You're boldest bet spread and the results

johndoe · Jun 30, 2011

tthree said:

Huh?

I think it's safe to assume that those hitting these large spreads are doing so at the appropriate count (probably +4 or +5), and are sufficiently bankrolled.

I'll also take issue with Tarzan's statement - having 2x25 units out as a top bet really isn't that unreasonable, and getting these big bets out is what we all hope for! *Especially* when we have opportunities to split and double down! You definitely don't want to pull punches at that point.

Having a session bankroll of 1000+ units is a little large but by no means unusual. And certainly, anyone betting like this competently would ensure they have plenty of reserves to finish out the shoe, at the very least.

I also suspect that if your top bet isn't coming out for 40-80 hours, you need to adjust your ramp.

FLASH1296 · Jun 30, 2011

I won slightly over $250,000 over about 6 months of play. That was about 60-70 days of play.

I have no recollection of individual session results.

Coyote · Jun 30, 2011

FLASH1296 said:

Very nice!

Tarzan · Jun 30, 2011

Sure thing

johndoe said:

Oh sure, why not? Throw away rational play based on concrete mathematical theory with a proven track record of extreme profitability and just go completely CRAZY with it, taking excessive risk in the short term and also destroying any longevity of play... all because some guy on the internet said to. Who said to do that? Why, JohnDoe of course! Okay, maybe not... and I don't see myself adjusting anything anytime soon over reading someone's grandiose notions on the internet that don't quite add up mathematically.

I'm not seeing the answer to my question, though. Do you ordinarily bring a 1000+ unit trip bankroll and what was the TC when you slapped that 2 x 20-25 out there?

The Suburbs · Jun 30, 2011

Tarzan said:

Agreed. I think the most I've spread was 3x12 units or 2x18-20 units on the last hand of a shoe @ TC >= 8. If you're bringing 1,000 "units" to a session, you're probably not sizing your bankroll units correctly. Unless you're bringing your whole bankroll to every BJ session, that is.

Then again, I define "units" as a function of your bankroll, generally unrelated to the table minimum you're playing. I've seen a lot of people here define units as minimum bets.

MeWin$ · Jun 30, 2011

The Chaperone said:

5-7x200.... thousands

25-7x500... nearly a thousand

100-2x4k... hundreds but not all at the same place

Received very few repurcussions for the first two. The last one got me backed off everywhere and put in every database. If I had to do it over again I'd probably pass on the last one, but no regrets about the top two obv. Then again I did make well into six figures in 3-4 months with the last spread so not sure I really even regret that.

Very nice indeed.

Dyepaintball12 · Jun 30, 2011

When I first started playing for real I spread 1x25 to 2x300, on DD, in Vegas, for hours at a time, and it did NOT go well. :laugh:

johndoe · Jun 30, 2011

Tarzan said:

Where is the absence of rational play based on concrete mathematical theory? These spreads are completely consistent and mathematically sound - and in fact are preferred - if you have sufficient bankroll. Run the numbers yourself.

Ideally, you'd play $0 for -EV and ramp up to table max. Anything less is done due to 1) bankroll considerations, and 2) heat. I assume, given the long experiences with many on this thread, that both were managed appropriately.

As for me, sure, I've carried along $25k when playing $25 units before. That's really not such a big deal - I'm sure many here have done similarly. A $10k trip BR on $10 units is even less of a stretch. And I'd usually reach my top bet at TC=5.

tthree · Jun 30, 2011

johndoe said:

The top bet only coming out on those rare occasions is a bet that makes the casino uncomfortable and risks the sweet game. Obviously we have some here who are better defined as gamblers if they like the proposition of such a large chunk of your bankroll being risked on one hand matchup considering doubles and splits. It is especially troubling when they don't understand the weakness of whatever counting system they use. Hilo has no information on 7, 8 and 9, and confuses the ratio of high cards to low cards by including aces as a high card. There is not a problem with the ace as a high card when your hand and the dealer's hand uses the ace as a high card but when it doesn't watch out. This built in error for playing against a dealer stiff can have you making very bad decisions from time to time at very high counts. When you play against a dealer stiff the lack of an accurate knowledge of ten density as well as the total lack of information on the 7, 8, 9 and A density adds up to very poor playing efficiency. Translation you make stupid decisions regarding how to play your hand a lot because you have weak information to base your plays on.

