Leveraging a 50k bankroll

[flyingwind]

What's the best way to leverage a 50k bankroll? It is by playing AP BJ?

[I've wanted to start this thread since awhile ago, since when I read someone's post that there are better ways to leverage a 50k BR. I forgot where that post went or who posted that, though.]

 

[tensplitter]

Counting cards is a sure way to increase that bankroll. With $50,000, $25-300 spread and Pennsylvania rules playing an average of 5 hours a day (with 30 days a year off), one can make $100,000 a year with a .8% risk of ruin. Or make $50,000 a year with half as much play. That's enough to make card counting a full time job.

If you have a $50,000 bankroll and want to earn the same as the average long term stock portfolio (10% a year), you'd only need to play 90 hours a year. You could easily spend more than 90 hours a year trying to figure out which stocks to buy and sell. With that little amount of time spent playing, heat will be minimal. Card counting only has variance as a risk factor, it isn't tied to the economy since there will always be casinos. In 10 years, you would have doubled your initial investment. When your bankroll grows, you can raise your stakes and earn more residual tax-free income. It doesn't matter if you lose money in a given year, since you'll make it back in the long run. It's similar to a stock portfolio losing value one year, then gaining its value back.

In fact, the return will be slightly higher because the money will earn interest while it's sitting in your savings account since you won't have all $50,000 in cash with you. I would rather not invest in stocks and use that money to play blackjack. 100 hours of blackjack a year for several decades will be more fun and more rewarding than trading stocks 100 hours a year (I would consider the time spent reading The Wall Street Journal, watching CNBC, and worrying about your stock portfolio as time spent trading. Plus at those stakes you'd get some nice comps.

 

[junior_counter]

Great points regarding stock market.

Inspirational post Tensplitter. Have the results you speak of been experienced, or close to that, first hand? This would have been a nice response to a post submitted not too long ago on the forum about playing blackjack full time.

This is also a response I was seeking on a post under "Other Games”, “Blackjack vs. stock market" on this forum. I've always had thoughts about the great points you stated for drawbacks on market investing. Time invested looking at portfolio, time spent on stock market strategies that may not pan out due to uncontrollable factors in the market, reading market journals, watching CNBC, tax implications, unable to touch entire bankroll as it’s locked up sitting in the market. Many factors to look at, whereas blackjack is focused on mathematical advantage, and that’s it.

Naturally, we are taught to invest in the market opposed to gambling in casinos for good reason for the average individual. However, if you do the research, put in the time and discipline, one can become an advantage player, but is not preached in the everyday media.

Personally have took a huge negative swing in stock market before rebounding, basically to a little over breakeven point(after adjusting for inflation). Would have been better to use, even just a fraction of, the market investment to experiment in blackjack years ago. As you stated, I believe the time would have been more rewarding at blackjack than trading stocks.

Man, if even only half of the above results could be personally obtained, I’d look to dropping the full-time day job to part-time (as backup for constant income), and play blackjack part-time.

 

[bj21abc]

Well,

I assume you've been using ideal conditions to run your numbers. Spreading $25-300 making $60 an hour seems a little high to me,you used backcounting in your numbers, with zero camo ? Add in time moving from table to table, plus much lower rounds/hr when tables are full.

Now that you have an adjusted number, consider how much time each store will let you stay before barring you. Even in PA, a 25-300 spread will have people looking at you closely. Unless they are completely clueless and left their guide dog at home, your betting variation plus your accumulated win will tip them off quickly. That is, unless you play very short sessions or use expensive camo, or both. Add those considerations to the numbers.

I had understood that PA casinos share information - so if you're barred in one you've lost them all. Then you have to find other games. Add on travel costs. Factor in games with worse rules and worse pen.

SO can you make a living off a 50K bankroll ? Certainly in Casino Verite. Otherwise - yes, but it's not easy to say the least. Most of us will be better off with that 50K in an index fund.


D.

Counting cards is a sure way to increase that bankroll. With $50,000, $25-300 spread and Pennsylvania rules playing an average of 5 hours a day (with 30 days a year off), one can make $100,000 a year with a .8% risk of ruin. Or make $50,000 a year with half as much play. That's enough to make card counting a full time job.

