Since I don't have a sim program and it was recommended not to get one 
I was thinking about a betting scheme I've seen in a couple of books. The exact amounts aren't important, whats important is when it was suggested to raise your bet.
Say you can bet from $10-100. Now I know that at a TC of 0 or less the house has the edge so you would probably want to wait till a TC of at least 1 to raise your bet but I've seen something as follows recommended:
neg counts: $10
0 and +1: $25
+2: $50
+3: $75
+4: $100
I would have thought it would be better to wait till +1 to raise your bet:
0 and neg: $10
+1: $25
+2: $50
+3: $75
+4: $100
Since it was recommended in a book I assume there must be some validity behind it and that I must be wrong but I'm not sure why. At first I thought that betting $25 at TC of 0 would inc. your avg bet, increasing your overall profit. But that simply doesn't make sense since at 0 you're losing more money than you're making so that should in fact lower your ev.
I was thinking about a betting scheme I've seen in a couple of books. The exact amounts aren't important, whats important is when it was suggested to raise your bet.Say you can bet from $10-100. Now I know that at a TC of 0 or less the house has the edge so you would probably want to wait till a TC of at least 1 to raise your bet but I've seen something as follows recommended:
neg counts: $10
0 and +1: $25
+2: $50
+3: $75
+4: $100
I would have thought it would be better to wait till +1 to raise your bet:
0 and neg: $10
+1: $25
+2: $50
+3: $75
+4: $100
Since it was recommended in a book I assume there must be some validity behind it and that I must be wrong but I'm not sure why. At first I thought that betting $25 at TC of 0 would inc. your avg bet, increasing your overall profit. But that simply doesn't make sense since at 0 you're losing more money than you're making so that should in fact lower your ev.
