loss
- Thread starter hammer
- Start date
It has been somewhat disheartening...
I learned this card-counting last September, and I've been playing (almost) every weekend (usually from Friday night till Monday morning) ever since. I don't claim to have a lot of experience, but it's been a few months and I'm starting to see some pattern in my wins/losses, which happens to be exactly the same as described by Hammer. I usually play OK, and I break even or I'm up a couple of hundred dollars at the end of the weekend. (I normally play 5~20, 10~30, or sometimes 25~50) But, for the few weekends when I was down, I was down a couple of thousand dollars each time. I don't know if it's normal, but I would rather have the opposite pattern: A few big winning weeks and some losses for all the rest.
Am I doing something wrong? Or is it just a normal pattern in Blackjack? (I use Canfield expert system with about 20~30 indices, if this matters. I (almost) exclusively play SD games.)
Thanks,
~Jack
I learned this card-counting last September, and I've been playing (almost) every weekend (usually from Friday night till Monday morning) ever since. I don't claim to have a lot of experience, but it's been a few months and I'm starting to see some pattern in my wins/losses, which happens to be exactly the same as described by Hammer. I usually play OK, and I break even or I'm up a couple of hundred dollars at the end of the weekend. (I normally play 5~20, 10~30, or sometimes 25~50) But, for the few weekends when I was down, I was down a couple of thousand dollars each time. I don't know if it's normal, but I would rather have the opposite pattern: A few big winning weeks and some losses for all the rest.
Am I doing something wrong? Or is it just a normal pattern in Blackjack? (I use Canfield expert system with about 20~30 indices, if this matters. I (almost) exclusively play SD games.)
Thanks,
~Jack
Re: It has been somewhat disheartening...
I cant comment on what your doing wrong or if you are doing anything wrong because i'm obviously not watching you play. With all do respect do you use a progresson betting scheme while you play, (oops I think I just bit the hook). This is what I gathered from your recent posts/articles on the mathamtical proof that progressions can out perform flat betting and possibly be used positivily in regards to lowering the casino vig will even disabling it.??
I dont uderstand the actual mathmatics you described. I do uderstand that no matter what that progression betting scheme is. It, the scheme, is still affected by the casino vig. Even on a short winning session you will eventually be consumed by the vig. If you play one time your whole life and win over your starting bankroll and you leave, great! Your a winner! You have beaten the casino! But If you stay or come back later the vig will kick in and you will be eaten up. The vig itself cannot be changed in a game. You can only change your ability to bet more money at the proposed advantages identified by the the count. This in turn gives you the ability to win more money at the predicted time so as to offset the vig taking of your money at your loosing times. Due to the nature of the game; the rules, card cut, your bet spread, I believe that no betting progression sytem can win long or short.
Card counting theory, (playing descisions and betting tactics), is based on formulations of extremely extended mathamtical simulations. Thes sims are run out millions and millions of calculations to get as close to the answer as posibble. This in turn will get a fair idea of the percentages involved in the odds of how to bet and play each hand. Progressions by them selves are weak and dangerous. They work against the balance that the recommend bet size offers through out the game. Bet size is in proportion to the calculated ror and the TC at hand. Even with card counting you can lose. With a proggression you can end up overbetting or under betting. This I believe has the effect of raising your ROR or putting your self in a position of loosing betting effeciency. This is my position and I have only skimmed the icing off of the cake. I cant back this up with a lengthy desertation of formulas of statistics and probabilities because I am mathmatically ignorant. If you can back your theory please do so. But in a laymans terms please. The true intellectual can teach everyone not just pleasure his own ego. Welcome to the site> LTC
I cant comment on what your doing wrong or if you are doing anything wrong because i'm obviously not watching you play. With all do respect do you use a progresson betting scheme while you play, (oops I think I just bit the hook). This is what I gathered from your recent posts/articles on the mathamtical proof that progressions can out perform flat betting and possibly be used positivily in regards to lowering the casino vig will even disabling it.??
