Any successful Progression Players?
- Thread starter FUHGEDABOUDIT
- Start date
Sonny
Well-Known Member
This should get you started:
http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?p=21994#post21994
-Sonny-
Sonny
Well-Known Member
sequencing against a CSM?
Yup. That's how some of the older models were beaten. I believe it is still possible against the newer models as well.
-Sonny-
sagefr0g
Well-Known Member
so lemme guess..... in a csm game normally you get at least a round of cards in the discard tray. you spot say an ace and some 'key' cards i suppose on top of it. the key cards when they come out, well you expect the ace to surface so it would be possible to catch that ace giving you circa 50% advantage? is that the idea?
edit ==>> but then with that ferris wheel contraptions spinning it would be hard to speculate i would think as one doesn't know if maybe a group of cards is pulled at a time from the wheel into a buffer or if one card at a time comes out into the buffer?
davidmcclung
New Member
4 straight losses and quit table strategy
I have tried it with various progressions schemes, did not work as well as flat bets AND flat bets require lower session bankroll for larger flat bets and I like that. Anyway, flat bets, although not as fun, are better than progression or regressions I have finally come to realize. Just quit the table after four straight losses with level bets and a 30 bet session bankroll. Any four straight losses even if they overlap shoes. As an example: quit that table even if two consecutive losses occurred at the end of the shoe and two consecutive losses at the beginning of the new shoe counts as 4 straight losses so then quit that table. Works on six decks and double decks also. I am counting one 3-4 day trip as one session with many hrs playing on the trip: 7 sessions completed with level bets and switching tables or quitting the session after 4 straight losses. One loss and 6 wins, for net win of $975. Need 30 times your flat bet session bankroll and this is plenty and very important, and I have been only playing with $10 and $15 level bets. Will now start playing with $25 level bets with $750 session bankroll, as I have much more confidence now in its positive results after extended casino playing exactly as outlined in this post. For you non-counters looking for a new strategy, give this a try and report your results here after completing 3-4 sessions. DO NOT LEAN INTO THE PUNCH does seem to produce steady wins..
I have tried it with various progressions schemes, did not work as well as flat bets AND flat bets require lower session bankroll for larger flat bets and I like that. Anyway, flat bets, although not as fun, are better than progression or regressions I have finally come to realize. Just quit the table after four straight losses with level bets and a 30 bet session bankroll. Any four straight losses even if they overlap shoes. As an example: quit that table even if two consecutive losses occurred at the end of the shoe and two consecutive losses at the beginning of the new shoe counts as 4 straight losses so then quit that table. Works on six decks and double decks also. I am counting one 3-4 day trip as one session with many hrs playing on the trip: 7 sessions completed with level bets and switching tables or quitting the session after 4 straight losses. One loss and 6 wins, for net win of $975. Need 30 times your flat bet session bankroll and this is plenty and very important, and I have been only playing with $10 and $15 level bets. Will now start playing with $25 level bets with $750 session bankroll, as I have much more confidence now in its positive results after extended casino playing exactly as outlined in this post. For you non-counters looking for a new strategy, give this a try and report your results here after completing 3-4 sessions. DO NOT LEAN INTO THE PUNCH does seem to produce steady wins..
Sonny
Well-Known Member
Yes, but take it a few steps further. What if you could sequence a sequence? If you could remember 6 cards in a row then you could use the first 3 as key cards to predict the next three cards. Suddenly you are predicting 3 cards instead of just one! That could help you learn the value of your first card, the dealer’s hole card, the next hit cards, etc.
Now let’s take it one step further. What if you memorized two sequences that you knew were going to be shuffled together? For example:
A,3,5,Q
6,J,8,2
When you see A,6,3,5 come out, you know that the next card has to be either J or Q. If it is a J then the next card must be a Q or 8. You can similarly predict the next several cards with very high accuracy. That’s very powerful stuff!
Indeed. This techniques was used against the older CSMs that tried to simulate an actual riffle shuffle. Many of the current machines act more like a RNG where (almost) any card can be chosen at any time.
-Sonny-
sagefr0g
Well-Known Member
and i suppose most of the ASM's have to complicated of a shuffle also?
