Tongue-in-cheek. The MACHINE flew, the Wrights were just lying down. (Laying down on the job???)I don't. Just another statement without the facts being spewed.
Tongue-in-cheek. The MACHINE flew, the Wrights were just lying down. (Laying down on the job???)I don't. Just another statement without the facts being spewed.
Tongue-in-cheek. The MACHINE flew, the Wrights were just lying down. (Laying down on the job???)
Innovative minds and gambling (AKA AP PLAYING) are not the same attitudes.
Tongue-in-cheek. The MACHINE flew, the Wrights were just lying down. (Laying down on the job???)
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-
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 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!![]()
If it's gambling, then the house is gambling even more, since it has an smaller edge. No, there is an element of gambling even when you play perfectly, but that element does not put the activity into the category of gambling. If you work very hard at your job, you are not considered a gambler. Yet, no matter how hard you work, you may still lose your job. The boss doesn't like you. The boss wants to hire his nephew in your place. The company is losing money. The boss doesn't like how you part your hair.... In this sense, everything in life is a gamble, but I have to agree with Sonny--while there is a significant element of gambling in the short run, the activity of card counting, if done properly, is more akin to science than to gambling. Just my take; you may continue to differ.
One thing the casino has is money and time and the degenerate nature of the gambling proffession.
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.
Why start over after shuffle??? zgJust 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.
So, the original version was to keep raising your bet throughout the shoe. The revised version says to stop raising at $20.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'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