I dont uderstand the actual mathmatics you described. I do uderstand that no matter what that progression betting scheme is. It, the scheme, is still affected by the casino vig. Even on a short winning session you will eventually be consumed by the vig. If you play one time your whole life and win over your starting bankroll and you leave, great! Your a winner! You have beaten the casino! But If you stay or come back later the vig will kick in and you will be eaten up. The vig itself cannot be changed in a game. You can only change your ability to bet more money at the proposed advantages identified by the the count. This in turn gives you the ability to win more money at the predicted time so as to offset the vig taking of your money at your loosing times. Due to the nature of the game; the rules, card cut, your bet spread, I believe that no betting progression sytem can win long or short.
Card counting theory, (playing descisions and betting tactics), is based on formulations of extremely extended mathamtical simulations. Thes sims are run out millions and millions of calculations to get as close to the answer as posibble. This in turn will get a fair idea of the percentages involved in the odds of how to bet and play each hand. Progressions by them selves are weak and dangerous. They work against the balance that the recommend bet size offers through out the game. Bet size is in proportion to the calculated ror and the TC at hand. Even with card counting you can lose. With a proggression you can end up overbetting or under betting. This I believe has the effect of raising your ROR or putting your self in a position of loosing betting effeciency. This is my position and I have only skimmed the icing off of the cake. I cant back this up with a lengthy desertation of formulas of statistics and probabilities because I am mathmatically ignorant. If you can back your theory please do so. But in a laymans terms please. The true intellectual can teach everyone not just pleasure his own ego. Welcome to the site> LTC
WIth all due respect, LTC
I read AJ's post slightly differently. I read that he was counting and had a bad streak. I could be reading it wrong, but I didn't see anything pointint to the use of a progression.
My advice to AJ is to read this article:
http://www.cardcounter.com/Essays/Three_Hundred_Hours.htm (Archive copy)
--Mayor
I read AJ's post slightly differently. I read that he was counting and had a bad streak. I could be reading it wrong, but I didn't see anything pointint to the use of a progression.
My advice to AJ is to read this article:
http://www.cardcounter.com/Essays/Three_Hundred_Hours.htm (Archive copy)
--Mayor
question about your play
Hi,
I'm sorry that you are having problems. I am wondering if you "Wong" out at high negative counts? Do you sit there with high negative counts hand after hand after hand? For me personally, if a count gets overly negative and stays that way for long I leave that table. I then backcount the next table I want to play at and only sit down to play if the true count is > 3.
One thing that I have noticed about six deck games, now I am sure the math boys will argue ferociously about the "theory" of this statement, but I am just speaking from my own experience and observations, six deck games tend to be streaky, so if you are getting hammered get up and leave. I will usually leave a table if I lose three or four hands in a row and the count is negative. Here is an example, I sat down at a table to play, it was a fresh shuffle, I lost four hands in a row, the count never got above 0, so I quit. I stood next to the three card poker table to "see who this game is played" and backcounted the low stakes bj table next to it, when the true count was 4 I sat down to play. I watched the "bad" table out of the corner of my eye and watched player after player get hammered (sorry, couldn't resist).
If I were you I would start keeping statistics of my play. Analyzing these statistics may give you a clue as to what is wrong.
Keep on trucking, baby.
Steve
Hi,
I'm sorry that you are having problems. I am wondering if you "Wong" out at high negative counts? Do you sit there with high negative counts hand after hand after hand? For me personally, if a count gets overly negative and stays that way for long I leave that table. I then backcount the next table I want to play at and only sit down to play if the true count is > 3.
