Mikeaber
Well-Known Member
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Just in case anyone needs reminding, no betting system can change a negative edge game into a positive edge game. Despite any claims to the contrary, all progressions lose money in the long run, equivalent to the house edge times the total money wagered.
In many cases, the progressions do worse, because they may put you in a situation where you don't have enough bankroll left to double and split appropriately. For example, imagine little john gets dealt a pair of 8s with his $1000 bet working. Does he have the bankroll left to put $8000 in play if he makes four hands that should each be doubled?
Progressions may be fun, and they may cause you to be a winner on many of your sessions. But, at the end of many sessions, you'll still lose roughly the same amount as a flat-betting basic strategy player whose bets total the same as yours.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The above was posted by Ken Smith in another topic here on this forum. No one who knows the math behind blackjack will have the audacity to challenge this wisdom!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But, with that stated and accepted, who out there sees any benefit to betting strategies even with the above accepted? I'm not talking about a generic "money management" methodology but rather the practice of betting progressions both negative, positive and hybrids.
There seem to be two very distinct categories of Blackjack players....those who hit the casinos with the sole purpose of making their killing and getting the hell out of Dogde and the other being those who play it for the entertainment value.
Okay, that first category, that's one that if the player is smart, he will not even attempt unless he is very proficient at advantage play. To these players, progressions have no validity for their bets are dictated by the count of the cards....the true condition of the deck. To think that you are going to consistantly beat the house without the discipline of learning advantage play is pure folly.
The other group is the one I'm interested in. Are you content to sit at a table, mechanically putting out the same bet hand after hand and then depend on the advantage being recovered by making doubles and splits on favorable hands?
Or do you seek adrenalin rushes by playing progressions that will get more money out on the table based on whether you won or lost the previous hand?
I am more of the grinder who bets pretty much flat. However, I have been using a progression just for the fun of it on very low limit tables. In units, it goes 2,1,2,3,3,4,5 and then start back over at the first 2-unit bet after you've reached the 5-unit bet or when you loose. It's a conservative progression. If you are in a really choppy 6-deck game, it works out pretty good. Of course, on those predominately dealer wins 2/3's of the hands, you are going to go down a lot faster than with 1-unit flat betting.
I will go on to state that in my software simulations, I have lost more with the progression than with flat betting. In actual casino play, I come out about the same. It is sort of fun though to watch the Pit Criters eye-balling me when I progress from the minimum $3 bet up to a $15 or $20 bet!!
Just curious.
Just in case anyone needs reminding, no betting system can change a negative edge game into a positive edge game. Despite any claims to the contrary, all progressions lose money in the long run, equivalent to the house edge times the total money wagered.
In many cases, the progressions do worse, because they may put you in a situation where you don't have enough bankroll left to double and split appropriately. For example, imagine little john gets dealt a pair of 8s with his $1000 bet working. Does he have the bankroll left to put $8000 in play if he makes four hands that should each be doubled?
Progressions may be fun, and they may cause you to be a winner on many of your sessions. But, at the end of many sessions, you'll still lose roughly the same amount as a flat-betting basic strategy player whose bets total the same as yours.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The above was posted by Ken Smith in another topic here on this forum. No one who knows the math behind blackjack will have the audacity to challenge this wisdom!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But, with that stated and accepted, who out there sees any benefit to betting strategies even with the above accepted? I'm not talking about a generic "money management" methodology but rather the practice of betting progressions both negative, positive and hybrids.
There seem to be two very distinct categories of Blackjack players....those who hit the casinos with the sole purpose of making their killing and getting the hell out of Dogde and the other being those who play it for the entertainment value.
Okay, that first category, that's one that if the player is smart, he will not even attempt unless he is very proficient at advantage play. To these players, progressions have no validity for their bets are dictated by the count of the cards....the true condition of the deck. To think that you are going to consistantly beat the house without the discipline of learning advantage play is pure folly.
The other group is the one I'm interested in. Are you content to sit at a table, mechanically putting out the same bet hand after hand and then depend on the advantage being recovered by making doubles and splits on favorable hands?
Or do you seek adrenalin rushes by playing progressions that will get more money out on the table based on whether you won or lost the previous hand?
I am more of the grinder who bets pretty much flat. However, I have been using a progression just for the fun of it on very low limit tables. In units, it goes 2,1,2,3,3,4,5 and then start back over at the first 2-unit bet after you've reached the 5-unit bet or when you loose. It's a conservative progression. If you are in a really choppy 6-deck game, it works out pretty good. Of course, on those predominately dealer wins 2/3's of the hands, you are going to go down a lot faster than with 1-unit flat betting.
I will go on to state that in my software simulations, I have lost more with the progression than with flat betting. In actual casino play, I come out about the same. It is sort of fun though to watch the Pit Criters eye-balling me when I progress from the minimum $3 bet up to a $15 or $20 bet!!
Just curious.