Sonny
Well-Known Member
progression
I've tried one system where my betting unit was 10 and if i won a hand continously, I would bet 10,10,15,15,20,20,30,30 and so on. If I lose I would go back to 10. It was good enough for a run. I use this system
when the heat is around. I average about 100 an hour on this system.
But now have incorporated the count system when there is no heat.
If you lose a hand just keep on betting the minimum. It works when
they are watching and cant understand the concept of betting when
you are winning consecutive hands. I've tried this system on larger amounts and can say it is mathematically interesting. Has anyone ever tried this system. I wouldnt advise it but it would be a good break for
using another system with a little play advantage.
I've tried one system where my betting unit was 10 and if i won a hand continously, I would bet 10,10,15,15,20,20,30,30 and so on. If I lose I would go back to 10. It was good enough for a run. I use this system
when the heat is around. I average about 100 an hour on this system.
But now have incorporated the count system when there is no heat.
If you lose a hand just keep on betting the minimum. It works when
they are watching and cant understand the concept of betting when
you are winning consecutive hands. I've tried this system on larger amounts and can say it is mathematically interesting. Has anyone ever tried this system. I wouldnt advise it but it would be a good break for
using another system with a little play advantage.
Scavenger plays as far as i know are either buying hands of people that you know are profitable (Getting in on doubles for less etc), and some people even outright cheating by swapping cards between players in face down games.
Some side bets are very beatable, such as lucky ladies. So you can back count and bet on the side bet for everyone who is not betting the side bet. Few side bets are beatable on high/low count.
Back-lining is where you back-bet someones hand. If they split you can choose to play only one hand if the split is unfavorable. So if you have a player with a small front bet and a very large back bet, you can decrease the house edge by about 0.2%, in some rare cases this is enough to give a player advantage.
Some side bets are very beatable, such as lucky ladies. So you can back count and bet on the side bet for everyone who is not betting the side bet. Few side bets are beatable on high/low count.
Back-lining is where you back-bet someones hand. If they split you can choose to play only one hand if the split is unfavorable. So if you have a player with a small front bet and a very large back bet, you can decrease the house edge by about 0.2%, in some rare cases this is enough to give a player advantage.
davidmcclung
New Member
This form of progression may help us win often:
After a recent frustrating session loss with my four losses and quit table strategy, I have now changed to the following: I have utilized this method of betting with good success the latest few sessions and would be interested if any of you have also tried this: I start on a six deck shoe with $10 bets. Works best on 6 deck shoes. If winning on that shoe, then I double my bet to $20 and keep it at $20 as long as winning on the current shoe. If losing on the current shoe, then just $10 bets, if winning on the current shoe, then $20 bets, that's it. Do this betting strategy on a per shoe basis with $500 session bankroll, simply double your base bet when winning on the current shoe returning to your base bet if even or losing on the current shoe. Have averaged almost $100 wins with 3 consecutive winning sessions, total time played thusfar using this betting is about 7 hrs. This allows you to take advantage of any positive shoes which do occur but not as frequent as we like, with lower bets on the not so good shoes which are more frequent unfortunately, AND it is conservative. Any thoughts and has anyone used this betting strategy?
After a recent frustrating session loss with my four losses and quit table strategy, I have now changed to the following: I have utilized this method of betting with good success the latest few sessions and would be interested if any of you have also tried this: I start on a six deck shoe with $10 bets. Works best on 6 deck shoes. If winning on that shoe, then I double my bet to $20 and keep it at $20 as long as winning on the current shoe. If losing on the current shoe, then just $10 bets, if winning on the current shoe, then $20 bets, that's it. Do this betting strategy on a per shoe basis with $500 session bankroll, simply double your base bet when winning on the current shoe returning to your base bet if even or losing on the current shoe. Have averaged almost $100 wins with 3 consecutive winning sessions, total time played thusfar using this betting is about 7 hrs. This allows you to take advantage of any positive shoes which do occur but not as frequent as we like, with lower bets on the not so good shoes which are more frequent unfortunately, AND it is conservative. Any thoughts and has anyone used this betting strategy?
You took quite a few words to describe "I bet $10 a hand but go up to $20 if I've won the last hand".