One thing that I have noticed about six deck games, now I am sure the math boys will argue ferociously about the "theory" of this statement, but I am just speaking from my own experience and observations, six deck games tend to be streaky, so if you are getting hammered get up and leave. I will usually leave a table if I lose three or four hands in a row and the count is negative. Here is an example, I sat down at a table to play, it was a fresh shuffle, I lost four hands in a row, the count never got above 0, so I quit. I stood next to the three card poker table to "see who this game is played" and backcounted the low stakes bj table next to it, when the true count was 4 I sat down to play. I watched the "bad" table out of the corner of my eye and watched player after player get hammered (sorry, couldn't resist).
If I were you I would start keeping statistics of my play. Analyzing these statistics may give you a clue as to what is wrong.
Keep on trucking, baby.
Steve
Re: WIth all due respect, LTC
Yes excuse me if I was wrong but I was speaking about a post he made on bj21 free pages on saturday. I jump back and forth so much between webs sites that I probably got confused. The post I was talking about was one that discussed how progressons could be useful or something like that. sorry. You know that four black jack board thing that Mcgarvey put up is pretty good for checking all four sites at once. Except that he has rge publishing and not Nachts site advantage player.com.
Yes excuse me if I was wrong but I was speaking about a post he made on bj21 free pages on saturday. I jump back and forth so much between webs sites that I probably got confused. The post I was talking about was one that discussed how progressons could be useful or something like that. sorry. You know that four black jack board thing that Mcgarvey put up is pretty good for checking all four sites at once. Except that he has rge publishing and not Nachts site advantage player.com.
I should have known better ;-)
Dear LTC,
The messages I posted on other BJ sites regarding progression are purely theoretical (at least at this point), and, as I said on a couple of occasions, I don't believe in progressive betting systems (again, at the moment). My point was they (anti-progressionts, including yourself?) were confused with theoretical and practical issues, and facts and beliefs. I asked whether there was "rock-solid" proof that progression doesn't work in BJ. I haven't heard any convincing arguments so far.
Sorry, since you brought it up, I had to defend myself
Regarding my betting system, sure, I use "some sort of" progression as suggested by some experts (like Canfield and many others): I don't raise the bet when I lose even though the count is positive, etc etc. If you call it a progressive system, then I'm guilty as charged. But, I still cannot understand my win/loss pattern based on my betting pattern (which, I assume, is probably very common among AP players since I learned them from BJ books).
BTW, I'm also LTC.
~Jack
PS: Thanks for "standing up" for me, The Mayor!
Dear LTC,
The messages I posted on other BJ sites regarding progression are purely theoretical (at least at this point), and, as I said on a couple of occasions, I don't believe in progressive betting systems (again, at the moment). My point was they (anti-progressionts, including yourself?) were confused with theoretical and practical issues, and facts and beliefs. I asked whether there was "rock-solid" proof that progression doesn't work in BJ. I haven't heard any convincing arguments so far.
Sorry, since you brought it up, I had to defend myself
Regarding my betting system, sure, I use "some sort of" progression as suggested by some experts (like Canfield and many others): I don't raise the bet when I lose even though the count is positive, etc etc. If you call it a progressive system, then I'm guilty as charged. But, I still cannot understand my win/loss pattern based on my betting pattern (which, I assume, is probably very common among AP players since I learned them from BJ books).
BTW, I'm also LTC.
~Jack
PS: Thanks for "standing up" for me, The Mayor!
AAAAH so you saw it Eliot on BJ21
I agree with you 100,000,000,000 %. Progressionist should form their own web site societies. A good book on super progressionist systems is by John Patrick its called "so you want to be a gambler; Slots." It was a book I picked up at a yard sale for 10 cents. It was quite funny. I will send you the book, Eliot, maybe you can use it to start the grill.
I agree with you 100,000,000,000 %. Progressionist should form their own web site societies. A good book on super progressionist systems is by John Patrick its called "so you want to be a gambler; Slots." It was a book I picked up at a yard sale for 10 cents. It was quite funny. I will send you the book, Eliot, maybe you can use it to start the grill.
