The NO RETREAT BJ scheme is winning
- Thread starter davidmcclung
- Start date
They are exactly the same mindset. Both are scientific research. They both involve developing valid concepts that do not currently exist. They even use the same forms of mathematics and procedures for verification. Also, gambling is not the same thing as AP playing.
You really don't like APs, do you?
-Sonny-
You really don't like APs, do you?
-Sonny-
Sonny said:
They are exactly the same mindset. Both are scientific research. They both involve developing valid concepts that do not currently exist. They even use the same forms of mathematics and procedures for verification. Also, gambling is not the same thing as AP playing.
You really don't like APs, do you?
-Sonny-
You really don't like APs, do you?
-Sonny-
I never said I don't like AP's. I pratice AP in one form or another. I believe in it totallly. But I want you to realize it is still called gambling. That's were we differ on our thoughts. The edge is just to small to call it anything else. I love all of you's!
I understand now. We have different definitions of that word. To me, gambling is relying on luck to achieve success. The less luck you require, the less gambling you are doing. Almost every human endeavor has some form of luck or unceartanty involved so I suppose we all gamble many times every day. I don’t disagree with you on that. I just disagree that you can't remove the gamble from certain activities.
That’s exactly what the problem is. Having a small advantage means that the results will be mostly a factor of pure luck. However, an AP tries to remove as much luck from the game as possible. In a different thread I mentioned a game that had a N0 of 50 hours. That’s not really gambling anymore. If you play for 100 hours you have a 95% chance of overcoming the luck. There’s almost no luck involved at all. If you play for a few weekends you will definitely earn your EV, no question. The certainty of winning has overcome the gamble of playing. You are no longer gambling, you are investing. The unceartainty and risk has been completely removed. That should be the goal of every serious AP.
-Sonny-
That’s exactly what the problem is. Having a small advantage means that the results will be mostly a factor of pure luck. However, an AP tries to remove as much luck from the game as possible. In a different thread I mentioned a game that had a N0 of 50 hours. That’s not really gambling anymore. If you play for 100 hours you have a 95% chance of overcoming the luck. There’s almost no luck involved at all. If you play for a few weekends you will definitely earn your EV, no question. The certainty of winning has overcome the gamble of playing. You are no longer gambling, you are investing. The unceartainty and risk has been completely removed. That should be the goal of every serious AP.
-Sonny-
InPlay said:
I never said I don't like AP's. I pratice AP in one form or another. I believe in it totallly. But I want you to realize it is still called gambling. That's were we differ on our thoughts. The edge is just to small to call it anything else. I love all of you's!
True, lowering their risk significantly, if taken as a whole. But when they play an AP, it is they who are gambling, whether or not they know it. The AP must, as you point out, be careful to have sufficient bankroll and time to ply their trade, in order for this to happen, but we are talking about AP play, meaning someone who has risen to the level of advantaged play, and that includes all aspects of the game. It doesn't take many AP's playing at the highest levels, like $10,000 a hand, to inflict serious damage on the house's "business." In other AP areas, such as roulette, casinos have lost millions of dollars, a good portion of this documented for you reading pleasure. Lol The house, unless they stoop to cheating (and that entails its own risks), is in greater danger of losing significant amounts than the professional AP. At least, that's how I see it.
A lot of silliness here, getting back to BJ:
Have refined the NO RETREAT SCHEME a little more, playing with $500 session bankroll, double deck, $10 minimum bets to start the new shoe. Stop at double, $20 as to max bet. Up one unit on each win, no regression, $10,$15,$20 on wins, starting over again at $10 bets on the new shoe. Won another $130 tonight, easy win. This is about the proper session bankroll for max chances of a win, not too much but enough. I know, counting is the only way to win at BJ, but this will not put you in the poor house with the big bets that are often lost in favorable counts.
Have refined the NO RETREAT SCHEME a little more, playing with $500 session bankroll, double deck, $10 minimum bets to start the new shoe. Stop at double, $20 as to max bet. Up one unit on each win, no regression, $10,$15,$20 on wins, starting over again at $10 bets on the new shoe. Won another $130 tonight, easy win. This is about the proper session bankroll for max chances of a win, not too much but enough. I know, counting is the only way to win at BJ, but this will not put you in the poor house with the big bets that are often lost in favorable counts.
No Retreat Results
Here are the cold hard facts: 10 sessions(day trips) now completed. Net win is $1380, 9 wins and one loss. Here is the scheme again: Double deck, start off every shoe with minimum $10 bets, upping bets by $5 on every win, stopping at $20 max. $500 session bankroll. No regressions. Just keep raising bets by one unit on every win until the end of the shoe and stop at $20 max bet, then start over again with $10 bet on the new shoe.
Here are the cold hard facts: 10 sessions(day trips) now completed. Net win is $1380, 9 wins and one loss. Here is the scheme again: Double deck, start off every shoe with minimum $10 bets, upping bets by $5 on every win, stopping at $20 max. $500 session bankroll. No regressions. Just keep raising bets by one unit on every win until the end of the shoe and stop at $20 max bet, then start over again with $10 bet on the new shoe.
I've been doing a progression strat and it's been pretty successful. Now, I know many say that in the long run it won't work. I'm pretty disciplined and will leave when I hit a conservative goal ($200-$300 per trip with $400 bank roll).
I know that the probability of winning HANDS is against me, but with a method like the thread starter mentioned and a progressive method, how does that affect whether we'll win MONEY or not? I know we will lose more hands than win, but still, I leave with more money.
I'm not saying you guys are wrong, just wondering if someone can explain. Thanks
I know that the probability of winning HANDS is against me, but with a method like the thread starter mentioned and a progressive method, how does that affect whether we'll win MONEY or not? I know we will lose more hands than win, but still, I leave with more money.
I'm not saying you guys are wrong, just wondering if someone can explain. Thanks
If you are playing a game with a house edge of 1% that means that on average you will lose a penny on each dollar bet in the long run.Ten cents on ten dollars,A dollar on one hundred dollars,ten dollars on a thousand.
It doesn't matter if you are betting X,Y,2X,5X,3Y,whatever,in the long run you will lose 1% of the money you wage.The only way to overcome the house edge is to change the game to your advantage. You can do this by counting,by wonging,by hole carding,shuffle tracking,or a few other methods. Altering you bets based only on the results of the last hand is just not going to change the house edge.Thousands of people with math backgrounds far beyond mine have tried for hundreds of years to develop a system that will overcome the houses edge. No one has.You can accept that as fact,or you can find out the hard way.