often are much different.

 

[Blagger]

Mikebear,

As you might guess from my user name, hit & run is my preferred option but I am prepared for an extended siege if things don't go to plan early on.

Everyone to their own thing I say. I don't think I could last an 8 hour stint.

 

[tedloc]

You made my point

Liquid Chips - There is definitely something very fishy about the duration and frequency of losing streaks on internet blackjack games. I know some sites tell you that the 'so called' random number generator on real money games is different to the ones used for fun games. The number sequences generated are said to be audited to check they are unbiased but I have a suspicion that, even if they average out in the very long term, they are deliberately generated in a way that produces severe runs of losing hands in the short term. Enough to trigger most players' stop losses and force them to suffer the loss.

I spreadbet the stock markets and know that this tactic of deliberately forcing temporary negative swings to fish for stop losses is done every day by market makers. It generates enormous wealth for them.

Tedloc - I would never set a target of $1000. With a $500 roll and $10 bets I wouldn't target more than $50 as a point to quit. 10% profit in a few hours is huge. Most financial fund managers don't manage that in a year.

You make my point exactly. Joe has a unrealistic target of $1000 playing on a $10 dollar table. No matter what his bankroll is.

 

[Mikeaber]

Mikebear,

As you might guess from my user name, hit & run is my preferred option but I am prepared for an extended siege if things don't go to plan early on.

Everyone to their own thing I say. I don't think I could last an 8 hour stint.

Blagger,

I do modify my methods when I'm in Vegas. I'll set a "short" goal and most of the time, will leave when I reach that goal. However, If I'm at a table with a dealer that adds to the experience in a positive way and the players are having a time of it, then I'll often stay WAY too long at that table. No doubt, I come out better financially when I stick with my money management strategy and leave when ahead, but often when I do this, it is at the expense of the entertainment value of the table.

When I employ strategy, it is usually to buy in for $200 at a $5 table and leave when I'm ahead by $50 or leave after I've lost $100.

Streaks, while totally unpredictable, do occur and they seem to happen more in favor of the dealer...at least, I seem to recall dealer streaks more than my own win streaks. This past weekend, I played out one streak where the dealer won 11 and I won only 1. It took me most of the day to recover from that one streak.

 

[Blagger]

Mike,

I think streaks mostly favouring the dealer is in the nature of the game of blackjack. It is certainly my experience. Streaks should be expected with real cards due to clumping and changes in the concentrations of tens and aces. That after all is the basis of card counting. When cards are shuffled each hand I would expect streaks to be less frequent but that is not my experience with internet blackjack and just reinforces my suspicions about the "randomisation" routines employed.

I could possibly live with a non-random shuffle on the basis that it more realistically simulates real card blackjack as long as internet casinos are open and above board about what they are doing. At the moment they are very vague about what they mean by "shuffling between every hand". Obviously they is no actual shuffling. They must mean that numbers are generated in a way that simulates shuffling between each hand. Freedom to "simulate real blackjack games" gives them the freedom to deliberately make the number generation streaky.

I find that internet blackjack streaks kill me by long periods where doubling opportunities are very frequent but never work out. This guarantees that anybody using basic strategy will be killed.

The worst possible crime an internet casino can commit is to use reactive software. As I have posted earlier, it does seem to me that some internet casino software is reactive and this is very disturbing.

 

[AdamSmith]

Online blackjack can have some very questionable losing streaks. How often in land-based casinos do you have 12 losing hands in a row, then 1 win, then another 11 losing hands in a row?? How about, for example, 5 losses, 1 win, 7 losses, 1 win, 5 losses in every session of around 50 hands? Land-based blackjack has losing streaks too but not to the extent that I experience online.

I've been playing black jack with "Casino-on-Net" or http://www.888.comhttp://www.888.com, and my winning/losing streaks vary.. For example, I played 29 games in a row....

W L L L L L W L L W L W L L L L L L W L W W W W W W L L W
12 Wins & 17 Losses. I played these according to basic strategy & I almost ended up losing $10 or so, but I ended off with making a $25 bet and I came out ahead (lucky me).

-Adam

 

[Mikeaber]

Adam, your session was pretty close to the projected "norm" if you look at it. You lost arouns 58% and won 41% of the hands played. I think that 48% is the expected loss and 44% the expected win with 8% pushed. Keep in mind that you only played 29 hands. That's hardly a statistical universe.

The thing is, "streaks" of 5 and 6 hands in a row, can be expected to occur pretty often. I've been on those dealer win runs where I lost 6 in a row but others at the table were winning. Those I think are the most frustrating. When the dealer is ending up with a face up on every hand...those are the ones where everyone is losing. They may have a 6 down but you can't really play it that way!

I've been playing black jack with "Casino-on-Net" or http://www.888.com, and my winning/losing streaks vary.. For example, I played 29 games in a row....

W L L L L L W L L W L W L L L L L L W L W W W W W W L L W
12 Wins & 17 Losses. I played these according to basic strategy & I almost ended up losing $10 or so, but I ended off with making a $25 bet and I came out ahead (lucky me).

-Adam