Answer to your question about my play
> One thing that I have noticed about six deck games, now I am sure the math boys will argue ferociously about the "theory" of this statement, but I am just speaking from my own experience and observations, six deck games tend to be streaky, so if you are getting hammered get up and leave.
I only play SD games, but I'm somewhat superstitious myself. If "the dealer gets hot", I usually change tables. I also consider myself relatively disciplined. If I'm on a losing streak, I sometimes play slots or pow gaw pokers, or just go out for a fresh air. But, the strangest thing is, if I'm on one of those losing streaks, it doesn't matter whatever I do. I go to bed early and come back the next day, and I still lose. Either I keep getting stiff hands (15, 16, 15, 15, ...) or the dealer keeps making 21 no matter what upcard she has....
The only thing I can think of to prevent the big loss is that I just quit playing once I realize this week is a "bad week" (if there is a such a thing...).
Thanks,
~Jack
> One thing that I have noticed about six deck games, now I am sure the math boys will argue ferociously about the "theory" of this statement, but I am just speaking from my own experience and observations, six deck games tend to be streaky, so if you are getting hammered get up and leave.
I only play SD games, but I'm somewhat superstitious myself. If "the dealer gets hot", I usually change tables. I also consider myself relatively disciplined. If I'm on a losing streak, I sometimes play slots or pow gaw pokers, or just go out for a fresh air. But, the strangest thing is, if I'm on one of those losing streaks, it doesn't matter whatever I do. I go to bed early and come back the next day, and I still lose. Either I keep getting stiff hands (15, 16, 15, 15, ...) or the dealer keeps making 21 no matter what upcard she has....
The only thing I can think of to prevent the big loss is that I just quit playing once I realize this week is a "bad week" (if there is a such a thing...).
Thanks,
~Jack
It was a bit comforting to read hammer's post and the string of responses following a devastating weekend of play. It seemed like I was playing to endless dealer making hand after hand and me constantly getting 2 - 6, T and then either an inadaquate pull or busting.
The count generally staying in a mediocre range not low enough to get up and leave, not high enough to increase my bet (KO system). Times I did increase my bet in high counts. I seemed to lose more often to the dealer making his hand with a counter-intuitive series of small card pulls. The few winning streaks I had were in counts on the low side or when the count was just fluctuating at the beginning of a shoe with me having low bets out.
Rob McG suggests rightly in a different message string that life is too short to play anything but advantage games. (I am an architect btw) I take this to be good advice but, think that be succesful at this game one needs nerves of steel,a deep bankroll and lots of time.
Just when I thought I might throw in the towel I read the responses and found them helpful in understanding what may have happened. I think that instead I will just back away, restudy my game, gather some playing money together and have at it again.
Brad
The count generally staying in a mediocre range not low enough to get up and leave, not high enough to increase my bet (KO system). Times I did increase my bet in high counts. I seemed to lose more often to the dealer making his hand with a counter-intuitive series of small card pulls. The few winning streaks I had were in counts on the low side or when the count was just fluctuating at the beginning of a shoe with me having low bets out.
Rob McG suggests rightly in a different message string that life is too short to play anything but advantage games. (I am an architect btw) I take this to be good advice but, think that be succesful at this game one needs nerves of steel,a deep bankroll and lots of time.
Just when I thought I might throw in the towel I read the responses and found them helpful in understanding what may have happened. I think that instead I will just back away, restudy my game, gather some playing money together and have at it again.
Brad
Re: question about your play
>One thing that I have noticed about six deck games, now I am sure the math boys will argue ferociously about the "theory" of this statement, but I am just speaking from my own experience and observations, six deck games tend to be streaky, so if you are getting hammered get up and leave.
This is silly and has nothing to do with advantage play.
On the subject of "Math Boys" -- such phrases are welcome on Patrick's site (www.johnpatrick.com) but not here. The mathematics is correct, there is no argument among the mathematicians about it.
