# N0 Infinite Bank

Discussion in 'Skilled Play - Card Counting, Advanced Strategies' started by blackjack avenger, Oct 9, 2011.

1. ### blackjack avengerWell-Known Member

I believe in theory with an infinite bank one would bet table max at any advantage. This technique would result in a horrible N0, DI & SCORE. The measures we are suppose to care about. Even with an infinite bank should't one care about game quality?

2. ### tthreeBanned

With a truly infinite bank you could lose every hand you play and you would still have an infinite bank. What have you actually lost?

3. ### iCountNTrackWell-Known Member

Yes, if you are playing a negative expectation game, you will loose an infinite amount of money even if your bankroll is infinite. When talking about infinity, we need to use limit theory, because infinity is a concept and not a number.

http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showpost.php?p=206575&postcount=259

check the above link for a more detailed explanation

4. ### psyduckWell-Known Member

LOL! Good thinking!

I wonder what spread I need to achieve that bank.

5. ### blackjack avengerWell-Known Member

N0 Focus?

With an infinite bank why play? We can have subjective reasons to play or just be greedy.

I think the idea of an infinite bank is ror is eliminated so why not chase EV at every opportunity?

If those game measure DI, SCORE & N0 mean anything then they should tell us that we still want to play with the mentioned game measures in mind even with an infinite bank.

6. ### NynefingersWell-Known Member

I would think we'd just want to maximize CE. For an bankroll approaching infinity, CE approaches EV, so we'd just maximize EV. N0 may be huge, but since our bets are insignificant relative to the bankroll, we can handle that large N0 and it won't be that big of a deal.

7. ### blackjack avengerWell-Known Member

N0 Rebuttal

However,
With a near infinite or very very large bank we still want to win? Are we variance junkies? A simple wonging 1 to 2 spread greatly outperforms; in SCORE & N0, a flat spread.

Perhaps there is a fine line in terminology?:
Infinite bank, bet max every opportunity
Less then infinite bank, SCORE & N0 should be considered

I used N0 to rebute

8. ### NynefingersWell-Known Member

For a large, but not infinite bankroll, I still think we maximize CE. By its definition, CE is the amount you would accept with no variance in exchange for not taking the risky bet. If someone with an infinite bank were around and willing to buy out all of our bets at exactly our CE and take on the variance for us, we'd clearly want to maximize CE. I don't see why that would change if we were actually making the bets. They are either worth that much to us or they aren't, and if they aren't, we simply adjust our utility function to more closely match our reality and calcuate CE based on that.

9. ### aslanWell-Known Member

Wouldn't an infinite bankroll preclude there being any money left to win from the casino in the first place? I mean, which is larger-- all the money in the universe or an infinite bankroll? :laugh: I'm not greedy-- I'd settle for all the money in the universe-- at least that's a finite amount. And if I had all the money in the universe, I'd have to loan the casino money so that I could play. :laugh:

10. ### aslanWell-Known Member

View attachment 8148 Infinitely less than what you began with.

File size:
2.1 KB
Views:
271