If you have a $50,000 bankroll and want to earn the same as the average long term stock portfolio (10% a year), you'd only need to play 90 hours a year. You could easily spend more than 90 hours a year trying to figure out which stocks to buy and sell. With that little amount of time spent playing, heat will be minimal. Card counting only has variance as a risk factor, it isn't tied to the economy since there will always be casinos. In 10 years, you would have doubled your initial investment. When your bankroll grows, you can raise your stakes and earn more residual tax-free income. It doesn't matter if you lose money in a given year, since you'll make it back in the long run. It's similar to a stock portfolio losing value one year, then gaining its value back.

In fact, the return will be slightly higher because the money will earn interest while it's sitting in your savings account since you won't have all $50,000 in cash with you. I would rather not invest in stocks and use that money to play blackjack. 100 hours of blackjack a year for several decades will be more fun and more rewarding than trading stocks 100 hours a year (I would consider the time spent reading The Wall Street Journal, watching CNBC, and worrying about your stock portfolio as time spent trading. Plus at those stakes you'd get some nice comps.

 

[kewljason]

Inspirational post Tensplitter. Have the results you speak of been experienced, or close to that, first hand? This would have been a nice response to a post submitted not too long ago on the forum about playing blackjack full time.

Man, if even only half of the above results could be personally obtained, I’d look to dropping the full-time day job to part-time (as backup for constant income), and play blackjack part-time.

I play about the level tensplitter spoke of (slightly higher max bet) and I probably put in more than 50 hours per week playing, scouting, walking between casinos, record keeping, planning my trips and rotations and I have yet to hit 6 figures for a year. I think a more reasonable goal is half to two-thirds of that. At the playing level mentioned it is not some easy life of riches, playing 20 hours a week while rolling in six figures. You are going to have to bet a far higher level or be involved in team play for those kind of expectations. At this level it is a fulltime job consuming most of your life. It is far from the normal fulltime or parttime job. You have to be willing to vary your play schedule so you are not playing the same locations on the same days and times. Basically it becomes your life not a job. Lots of travel. Lots of nights in hotels. In addition to all this you need to be in a location that has a good number of playable venues fairly close or you will spend even more time and expense traveling. For me, this meant relocating to Las Vegas. The east coast does have a whole new group of venues now, so maybe if you live somewhere in Jersey or Pa and can travel to AC, and several of the Pa and Delaware stores easily that could work. And lastly and most importantly. You have to be mentally prepared for going long periods without making or worse yet losing money. And let me tell, you this is not something you can learn from a book or from the good folks here on the message board sharing their experiences. It is something you really have to experience. I wouldn't reccommend anyone jump into this fulltime. Hang on to your fulltime job and play on the side. If you really think you must, then switch that up and work parttime and play BJ fulltime.

If you have the smarts to actually succeed at fulltime BJ play at this level, chances are you could have found far less taxing way to make 50-75 grand, so if you choose this route, you better be very passionate about this path.

 

[Billy C1]

Think twice (or more times)

As much as some dislike their present jobs, they should heed Jason's input here. I've never tried full time AP but I've done enough of it that I know most people would have second thoughts about making it a livelyhood.
The "fun" part of it disappears quickly.

BillyC1

 

[zoomie]

I have been using RPC for over 30 years. I play two days almost every week, averaging 5 hrs/day actual table time. My spread is from 1X $25 to 2X $450. My theoretical win is about $100/hr, but actual is probably $75 - $90/hr because I avoid some sudden bet jumps. It is very tiring, and after a couple of days I've had it. I do love the "game" (in a large sense), but I am not about to go full time. As noted, I can earn much more from my day job.

 

[tensplitter]

Using what a normal person would invest in the stock market to play blackjack would return more than the average stock portfolio would return. They would be lucky to earn $5000 a year. The blackjack player will expect to win more than $5000 a year, playing a few hours a week or 30 minutes a day, and heat will be low.