I hope that if you post again, you will understand that mythology has no place on this site.
--Mayor
>One thing that I have noticed about six deck games, now I am sure the math boys will argue ferociously about the "theory" of this statement, but I am just speaking from my own experience and observations, six deck games tend to be streaky, so if you are getting hammered get up and leave.
This is silly and has nothing to do with advantage play.
On the subject of "Math Boys" -- such phrases are welcome on Patrick's site (www.johnpatrick.com) but not here. The mathematics is correct, there is no argument among the mathematicians about it.
I hope that if you post again, you will understand that mythology has no place on this site.
--Mayor
Re: I should have known better ;-)
No problemo hombre. Everyone has a right to play as they want. Its just that this is strictly an advantage player website and I guess I am predjudice about progressions my self.
One thing I can say about your spread if your playing six deckers. Your spread may need adjustment. You may have to spread one to 30/40 units if your playing red action.
I play red and ramp up one unit at nuetral. At plus 2 I go 5 units. At plus 2 to plus 3 I go to 9/10 units and at plus 3-plus 4 10/15 units and at plus four-plus 5 (when surrender offered) max bet of 20/30 units any thing over, plus 5 or over play two hands at 20(and if you can get away with it two hands at 25 units). With this bet ramp you can only play a short times. An hour or two then leave. This is moderately aggressive and you have to be careful. This betting scheme is for a good bank roll to support it as well 5-10k. The worst swing I experienced was at primo high TC'S Ilost over $1200 dollars in twenty minutes at a fast table. I was devastated. An emotional coaster ride. Luckily I came back strong the next two days.
.....and try to leave at minus 1 true counts.
No problemo hombre. Everyone has a right to play as they want. Its just that this is strictly an advantage player website and I guess I am predjudice about progressions my self.
One thing I can say about your spread if your playing six deckers. Your spread may need adjustment. You may have to spread one to 30/40 units if your playing red action.
I play red and ramp up one unit at nuetral. At plus 2 I go 5 units. At plus 2 to plus 3 I go to 9/10 units and at plus 3-plus 4 10/15 units and at plus four-plus 5 (when surrender offered) max bet of 20/30 units any thing over, plus 5 or over play two hands at 20(and if you can get away with it two hands at 25 units). With this bet ramp you can only play a short times. An hour or two then leave. This is moderately aggressive and you have to be careful. This betting scheme is for a good bank roll to support it as well 5-10k. The worst swing I experienced was at primo high TC'S Ilost over $1200 dollars in twenty minutes at a fast table. I was devastated. An emotional coaster ride. Luckily I came back strong the next two days.
.....and try to leave at minus 1 true counts.
Re: question about your play
Hello steve welcome. So AJ and you are into the proggresionist movement. Sounds like a religious movement. Well all I can say in behalf Of the "math boys" is that the evidence is at hand but sorry to say only the math boys can explain it in mathimatical terms. In english the theory is that if you play a perfect game you will be able to offset your losses during negative deviation. This means that you will lose even in high plus counts. But you will stil be able to pull ahead of your losses because you wll be betting the premium bet efficiency during times when the odds are in your favor and you will win during positive diviation. This high betting efficiency occurs at high TC"s.
Why would you play at single deck when under such horrible conditions (even in vegas) when there are some real juicy six deckers out there. I play single deck for tiny stakes and I do okay. I play single deck because It is very challenging and is good for warm up. It gets my senses up to read the table quick. Hey guys great debating with you but this is a strictly advantage player web site. Keep the progressions over at JP's site and tell frank stanton hi!
Hello steve welcome. So AJ and you are into the proggresionist movement. Sounds like a religious movement. Well all I can say in behalf Of the "math boys" is that the evidence is at hand but sorry to say only the math boys can explain it in mathimatical terms. In english the theory is that if you play a perfect game you will be able to offset your losses during negative deviation. This means that you will lose even in high plus counts. But you will stil be able to pull ahead of your losses because you wll be betting the premium bet efficiency during times when the odds are in your favor and you will win during positive diviation. This high betting efficiency occurs at high TC"s.