This strategy is no more or less worthless than any other betting strategy that isn't correlated to the count.
davidmcclung
New Member
Sabre:
Despite my too many words in describing my betting strategy(agree with you there but I did that for a reason), unfortunately you still do not understand it, so here we go again. You do NOT go up to $20 after every winning $10 bet. You have to be winning on the current shoe before increasing to $20, then keep at $20 as long as you are in the plus $ on the current shoe. If you get in the negative or even in the current shoe, go back to $10 bets, only increase to $20 when winning on the current shoe. $500 session bankroll is also very important. Now before you dismiss this, try it for an hour or two exactly as I lay it out here when you get tired of your current strategy. I am not saying this will win all the time, but it has worked very well thusfar. The way I keep track of it is I put $100 in red chips in front of me at the start of every shoe. When at $100 or less, only $10 bets. When more than $100, then bet $20 every time when plus $100 on the current shoe. Then repeat the exact same process on the start of the next shoe.
Despite my too many words in describing my betting strategy(agree with you there but I did that for a reason), unfortunately you still do not understand it, so here we go again. You do NOT go up to $20 after every winning $10 bet. You have to be winning on the current shoe before increasing to $20, then keep at $20 as long as you are in the plus $ on the current shoe. If you get in the negative or even in the current shoe, go back to $10 bets, only increase to $20 when winning on the current shoe. $500 session bankroll is also very important. Now before you dismiss this, try it for an hour or two exactly as I lay it out here when you get tired of your current strategy. I am not saying this will win all the time, but it has worked very well thusfar. The way I keep track of it is I put $100 in red chips in front of me at the start of every shoe. When at $100 or less, only $10 bets. When more than $100, then bet $20 every time when plus $100 on the current shoe. Then repeat the exact same process on the start of the next shoe.
Sonny
Well-Known Member
So when you're ahead you'll be losing your money twice as fast, and when you’re behind you’re limiting yourself to winning it back more slowly. I don’t get it. It seems like you'll spend most of your time in the red.
-Sonny-
davidmcclung
New Member
The idea here with my current strategy is:
You are taking advantage of the good shoes with higher overall bets, and lower bets on the negative shoes. Many sessions I have a few good shoes to counter the more not-so-good shoes, and this betting strategm does seem to help me win. Try it and you will see, i.e. if any of you all get tired of the counting grind with the high volatility as I did.
You are taking advantage of the good shoes with higher overall bets, and lower bets on the negative shoes. Many sessions I have a few good shoes to counter the more not-so-good shoes, and this betting strategm does seem to help me win. Try it and you will see, i.e. if any of you all get tired of the counting grind with the high volatility as I did.
Sonny
Well-Known Member
But if you’re already ahead then the “good hands” have probably already happened, and when you’re behind the “bad hands” have already gone. Doesn’t that seem just as logical as any other excuse? I’m not saying it’s true, but it does seem to make sense. That ought to be enough for the Voodoo board.
The overall volatility in card counting is much less than with progression systems because of the high correlation to advantage. You are more likely to have good results when you raise your bets into a rising advantage as opposed to randomly raising your bets into unknown situations. In any case, the volatility should be secondary to getting an advantage IMHO. After all, what good does low variance do when it ends up bankrupting you?
-Sonny-
ihate17
Well-Known Member
It is philosophical and not mathematical
You betting pattern is conservative, as you said, but it based upon your belief in knowing a good from a bad shoe before that shoe is over. Sort oflke saying that since I won 4 of the first 5 hands of this shoe, the cards know that it is a good shoe for me and will continue to let me win more hands than I lose. Of course this might just happen or you might lose the next 10 straight or any other combination of wins and losses. Being that you do use a very conservative spread, your variance will not be huge, but you will lose over time at whatever skill level you play to compared to basic strategy. So if you play basic strategy perfectly you would lose a little more than a flat $10 bettor and less than a $20 bettor.