You could play that $25-300 spread at a table with a minimum of $25 and other ploppies playing black or purple chips. If someone's flat betting $500 at a table and you're spreading 25-300 at the same table, the pit won't notice your play too much. On a good streak in a high count, the player flat betting $500 would win more than you, so it would be hypocritical to back off the $300 player who appears to be winning less.

The green chip level is on the border of whether to play for comps or not. If you're betting black, don't give up your identity.

Remember that just like players won't feel so bad about a dealer with a great personality taking their money, the pit boss may not feel so bad about a player with a great personality taking the casino's money.

 

[kewljason]

You could play that $25-300 spread at a table with a minimum of $25 and other ploppies playing black or purple chips. If someone's flat betting $500 at a table and you're spreading 25-300 at the same table, the pit won't notice your play too much. On a good streak in a high count, the player flat betting $500 would win more than you, so it would be hypocritical to back off the $300 player who appears to be winning less.

Remember that just like players won't feel so bad about a dealer with a great personality taking their money, the pit boss may not feel so bad about a player with a great personality taking the casino's money.

Tensplitter, my friend, you have some odd thoughs. This last one in particular. I for one, don't feel any better about losing to a dealer with a nice personality than I do losing to a grumpy dealer. Losing is losing! And I don't think the pit boss is going to say oh it's ok that he took us for XX amount of dollars, he seemed like a good guy. And the folks up in surveilance don't have a clue about your personality. lol That's not what they are looking at. :laugh:

Now a $500 player flat betting would buy you cover if you werer spreading $25-$300, but I wouldn't go as far to say that they wouldn't notice you. If he is truely flat betting $500, they will quickly determine that he is no threat and the extra attention that he drew to the table could be focused on you. However, the cover part comes in because they may decide to do nothing about you for risk of annoying a larger betting ploppie. They certainly aren't going to half shoe you, nor are likely to reduce penetration, both things that could annoy the bigger player. So the option left is flagging you. And that too sometimes annoys other players, even ploppies, when they see someone perceived as being treated unfairly. But in the end, I don't think they worry about being hypocritical. Most things that casino's do are hypocritical. :laugh:

 

[Billy C1]

Using what a normal person would invest in the stock market to play blackjack would return more than the average stock portfolio would return. They would be lucky to earn $5000 a year. The blackjack player will expect to win more than $5000 a year, playing a few hours a week or 30 minutes a day, and heat will be low.

You could play that $25-300 spread at a table with a minimum of $25 and other ploppies playing black or purple chips. If someone's flat betting $500 at a table and you're spreading 25-300 at the same table, the pit won't notice your play too much. On a good streak in a high count, the player flat betting $500 would win more than you, so it would be hypocritical to back off the $300 player who appears to be winning less.

The green chip level is on the border of whether to play for comps or not. If you're betting black, don't give up your identity.



Remember that just like players won't feel so bad about a dealer with a great personality taking their money, the pit boss may not feel so bad about a player with a great personality taking the casino's money.

Have to disagree twice. First, pits are trained to watch for spreads and not flat bets (size makes little difference) and second, they're also trained to just watch the money AND disregard personalities!

BillyC1

 

[moo321]

What's the best way to leverage a 50k bankroll? It is by playing AP BJ?

[I've wanted to start this thread since awhile ago, since when I read someone's post that there are better ways to leverage a 50k BR. I forgot where that post went or who posted that, though.]

Here's my honest advice:

1. Play some blackjack. Maybe a trip or two a month. You shouldn't be playing one locale more than once a quarter or so. So rotate between Vegas, AC, South, etc.

2. Learn poker. No heat on poker.

3. Diversify your investments. Maybe get into stocks, real estate investing.

4. Consider another part time business as well. Blackjack is great as a part-time job, but it's hard to make a full-time living at it.

