hello everybody,
As mentionned in my previous post , in my 20's, I was stupid enough to think that would once beat the roulette. I never did, of course.
Though I used to enjoy playing at land_based casino, my roulette experience comes out mainly from computer analisys. Believe me or not, I analysed billions and billions of spins.
I say that someone approching blakJack with a good knowlege of how roulette works are studying blackjack with usefull tolls.
The Lost bets/Won bets balance of your game 'overnight, let's say) is one of them. Yes, I assume that those playing at Land-based casino go to sleep after they've played.
Please note in that case, I'm not talking about my final results moneywise but just the won/lost bets balance just as if I had played at constant bet.
Let' s suppose I played 1.000 hands, at constant bet, I win 10 units. I can consider the casino won 495 times and I won 505 times. (Balance +10)
If I were to consider ratio instead of balance I would say that that particular game as a 1% ratio to my advantage. we all agree that 1000 hands are not significant, I use 1.000 just as an exemple. let me use my previous post example playing at roulette table
A player is betting RED but for a period of time (15-20 minute in a land-based casino) the roulette shows a "BLACK" numbers once again.
After 1-2-... 5-....7- 10-15-16-17 "BLACK" numbers coming in a row the roulette players etc....
Let's suppose that you would find yourself in the same situation (this is not realisic but just let your imgination do the work) at blackjack.
Let's say the blackjack player now gets 10-6 against 11 (the worst situation)and ends up losing that partucular hand.
Let's say the roulette player gets a "BLACK" number (while bettind "RED")again on his eighteen's spin and loses.
The blackjack player can state. "I lost, But, at least I had my highest bet on a winning (badly landed thougt). I did a good job (22%percent on the long term, according to me)
The roulette player, after losing that eighteens hand, can just say
I got a black number once again and a black number is 100*% of a black number. No way I can attach a factor to it. same for red. red id 100% red.
That why you can beat blackjack and you can't beat roulette. But a roulette background is not a useless tool to approach blackjack, believe me.
Let's suppose we play 1.000 hands at blackjack, keeping your won/lost balance up to date "SERIOUSLY" (best done in the comfort of your home that at land_based casinos)
let's suppose the bet your attack the table with is 10$. remember that I consider varying my bets. My posts are not directed to those who consider making money at "CONSTANT BET". My bets will "ALWAYS be >+ to 10$. we agree on that?
So the two parameters that we stick to are.
1. the win/loss balance (overnight, let's assume)
2.The basic bet you attack the table with(10$ in my example)
Let me state this
99% percent of "whichever game" players do consider they have won, whether playing at land based or at online casino IF
1. They quit (or interrupt) the game with more money at the end of their game session than the money they had when they started..
2. Losers, in the opposite situation.
I TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH THESE STATEMENTS.
1.If you quit the casino with a win/loss balance (remember 10$ is the initial attack) of +25 and you win 160 bucks you have LOST 90$. Because 25$ * 10 is 250$ and if you finish the game with 160 $, you are a loser.STOP PLAYING IMMEDIATELY. Buy another blackjack book, stick to me, learn music, write a letter to the person you are in love with....but STOP PLAYING. You are a long term "LOSER".
2.If you quit the casino with a win/lost balance of -50 and -350$ as you final money result, you are a winner. PROOF .Had you played at contant bet you would have lost 500$. YOU MADE 150$. of couse, I agree the 150$ are not in your pocket at this stage, but I guaranty your are using a good system. carry on playing, you are a long term "WINNER".
best regards to all of you
I will be to busy to post next week, but I will come back to you.
ben
As mentionned in my previous post , in my 20's, I was stupid enough to think that would once beat the roulette. I never did, of course.
Though I used to enjoy playing at land_based casino, my roulette experience comes out mainly from computer analisys. Believe me or not, I analysed billions and billions of spins.
I say that someone approching blakJack with a good knowlege of how roulette works are studying blackjack with usefull tolls.
The Lost bets/Won bets balance of your game 'overnight, let's say) is one of them. Yes, I assume that those playing at Land-based casino go to sleep after they've played.
Please note in that case, I'm not talking about my final results moneywise but just the won/lost bets balance just as if I had played at constant bet.
Let' s suppose I played 1.000 hands, at constant bet, I win 10 units. I can consider the casino won 495 times and I won 505 times. (Balance +10)
If I were to consider ratio instead of balance I would say that that particular game as a 1% ratio to my advantage. we all agree that 1000 hands are not significant, I use 1.000 just as an exemple. let me use my previous post example playing at roulette table
A player is betting RED but for a period of time (15-20 minute in a land-based casino) the roulette shows a "BLACK" numbers once again.
After 1-2-... 5-....7- 10-15-16-17 "BLACK" numbers coming in a row the roulette players etc....
Let's suppose that you would find yourself in the same situation (this is not realisic but just let your imgination do the work) at blackjack.
Let's say the blackjack player now gets 10-6 against 11 (the worst situation)and ends up losing that partucular hand.
Let's say the roulette player gets a "BLACK" number (while bettind "RED")again on his eighteen's spin and loses.
The blackjack player can state. "I lost, But, at least I had my highest bet on a winning (badly landed thougt). I did a good job (22%percent on the long term, according to me)
The roulette player, after losing that eighteens hand, can just say
I got a black number once again and a black number is 100*% of a black number. No way I can attach a factor to it. same for red. red id 100% red.
That why you can beat blackjack and you can't beat roulette. But a roulette background is not a useless tool to approach blackjack, believe me.
Let's suppose we play 1.000 hands at blackjack, keeping your won/lost balance up to date "SERIOUSLY" (best done in the comfort of your home that at land_based casinos)
let's suppose the bet your attack the table with is 10$. remember that I consider varying my bets. My posts are not directed to those who consider making money at "CONSTANT BET". My bets will "ALWAYS be >+ to 10$. we agree on that?
So the two parameters that we stick to are.
1. the win/loss balance (overnight, let's assume)
2.The basic bet you attack the table with(10$ in my example)
Let me state this
99% percent of "whichever game" players do consider they have won, whether playing at land based or at online casino IF
1. They quit (or interrupt) the game with more money at the end of their game session than the money they had when they started..
2. Losers, in the opposite situation.
I TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH THESE STATEMENTS.
1.If you quit the casino with a win/loss balance (remember 10$ is the initial attack) of +25 and you win 160 bucks you have LOST 90$. Because 25$ * 10 is 250$ and if you finish the game with 160 $, you are a loser.STOP PLAYING IMMEDIATELY. Buy another blackjack book, stick to me, learn music, write a letter to the person you are in love with....but STOP PLAYING. You are a long term "LOSER".
2.If you quit the casino with a win/lost balance of -50 and -350$ as you final money result, you are a winner. PROOF .Had you played at contant bet you would have lost 500$. YOU MADE 150$. of couse, I agree the 150$ are not in your pocket at this stage, but I guaranty your are using a good system. carry on playing, you are a long term "WINNER".
best regards to all of you
I will be to busy to post next week, but I will come back to you.
ben