What it does accomplish is that it makes things a little more exciting than just flat betting.
ihate17
You betting pattern is conservative, as you said, but it based upon your belief in knowing a good from a bad shoe before that shoe is over. Sort oflke saying that since I won 4 of the first 5 hands of this shoe, the cards know that it is a good shoe for me and will continue to let me win more hands than I lose. Of course this might just happen or you might lose the next 10 straight or any other combination of wins and losses. Being that you do use a very conservative spread, your variance will not be huge, but you will lose over time at whatever skill level you play to compared to basic strategy. So if you play basic strategy perfectly you would lose a little more than a flat $10 bettor and less than a $20 bettor.
What it does accomplish is that it makes things a little more exciting than just flat betting.
ihate17
OK - I'll stir the pot a little.
Actually I think it's based on how often a BS flat-better will finish at least 0.5 units ahead over a certain number of hands.
Which is very often.
Basically, he will make up some portion of a $10 unit quite often. Extending his play by a large amount compared to a $10-only BS flat better.
It wouldn't surprise me that he will still beat the HA in dollars, not hands won, over a few hundred thousand hands with such a simple but effective betting scheme.
Not forever. as u say, but for a long time.
Not many of us play a million hands in a lifetime.
davidmcclung
New Member
Kasi: you are correct:
This is a simple but effective strategy, and it continues to win and here is exactly how I play it now: Buyin is $200 per table, $600 session bankroll. Change tables if lose the $200. Works best on six decks shoes. Put $100 in red chips in front of you at the start of the shoe to keep track if you are winning or losing in the current shoe. If winning on the current shoe, then double your bet to $20 and keep it at $20 as long as winning on the current shoe. If losing or even on the current shoe, just $10 bets. Then start over again on the next shoe with initial $10 bet, and go up to $20 and keep at $20 if winning on that shoe, if losing or even on that shoe then $10 bets. If anyone else tries my strategy, let us know. You will like it most sessions. Now I know you counters and math guys say it cannot work, but dont you all have good and bad shoes as to number of hands won and lost- that is why I believe the strategy works, more money bet in the winning shoes and less bet in the losing shoes-the simple fact is that it has produced a net session win averaging a little over $100 in many, and I mean many, hours of playing.
This is a simple but effective strategy, and it continues to win and here is exactly how I play it now: Buyin is $200 per table, $600 session bankroll. Change tables if lose the $200. Works best on six decks shoes. Put $100 in red chips in front of you at the start of the shoe to keep track if you are winning or losing in the current shoe. If winning on the current shoe, then double your bet to $20 and keep it at $20 as long as winning on the current shoe. If losing or even on the current shoe, just $10 bets. Then start over again on the next shoe with initial $10 bet, and go up to $20 and keep at $20 if winning on that shoe, if losing or even on that shoe then $10 bets. If anyone else tries my strategy, let us know. You will like it most sessions. Now I know you counters and math guys say it cannot work, but dont you all have good and bad shoes as to number of hands won and lost- that is why I believe the strategy works, more money bet in the winning shoes and less bet in the losing shoes-the simple fact is that it has produced a net session win averaging a little over $100 in many, and I mean many, hours of playing.
ihate17
Well-Known Member
You never know when it will change
The counter will know when he has the advantage. Neither you or the counter know if you win the next hand, the next 5 hands or if a good or bad shoe will change completely on the next hand. So everything is unknown except the counter does know when he has an advantage.
You ask if we have bad and good shoes, and certainly we do. The trouble with your method is that many of the very best shoes I have ever had began with many losses. Lose perhaps 7 of the first 8, count goes up and then I get my share of good hands at a much higher bet level. I measure good shoes by the amount of money won during the shoe. Your method will not give you a huge win on a shoe and is measured nearly by just how many hands you won and not how much money you won.
ihate17
The counter will know when he has the advantage. Neither you or the counter know if you win the next hand, the next 5 hands or if a good or bad shoe will change completely on the next hand. So everything is unknown except the counter does know when he has an advantage.
You ask if we have bad and good shoes, and certainly we do. The trouble with your method is that many of the very best shoes I have ever had began with many losses. Lose perhaps 7 of the first 8, count goes up and then I get my share of good hands at a much higher bet level. I measure good shoes by the amount of money won during the shoe. Your method will not give you a huge win on a shoe and is measured nearly by just how many hands you won and not how much money you won.
ihate17