 

[shadroch]

There are many ways to leverage 50,000 but you need to be something of an expert on a subject before you jump into it. A friend bought a car last month at Barret-Jackson that ended up costing $36,000 by the time he shipped it to NY, but he sold it two weeks later for $45,000. Do that six times a year and you are doing alright.
I myself just spent some $12,000 on about sixty comics that I should be able to sell for some $25,000, but I know the comic market and I know where and to whom to sell these. The previous owner spent almost $18,000
on them and thought he'd make a quick score selling them. Didn't know the market or the conditions and got burned badly.
Bottom line is to leverage money, you need to study the field you are engaging in. A well-placed 50,000 investment in stocks can give a 500% or more return, if you are in the right place at the right time. Most stocks won't do anything near that, just as the majority of BJ players won't be able to leverage $50,000 into a $100,000 per year income.

 

[tensplitter]

Yeah, if you want to leverage 50K into a 100K/year income or bankroll growth, you'd need to play blackjack full time and travel a lot. If you play with cover, your travel and hotel costs will be comped. But if you want an extra $5000 or 10% a year, playing blackjack a few hours a week or 3 weekend trips to Vegas a year would be enough. If you reinvest your winnings, add some savings from your main job, and increase your max bet accordingly, your bankroll will grow like money gaining compound interest. You could eventually retire or pay your kid's college tuition with your bankroll. I think playing blackjack is way more fun than reading the Wall Street Journal.
If you like stocks, you could still invest your bankroll, minus $10K in cash, in the stock market since you won't be playing with your entire $50K bankroll at once. When you get negative variance, you can sell stocks for cash and when you get positive variance, you can buy stocks.

 

[shadroch]

Yeah, if you want to leverage 50K into a 100K/year income or bankroll growth, you'd need to play blackjack full time and travel a lot. If you play with cover, your travel and hotel costs will be comped. But if you want an extra $5000 or 10% a year, playing blackjack a few hours a week or 3 weekend trips to Vegas a year would be enough. If you reinvest your winnings, add some savings from your main job, and increase your max bet accordingly, your bankroll will grow like money gaining compound interest. You could eventually retire or pay your kid's college tuition with your bankroll. I think playing blackjack is way more fun than reading the Wall Street Journal.
If you like stocks, you could still invest your bankroll, minus $10K in cash, in the stock market since you won't be playing with your entire $50K bankroll at once. When you get negative variance, you can sell stocks for cash and when you get positive variance, you can buy stocks.

This is going from the sublime to the outright stupid.

 

[kewljason]

Yeah, if you want to leverage 50K into a 100K/year income or bankroll growth, you'd need to play blackjack full time and travel a lot. If you play with cover, your travel and hotel costs will be comped. But if you want an extra $5000 or 10% a year, playing blackjack a few hours a week or 3 weekend trips to Vegas a year would be enough. If you reinvest your winnings, add some savings from your main job, and increase your max bet accordingly, your bankroll will grow like money gaining compound interest. You could eventually retire or pay your kid's college tuition with your bankroll. I think playing blackjack is way more fun than reading the Wall Street Journal.
If you like stocks, you could still invest your bankroll, minus $10K in cash, in the stock market since you won't be playing with your entire $50K bankroll at once. When you get negative variance, you can sell stocks for cash and when you get positive variance, you can buy stocks.

I don't think I would have used quite the terminology that Shadroch used, but I must say that I agree with him that most of your logic in this post is flawed. I have already stated in an early post in this thread why I think it is unrealist to expect to make 100K, from straight card counting at the level of play you are talking about.

Although I know little about the stock market, your thoughts there seem equally flawed. Your bankroll must be easily accessible. At least a good portion of it. More that 20%. That means parking it in a savings account or money market account where you can get to it immediately. The stock market does not offer that easy access. Unforetunately these are not good investments and return little, but that is the trade off for easy access. Again, I am not very knowledgable about stocks, but it seems to me that the market is pretty volitile. (dah) :laugh: So if you invest in XY company, you have reason to believe that XY stock is going to go up at some time in the future. But when? Next week? Next month? Next year? You have to be prepared to leave that money there and ride through the volitility until it reaches the level that you expect. Or until you decide, that you have made a mistake, but either way, funds from a bankroll cannot be used for that as again, you may need them at any given point and be forced to withdrawl at an inopportune time. Just my thoughts...probably wrong. :laugh:

 

[bj21abc]

Re the stock market I'd have to disagree. We have had drummed into us incessantly that "you should plan long-term with stocks" "keep your money in for 5-10 years" and so on- based on an assumption that the stock market has "bad" and "good" periods, and that you may be forced to sell your stocks during a "bad" period and take a loss.