Why would you play at single deck when under such horrible conditions (even in vegas) when there are some real juicy six deckers out there. I play single deck for tiny stakes and I do okay. I play single deck because It is very challenging and is good for warm up. It gets my senses up to read the table quick. Hey guys great debating with you but this is a strictly advantage player web site. Keep the progressions over at JP's site and tell frank stanton hi!
Re: question about your play
Within the math that tells us we should be betting x at +2 y at +3 and z at +4 we can be underbetting our bankroll within a progression for cover, comps, and to nibble away smaller wins and take most of the swing of the game away. I will look for the article that H Tamburnin wrote on this issue. ie
+2 = $50 10 25 50
+3 = $75 15 35 75
+4 = $100 20 50 100
I had been doing this for a while and was very happy to see HT's article on it basically verifying for me what I had been experiencing.
Within the math that tells us we should be betting x at +2 y at +3 and z at +4 we can be underbetting our bankroll within a progression for cover, comps, and to nibble away smaller wins and take most of the swing of the game away. I will look for the article that H Tamburnin wrote on this issue. ie
+2 = $50 10 25 50
+3 = $75 15 35 75
+4 = $100 20 50 100
I had been doing this for a while and was very happy to see HT's article on it basically verifying for me what I had been experiencing.
Re: question about your play
<Within the math that tells us we should be betting x at +2 y at +3 and z at +4 <we can be underbetting our bankroll within a progression for cover, comps, and <to nibble away smaller wins and take most of the swing of the game away. I <will look for the article that H Tamburnin wrote on this issue. ie
<+2 = $50 10 25 50
<+3 = $75 15 35 75
<+4 = $100 20 50 100
<I had been doing this for a while and was very happy to see HT's article on it <basically verifying for me what I had been experiencing.
Wow great view on bet changes.
I would NOT use any progression to cover my bet strategies. This is due to the fact that a strict progression (as you said and i agree with) will hurt your ability to offset the losses and make a profit. I use bet changes as well. I dont want to appear to be following some sort of betting pattern that is easily identifiable by the Pit Buzzard. AS long as your in the +EV zone and the TC is strong, change the size of your bet If the bet called for is $50 I bet will $75 0r $35 after a big win. SO if I do lose it. I lose less. The Buzzard will see some money on the table. I try and give them the view that I'm losing as much as I win.
The problem with the progressionist view is that they think that by "feeling/esp" alone that they will get on board the streak train and ride it to the bank. They have this feeling of ESP/Luck because they felt the Psychological power of having a good day. There is no way/ability to predict the streaks as they claim.
Lately there has been a big move by the progressionists to prove their FEELINGS by logic supported by math. The problem is (and I am not a mathmatician) is that even with six billions sims (and please if I am wrong on the theory let me know because I am picking up where I should have started in college but did not)that there is still a slight change in the rate of probability. In fact from what I understand that the rate of probability has a certain amount of infinity to it. Thus there is a slight continuing change but it is so small that we can get close to the prediction that we have a fairly good idea of what EV zone we are in. So we can know when to bet big or small and how to play each hand. Nothing is perfect but I do knopw that progressions are a poor way to bet from every thing I have read, everything I have be shown and most of all from casino experience. So this change will hurt the progressionist.
Progessions also lose because they tend to make little money when they are done. Hey we all have seen the 2 hour craps roller or the 10 spin winner on roulette. The vig will get them eventually. You know the casinos know this and they are still in business kicking ass. The casinos want this kind of action. I have spoke to some highly informative/educated pit buzzards and they know what kind of action as far as betting they want to see. I have had a couple tell me in english and a little in mathmatics that progressons are a suckers strategy.
