“Linear” Progessions?

[Stephen]

Hi all,

New to the forum, but not to the game.

After years of play and study, one thing that I continue to struggle with how to capitalize on the TONS of hand that are won during less than favorable TCs.

If a layman knew nothing about BJ and were to read anything about counting, he would assume that practically all hands are lost when the count is low, and then only a fraction are won when it is high.

We all know this isn’t the case but it seems to almost be the “attitude” of counters.

So I’ve been doing a non-counting progressive system that wins some and loses some, but I’d like to know if it is more sustainable/winable with a larger bankroll. Here is, freaking easy as can be!!

1-2-3!

Win or lose, bet 1 unit, then 2, then 3. Then repeat ad nausium.

I’ve never heard of this kind of progression until I saw someone mention a “linear” progression, buried DEEP in a YouTube comment section.

My bankroll is $120 on a $5 machine and sometimes I increase me unit size as my bankroll grows (out of boredom lol!). And I stop after I win $100-$200. It has worked more often than not. (“Not” meaning I get wiped out).

I’m wondering if anyone can run a sim on this?! I don’t have sim software and the free trials I’ve done were way over my head.

Staight BS, 1-2-3, early surrender, hit soft 17, no resplitting Aces, yes DAS. And it was a machine so essentially CSM.

Thanks!!!!!

 

[gronbog]

No need to run a sim. All of your bets at negative counts are made at a disadvantage. Making 2 and 3 unit bets at a disdavantage instead if sticking to one unit or, even better, not playing at all, will only increase the amount of money you expose to that disadvantage. Overall, you will end up losing more.

Edit: Just saw the CSM bit. So you can't be counting, but the same principle applies. More money bet at a disadvantage means more money lost in the long run.

 

[LV Bear]

Gronbog is correct, of course. Stephen may find this article to be helpful:

PROGRESSION SYSTEMS DON'T WORK

 

[Stephen]

Gronbog is correct, of course. Stephen may find this article to be helpful:

PROGRESSION SYSTEMS DON'T WORK

Thanks guys, yeah I’m very familiar with these principles. I’ve just never heard of a progression that increases and decreases bets steadily, regardless of win/loss. I was more just curious to see how the data compared to other progressions. And to gronbog, you are correct, I’m not counting while using this progression.

Side note: is it ever recommended to use a *conservative* progression (like this one) while counting? One reason being camouflage, the other just because it’s fun! Lol

 

[Ryemo]

Thanks guys, yeah I’m very familiar with these principles. I’ve just never heard of a progression that increases and decreases bets steadily, regardless of win/loss. I was more just curious to see how the data compared to other progressions. And to gronbog, you are correct, I’m not counting while using this progression.

Side note: is it ever recommended to use a *conservative* progression (like this one) while counting? One reason being camouflage, the other just because it’s fun! Lol

Tattoo this on your arm: No betting system of any kind will ever allow you to win long term in the game of blackjack, ever!

Unless you are moving your bets with the count and determining how much to bet based on your advantage over the house, you cannot expect to win with any other system.

 

[JohnCrover]

Hi all,

New to the forum, but not to the game.

After years of play and study, one thing that I continue to struggle with how to capitalize on the TONS of hand that are won during less than favorable TCs.

If a layman knew nothing about BJ and were to read anything about counting, he would assume that practically all hands are lost when the count is low, and then only a fraction are won when it is high.

We all know this isn’t the case but it seems to almost be the “attitude” of counters.

So I’ve been doing a non-counting progressive system that wins some and loses some, but I’d like to know if it is more sustainable/winable with a larger bankroll. Here is, freaking easy as can be!!

1-2-3!

Win or lose, bet 1 unit, then 2, then 3. Then repeat ad nausium.

I’ve never heard of this kind of progression until I saw someone mention a “linear” progression, buried DEEP in a YouTube comment section.

My bankroll is $120 on a $5 machine and sometimes I increase me unit size as my bankroll grows (out of boredom lol!). And I stop after I win $100-$200. It has worked more often than not. (“Not” meaning I get wiped out).

I’m wondering if anyone can run a sim on this?! I don’t have sim software and the free trials I’ve done were way over my head.

Staight BS, 1-2-3, early surrender, hit soft 17, no resplitting Aces, yes DAS. And it was a machine so essentially CSM.

Thanks!!!!!

Make sure you're being paid 3:2 on your Blackjacks... Machine Blackjack is notorious for paying even money or 6:5 on Blackjack.

 

[xengrifter]

I’ve just never heard of a progression that increases and decreases bets steadily, regardless of win/loss.

Actually, in the past era of deep 1D games I infrequently used such a system ...
I called it the double-blow-up progression and would even explain to pit-critters that my system bets more regardless of win/lose, with each successive round (123|579...), until the shuffle, returning to 1.

Can you proffer an educated guess as to why mine works and yours does not?

 

[Stephen]

Make sure you're being paid 3:2 on your Blackjacks... Machine Blackjack is notorious for paying even money or 6:5 on Blackjack.

Thanks, yes these machines are actually pretty good! Aside from my constant sneaking suspicion that the casino adjusts win rates like they do on regular slot machines (lol), the machines pay BJ 3:2, offer early surrender, and DAS. Only bad rule is no resplitting aces (and obviously the fact that it’s CSM).