The flaw here is that you can somehow identify a time when it is "good" to sell stocks and a time when it is "bad" to sell stocks. Unless you happen to be Warren Buffet, it is widely accepted that is is virtually impossible to time the market. Stocks fell 20% ? In retrospect that could have been a good time to sell - before they fell another 20%. Stocks rose 100% ? Could be a good time to buy, in retrospect. you can only tell in retrospect.

If you believe that the stock market will do well in the long term - then your money should be there. If expect it to do well over 10 years, as an AP, you should have no problems placing your money there for a year or less. Imagine you have a (CSM) BJ pays 2:1 promotion. You can't play it for 10 years straight, where you'd be certain to come out ahead. If you only had 2 hours (with a ~ 50:50 chance of coming out ahead) would you play ? I would ! In the same vein, you should be OK with placing money in stocks for the short term.

SO assuming you have a good stockbroking account with low commissions, and invest in stocks (or even better ETFs) with low spreads - Any portion of your bankroll that can stand a ~ one-day withdrawal delay can certainly be in the stock market...

I don't think I would have used quite the terminology that Shadroch used, but I must say that I agree with him that most of your logic in this post is flawed. I have already stated in an early post in this thread why I think it is unrealist to expect to make 100K, from straight card counting at the level of play you are talking about.

Although I know little about the stock market, your thoughts there seem equally flawed. Your bankroll must be easily accessible. At least a good portion of it. More that 20%. That means parking it in a savings account or money market account where you can get to it immediately. The stock market does not offer that easy access. Unforetunately these are not good investments and return little, but that is the trade off for easy access. Again, I am not very knowledgable about stocks, but it seems to me that the market is pretty volitile. (dah) :laugh: So if you invest in XY company, you have reason to believe that XY stock is going to go up at some time in the future. But when? Next week? Next month? Next year? You have to be prepared to leave that money there and ride through the volitility until it reaches the level that you expect. Or until you decide, that you have made a mistake, but either way, funds from a bankroll cannot be used for that as again, you may need them at any given point and be forced to withdrawl at an inopportune time. Just my thoughts...probably wrong. :laugh:

 

[shadroch]

It is not a one day delay, it is several working days. My brokers will hold the money for two working days, then it needs to be transferred into your bank, which takes a day or two, then it needs to clear your bank. I do this quite often and you need to factor in a week in general.
Of course, you could skip a few steps and cash a money market check in a casino but good luck doing that without disclosing your id.

 

[blackchipjim]

Bankrolls?

I'm a little confused here and in need of some explanations. I always thought that the term bankroll is just that. A blackjack player or any gambler for that matter is taught to keep your br seperate from your other finances. I would never mix personnal finances with my gambling br. I know pros have to take it into account for other reasons but hey. Your bj br is just thatand making more money by short term investing while it sits in an investment vehicle is wise. I guess some people can afford higher risk than others.

 

[kewljason]

I'm a little confused here and in need of some explanations. I always thought that the term bankroll is just that. A blackjack player or any gambler for that matter is taught to keep your br seperate from your other finances. I would never mix personnal finances with my gambling br. I know pros have to take it into account for other reasons but hey. Your bj br is just thatand making more money by short term investing while it sits in an investment vehicle is wise. I guess some people can afford higher risk than others.

I agree. My money is sitting in a money market acct which is paying almost nothing. Less than 2%, which sucks. But I can get it very quickly if and when I need it for the purpose that it is intended for.

 

[Billy C1]

I agree. My money is sitting in a money market acct which is paying almost nothing. Less than 2%, which sucks. But I can get it very quickly if and when I need it for the purpose that it is intended for.

That doesn't mean you would use it to replenish your current bankroll if things went south, does it?

BillyC1