My wife and I sat down at a blackjack table for the first time three years ago and were immediately hooked! We have since played in Vegas, Reno, Tahoe, Tunica, Kansas City, as well as many Indian casinos. I've become a card counter, and have done pretty well. My wife on the other hand plays straight basic strategy (not perfectly, but pretty close when I'm there to make suggestions) with flat betting. Here's the kicker: she's done almost as well as me! We've played hundreds of hours, long enough I think for the odds to work out, yet she continues to defy them and win money. Has anyone ever experienced such a thing?
Lucky BS player?
- Thread starter techster
- Start date
zengrifter
Banned
Sure, a few hundred hours does not the longrun, make. zg
Dyepaintball12
Well-Known Member
I have a friend who plays BS with me.
We have gone to the casino about 6 times, and the last time we went was the only time he lost any money.
He is probably up $1,000 after 5 months using BS.
But eventually he will lose it with his -EV.
We have gone to the casino about 6 times, and the last time we went was the only time he lost any money.
He is probably up $1,000 after 5 months using BS.
But eventually he will lose it with his -EV.
halcyon1234
Well-Known Member
If she's up, then by definition, it hasn't been long enough.
What you should be more concerned with is tracking your results. If you're hitting the long haul, and you're down, then you need to evaluate your play.
There's really no guarantee that the math will ever win out with such a small house advantage. If you consider that each session is as independent from the last as a spin of the roulette ball, it's not entirely inconceivable that a player might have the LUCK to sit at more good tables than bad ones.
She only plays at $5 tables, and only occasionally bets $10, but only when she feels lucky--she really does not pay attention to what I bet. I usually play at the $5 tables with her, and spread $5-$40, although I've had a lot of success spreading $10-$50 at $10 minimum tables. I'm still trying to build my bankroll to the point I can play higher limits comfortably.
halcyon1234
Well-Known Member
Except each session isn't indepenent, because it is all measured against a single starting point: her initial bankroll. When calculating the total profit, each session isn't analyzed individual, but rather as one, long session. 10x 1hour sessions are actually 1x 10 hour session.
The house edge is 0.5% for a perfect BS player. Probably around 1% for a near perfect. And she's varying her bets from $5 to $10 as she sees fit, so her average bet overall will be higher than $5.
It's luck until her expected losses are equal to a standard devitation, which is somewhere around her 12,000th hand, where she'll be expected to have lost ~$700 +/- ~$700.
I understand . . . I am simply saying that nothing is impossible. In reality, every session is just that: a session. My only point is that there is no supernatural force known as The Math which is going to follow her around and MAKE SURE that it all evens out.
She can walk into a casino and, against the odds, sit down to an unreasonably good shoe more often than not and walk away a winner. Is it likely? No. But the Spirit of Standard Deviation isn't going to stop it from happening either.
Mimosine
Well-Known Member
actually, while The Math might not be responsible, its inbred relative The Statistics usually does The Math's dirty work. Standard deviation will catch up with all of us over time, those of us playing with an edge will be above break even, those without below breakeven, by how much, well 68% of us will be roughly +/- 1 standard deviation above or below our expected EV.
Okay, then you're saying the EDGE is a supernatural force who ALWAYS gets his man. All I am saying is that the edge/the math/the statistics only say what is LIKELY to happen . . . not what WILL happen.
If I go and win today (without counting) then I will have beaten the edge. If I go and play tomorrow and just happen to sit at the right table, then that table has no knowledge of my playing yesterday and therefore will not seek to even things out, and it's possible I will win again. And while it's not likely that such a thing will continue, there's no cosmic law that will make sure it doesn't.
I remember reading about a story of a guy who, because of an ungodly winning streak and doubling up on his wins, he turned $40 into something like $14 million in one night at the baccarat table. Fiction? I don't know, but even if it's apocrayphal I think it proves that sometimes life beats all odds.
I'm not saying that, over the course of their playing career, most basic strategists won't lose more than they win. I am only saying that nothing is impossible and making definitive, absolute statements--i.e. this WILL happen undoubtedly--doesn't leave room for the simple reality that sometimes crazy sh*t happens.
Oh sure - not at all unusual. You mention she "occasionally bets $10" instead of $5. When and for how long? You win that extra net unit once an hour and you're gonna really make some money. You win a $20 bet, pick up 3 extra units and you're good for the next 9 hours.
I've beaten the HA over 200000 hands using only BS and some bet variation that resulted in a 1% payback greater than flat-betting.
Of course I set low winning goals that are easily and often achieved and have no idea how much she has won in terms of dollars or units.
With a big enough bankroll--let's just be ridiculously safe and say one that's large enough to withstand 100 straight losses--I am certain you would be WAY ahead.
positiveEV
Well-Known Member
Indeed, I understand. I was merely reacting to Halcyon's absolutist statement that leaves no room for any other possibilities and attributing god-like power to the house edge.
Well you're right, that much money does not exist, and neither do no-limit tables!
But however much it might be, there IS an amount of money that you could theoretically take to the tables and then proceed to win indefinitely with the Martingale if there were no betting limits.
Thank God for credit
I've never quite figured out if one would end up $1 ahead with a Martingdale and infinite bankroll with no table limits.
But I think the infinite losses would outweigh the infinite bankroll