<Within the math that tells us we should be betting x at +2 y at +3 and z at +4 <we can be underbetting our bankroll within a progression for cover, comps, and <to nibble away smaller wins and take most of the swing of the game away. I <will look for the article that H Tamburnin wrote on this issue. ie
<+2 = $50 10 25 50
<+3 = $75 15 35 75
<+4 = $100 20 50 100
<I had been doing this for a while and was very happy to see HT's article on it <basically verifying for me what I had been experiencing.
Wow great view on bet changes.
I would NOT use any progression to cover my bet strategies. This is due to the fact that a strict progression (as you said and i agree with) will hurt your ability to offset the losses and make a profit. I use bet changes as well. I dont want to appear to be following some sort of betting pattern that is easily identifiable by the Pit Buzzard. AS long as your in the +EV zone and the TC is strong, change the size of your bet If the bet called for is $50 I bet will $75 0r $35 after a big win. SO if I do lose it. I lose less. The Buzzard will see some money on the table. I try and give them the view that I'm losing as much as I win.
The problem with the progressionist view is that they think that by "feeling/esp" alone that they will get on board the streak train and ride it to the bank. They have this feeling of ESP/Luck because they felt the Psychological power of having a good day. There is no way/ability to predict the streaks as they claim.
Lately there has been a big move by the progressionists to prove their FEELINGS by logic supported by math. The problem is (and I am not a mathmatician) is that even with six billions sims (and please if I am wrong on the theory let me know because I am picking up where I should have started in college but did not)that there is still a slight change in the rate of probability. In fact from what I understand that the rate of probability has a certain amount of infinity to it. Thus there is a slight continuing change but it is so small that we can get close to the prediction that we have a fairly good idea of what EV zone we are in. So we can know when to bet big or small and how to play each hand. Nothing is perfect but I do knopw that progressions are a poor way to bet from every thing I have read, everything I have be shown and most of all from casino experience. So this change will hurt the progressionist.
Progessions also lose because they tend to make little money when they are done. Hey we all have seen the 2 hour craps roller or the 10 spin winner on roulette. The vig will get them eventually. You know the casinos know this and they are still in business kicking ass. The casinos want this kind of action. I have spoke to some highly informative/educated pit buzzards and they know what kind of action as far as betting they want to see. I have had a couple tell me in english and a little in mathmatics that progressons are a suckers strategy.
Re: It has been somewhat disheartening...
I also use Canfield's Master System with about the same number of indices. Spread about the same 1 - 3 or4 units. I use a side count of aces betting purposes and play mainly single deck.
I had a tough streak that took me out of the game for 3/4 of a year. I questioned my ability and also my willingness to put the money on the table when count was positive.
I have gone back and reviewed my records for last 2-3 years and have started playing a small unit game just to get my game back in shape.
The bottom line is you are going to have more units on the table when the cards are positive and dealer has as good a chance of getting the big cards as you do unless you spread to two hands. ( this will get you the tap on the shoulder in SD game )
I suggest you cont. playing and accept those small wins and if you keep at it you will hit some big wins to go with the small ones.
Good luck and keep posting as there are not too many of us Canfield players around.
Biff
I also use Canfield's Master System with about the same number of indices. Spread about the same 1 - 3 or4 units. I use a side count of aces betting purposes and play mainly single deck.
I had a tough streak that took me out of the game for 3/4 of a year. I questioned my ability and also my willingness to put the money on the table when count was positive.
I have gone back and reviewed my records for last 2-3 years and have started playing a small unit game just to get my game back in shape.
The bottom line is you are going to have more units on the table when the cards are positive and dealer has as good a chance of getting the big cards as you do unless you spread to two hands. ( this will get you the tap on the shoulder in SD game )
I suggest you cont. playing and accept those small wins and if you keep at it you will hit some big wins to go with the small ones.
Good luck and keep posting as there are not too many of us Canfield players around.
Biff