I've searched forums and am still unclear about probability and progression betting. I recently read that the probability of staying within a 4 or 5 hand win/loss zone is approximatly 80%. Is that a crock of bs,or is there some validity. If that is true, then some variation of progressive betting could be helpful, with strict money management. I realize that even if true ,the 20% outside the zone, could wipe out your bankrole in a matter of minutes. Its the 80% that i wonder about. Is it completely nonsense, or is there a probability that could be used for a player in the short run?
probabilities
- Thread starter Marsha
- Start date
Sonny
Well-Known Member
That depends on what kind of "zone" you mean. Do you mean the probability of losing 5 hands in a row, or the probability of being behind by 5 bets (or more) after a given time? The first question is a simple calculation while the latter can be answered many different ways.
-Sonny-
-Sonny-
Sonny
Well-Known Member
The probability of winning 5 hands in a row is (.47)^5 = 2.3%. The probability of losing 5 hands in a row is (.53)^5 = 4.2%.
But we still don’t have all the information yet. When someone says “80% of the time” you have to wonder what they mean by “time.” Do they mean that 80% of the hands you play will not go past 5 losses or wins? Or do they mean 80% of one-hour sessions? Or 80% of a full day’s play? How much time does that 80% account for?
It would be pretty easy to design a progression system that makes you a winner after 80% of the hands you play, but that still bankrupts you 20% of those hands. At 100 hands per hour that means you’ll go broke 20 times per hour. Suddenly that “80% of the time” doesn’t sound so good. This is exactly how some clever system sellers can make a losing system sound pretty good.
-Sonny-
But we still don’t have all the information yet. When someone says “80% of the time” you have to wonder what they mean by “time.” Do they mean that 80% of the hands you play will not go past 5 losses or wins? Or do they mean 80% of one-hour sessions? Or 80% of a full day’s play? How much time does that 80% account for?
It would be pretty easy to design a progression system that makes you a winner after 80% of the hands you play, but that still bankrupts you 20% of those hands. At 100 hands per hour that means you’ll go broke 20 times per hour. Suddenly that “80% of the time” doesn’t sound so good. This is exactly how some clever system sellers can make a losing system sound pretty good.
-Sonny-
SilentBob420BMFJ
Banned
you do not have a 47% chance of winning a hand and a 53% chance of losing a hand.. where did you get those numbers? the thing is, i know u know this, so im confused.. its like 43/49/8 (win/loss/tie) or something like that
Sonny
Well-Known Member
If you ignore pushes then the probabilities become 47/53 for wins/losses. See for yourself using the numbers above.
-Sonny-
Given the win loss numbers presented, it appears a limited negative progression would work most of the time, in the short run. You would have to be satisfied with small profits, and be able to hit and run.Its hard to give up voodoo practice. Am i wrong about the probabilities of winning with the hit and run mode. The probabiliity of extended losses still exists,but with strict loss limits, it appears you should come out winning most of the time. Am i a hopeless voodoo head?
Maybe you are a hopeless voo-doo head but I don't think there's anything wrong with it lol.
And, you're right most betting systems exchange a higher percentage of winning sessions at the cost of fewer but larger losing sessions.
Just define your bankroll, how much you will be playing, how much you want to win, etc.
Basically varying your bet a little bit here and there will probably greatly extend your play.
Sonny
Well-Known Member
I don’t think so. Not only does everything you just said make sense, it’s also true!
With a negative progression you will have small wins very often followed by occasional huge losses. If you use a stop-loss limit then you will simply have more small losing sessions that will add up to the same amount as one big one. Since you are arbitrarily entering and leaving the games it doesn’t matter how you bet or when you walk away – your average results will always be the same. You are changing the distribution of wins and losses, but you are not changing their frequencies.
-Sonny-
Sonny
Well-Known Member
So Sonny, does that mean with strict discipline, money management,and win/loss limits,i could suppliment my income or not? (most of the time,not likely,or forget about it?)
Don't count on it. You might get lucky and win for a while, but you are still playing a game where the house has the advantage. No progression system can change that. The chances of winning a particular session might increase, but you should still expect to lose money on average. Bottom line: this is not a smart way to suppliment your income.
-Sonny-
It appears that a positive progession, is the prefered betting strategy. I have seen that it keeps you game longer by reducing big losses. I have, however found, that it is not so easy to win two hands in a row. I have been playing the 25 dollar tables in hopes of a hit and run stategy. Oh well, Sonny kind of rained on that parade, although i appreciate hearing the reality. The obvious question to follow would be, is there a smart way to supplement my income playing blackjack? Or, is the casino advantage always going to reign supreme? I can only assume, that since this site exists,there is a way to win consistantly,or at least profit from the game. Is there hope for the average intellect, or is winning reserved for those with computer brains. You needn't be diplomatic, i want to hear the truth as you see it.
SilentBob420BMFJ
Banned
So Sonny, does that mean with strict discipline, money management,and win/loss limits,i could suppliment my income or not? (most of the time,not likely,or forget about it?)
also, think of this.. what would emotionally hurt you more, winning and losing random amounts that add up to you being behind X amount, or winning small amounts many sessions in a row with one HUGE loss, which will put you behind X.. id rather do the former, because imagine how you will feel when you lose $2000 on a hand and cant bet anymore because you hit the table limits and/or are out of money.. and my example is being generous, because chances are you are betting more than you want to with a progression system, therefor you wont lose the same amount in both examples, you will lose more on the progression system since your betting more
Or perhaps consider less extreme betting systems that, say, with a 100 unit bankroll, say $500, will win you 10 units ($50) 90% of the time. The other 10% of the time you will lose your 100 units. When the time comes you have lost your 100 units, maybe you are still ahead. Maybe not. At some point, and that could be a while, maybe you are behind $300. So maybe you now commit the same 100 units, say $2000, and have the same 90% chance of winning of winning 10 $20 units. Maybe you even win 2 sessions in a row, not exactly unlikely with a 90% chance of winning, and you're now $100 ahead.
There's a million variations of course. And many systems even less extreme than this.
But it may give you an idea, if you are willing to vary your bet and bankroll from time to time, that it is quite possible to stay ahead of the curve for a long time.
While I might not look at it as "supplemental income", or know your goals, or how much you may actually be playing, it's quite possible you could have a lot of fun for a long time.
No skill or intellect is required - a 12 year old could do it lol.
Never been a big fan of positive progressions myself.
Sonny
Well-Known Member
It depends on your goals. If you are looking to get the excitement of a “big score” then a positive progression is the way to go. You will have many small losses and a few big wins. If you want to win more often then a negative progression is the way to go. You will have many small wins and a few big losses that way.
There are literally dozens of ways to get an advantage over the casino. Some methods are more complicated than others. Card counting is probably the easiest way to beat blackjack. It doesn’t require any superhuman intelligence, only a lot of practice. That’s where most people get started.
-Sonny-