Sometimes I think the mathematics of the game is lost on people. A simple side count of aces would tell you how good an indication of the density of tens to low cards the TC is. Go ahead double your bet on a low EV double when your count is a very poor indication of the key cards. The count is huge double that soft 14,15 16, or 17 v 2; don't worry about the fact you have hardly seen an 8 or 9 in the whole shoe so far. The wider you spread the more you need a count with a very high playing efficiency to avoid dumb moves at max bet as much as you can. Being able to recognize what those dumb moves are likely to be due to your count's weakness is very important to control your variance. Just say no to weakly correlated moves at high TC. You have to ask yourself did I come to the best game I can find to gamble with high variance and get barred after losing or did I come to use a bet spread the casino is comfortable with to win an amount that will have me welcomed back over and over for decades.

Sharky · Jun 30, 2011

tthree said:

nary a mention of counting system until YOU brought it up...i think most do understand the BC of different counts...you also make assumptions regarding people's session br's...which is even sillier speculation

johndoe · Jul 1, 2011

The relative weakness of the playing efficiency of Hi-lo is easily outweighed by it's strength in betting correlation, and its simplicity. Nothing at all wrong with pushing out huge bets when the hi-lo count calls for it. The math is indisputable.

But like Sharky said, no one was talking about their counting systems, nor have people been relating max bet to bankroll size. Given the caliber of the people posting, I think it's safe to say that these large bets were well within what would be appropriate for their bankrolls.

tthree · Jul 1, 2011

Max bet size relation to bankroll was Tarzan's point that got this ball rolling. His point was you double and split a few times on a hand and 1 ridiculously sized max bet has now become 6 max bets and if the dealer hits to 21 you are effed. I took it further so those foolish enough to risk all their future winnings at a great game on a huge spread can at least recognize the points where your mathematically based decision is based on a very poor correlation to actual odds due to a lack of information on the key cards for the match up so it may be avoided when someone is vastly over betting (I used HILO because it is most likely to lead you down this path to bankroll destruction due to the horrible PE). Either over betting you bankroll or the store tolerance is very short sighted. What you might win today is small potatoes compared to what you will no longer win in the future. There is a thread on moles right now. I wonder if that kind of crazy spread is what a mole would encourage or if it shows a lack of experience at the tables.

Gamblor · Jul 1, 2011

You don't always even need "sufficient bankroll". What if your about +80 units? So you spread 2 x 20, split and double 5 times and lose. Now your -20 units. Big deal.

I don't think anyone is suggesting we put up these crazy spreads all the time - if they are, then that is definitely wrong.

pit15 · Jul 1, 2011

I think the max bet is more important then the spread.

1 - 3x60 in red is going to be tolerated a hell of a lot better then 1 - 8 in cranberry

Coyote · Jul 1, 2011

pit15 said:

Cranberry? 1-8? WTF?

rrwoods · Jul 1, 2011

(0) 5-15-25-50-75-100-125-150 (+7), 8D game.

Shoe went to around RC 30 with four to play, and stayed above TC 7 for the remainder.

Made $1600 in one shoe.

Left.

'Twas a good night.

Coyote · Jul 1, 2011

rrwoods said:

Gotta love those days! Sure helps swell the bankroll!

The Chaperone · Jul 1, 2011

Special thanks to tthree and Tarzan for the clueless posts (and the laugh). Good example of why focusing on 'units' instead of 'max bets' is so retarded. You guys are acting like betting $1 in a negative count somehow makes your $200 max bets more volatile. "OMG what if you have to split with 200 units out?"

Freightman · Jul 1, 2011

FrankieT said:

from 1 x 5 to 3 x 200 - have only doen it twice though - same store. First time 1 bl 1 double and stand vs dealer bustng, second time, lost 2 out of 3

Tarzan · Jul 2, 2011

More details, PLEASE!

Clue in one of the clueless dummies that has no idea what he is talking about and reveal total bankroll requirements in units for having max bets of 2X20-25 units out there, JohnDoe, Chaperone... someone...

Let's say that you can find a casino that you will ever get away with that bet spread beyond the very first playing session in which you do it and have any degree of longevity at (when you find it PLEASE let me know, so I can catch the first possible flight). What is your total bank in units and what is your recommended minimum bankroll to tackle such a spread.

You're boldest bet spread and the results

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Banned

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Banned

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Banned

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Banned