 

[Stephen]

Actually, in the past era of deep 1D games I infrequently used such a system ...
I called it the double-blow-up progression and would even explain to pit-critters that my system bets more regardless of win/lose, with each successive round (123|579...), until the shuffle, returning to 1.

Can you proffer an educated guess as to why mine works and yours does not?

Interesting! But to clarify, mine DOES “work” lol (more of than not). The whole genesis of my post was that I was curious how it would perform with a bigger bankroll, especially when compared to more common progressions. My progression is pretty fun, though admittedly based on moments of throwing my hands up in air saying “there’s no way to know when I’m going to win, so why not just mix it up and see what happens!!” Haha, very scientific approach!!! One of the key principles of it is that I don’t lose much per session if I get wiped out, so the idea of a bigger bankroll had me curious.

 

[xengrifter]

Actually, in the past era of deep 1D games I infrequently used such a system ...
I called it the double-blow-up progression and would even explain to pit-critters that my system bets more regardless of win/lose, with each successive round (123|579...), until the shuffle, returning to 1.

Can you proffer an educated guess as to why mine works and yours does not?

Interesting! But to clarify, mine DOES “work” lol (more often than not).

So is that it? You cannot guess why mine works and yours does not?
Anyone?

 

[johndoe]

No one is going to answer? Something similar was discussed in Andersen's book, where some guy was betting 1 unit on spot 1, 2 units on spot 2, all the way to 7 units on spot 7. Seemed to work for him, mysteriously. Also a 1D game, of course.

 

[Stephen]

So is that it? You cannot guess why mine works and yours does not?
Anyone?

Oh, I didn’t realize you were quizzing me. I thought you were just surmising. Yeah, I really couldn’t care less. I’m sure it has something to do with the fact that you are counting while using the progression, or that all non-counters have no business playing blackjack, or some other BJ-geek thing? Enlighten me!!!!!!!

 

[LC Larry]

No one is going to answer? Something similar was discussed in Andersen's book, where some guy was betting 1 unit on spot 1, 2 units on spot 2, all the way to 7 units on spot 7. Seemed to work for him, mysteriously. Also a 1D game, of course.

Depth Charging.

 

[Ryemo]

Depth Charging.

I’m assuming this works on deeply dealt single deck because the playing deviations alone are enough to gain an edge, with no requirement to move your money with the count?

Isn’t that something Ian Andersen wrote about in one of his books, where he talks about one guy who played all the spots on the table; he would bet small on spot 1, but have his largest bet out on the last spot. Because by the time he got to the last spot, he had a lot of information to work with.

 

[xengrifter]

Something similar was discussed in Andersen's book, where some guy was betting 1 unit on spot 1, 2 units on spot 2, all the way to 7 units on spot 7.

Depth Charging.

I’m assuming this works on deeply dealt single deck because the playing deviations alone are enough to gain an edge, with no requirement to move your money with the count?

Yes, depth charging...
...was never a strong play.

This Stephen character still doesn't know what we are talking about.
I was going to flag this thread for move to Voodoo forum, but I see that there isn't one.

 

[xengrifter]

Yeah, I really couldn’t care less.

Exactly!

 

[Stephen]

Exactly!

What I meant was couldn’t care less about your dumb quiz. Or more accurately, I don’t care enough about you to answer it.

The thing is, I just don’t do well with sassy dorks on niche community forums. I’m also a magician and holy hell you should see those guys!!! Lol.

I was really looking forward to joining this forum and posting a lot more for support/pro tips as it relates to actual serious play because I have just recently re-kindled my passion for counting, studying, and improving my game. I guess I picked a bad topic to start with lol. But yeah this forum will just get me worked up. It’s back to the lurker life for me!!! Take ‘er easy everyone!
-“This Stephen Character”

 

[xengrifter]

What I meant was couldn’t care less about your dumb quiz.

Yes, I got that.

I don’t care enough about YOU to answer it.

Don't make this personal LOL!

I’m also a magician

Oh, well why didn't you say so!?...
... Here I thought you were an alchemist, trying to turn sh*t into gold!

 

[Stevel96a1]

ALOT of people do not know about blackjack especially the new comers.

buy masque blackjack or free download off the net, that thing plays like real life shuffles unlike casino verite, you will see 1 shuffle can destroy 20 max bets in 1 sho4, thats right 20 x 150 tell how ya feel losing that within 30min LOL

Joel is my favorite player he said the game is so streaky wwllwllllwllllwwllllll something worst then that alot of people dont know the string of losses that 1 can face in one shoe.

it is best to go in with 2-3 bankrolls 2-300 max bets, and be prepared for a losing streak followed by a barring

but dont listen to me go listen to Ben and Colin who seem to have all the bank and brains to beat the casino enough but train people like me and you for a mere 3k$ fee LOL

i guess losing 1/5 of one of the 3 bankrolls is not alot of money in the grand scheme of things since everyone on here appears to have unlimited money but if your like me and work for everything you have and have bills you may want to consider Stephen, if you live in las vegas you win 10$ an hour playing video poker atleast you won't lose 3 grand on 30min there

 

[Hell'nBack]

I've never been barred after a big losing streak. But I expect it to happen sooner or later.