Raising After A Loss?

[Finn Dog]

The infamous Ian Andersen often stated in Burning The Tables that he never raised his bet after a loss under any circumstances (even for his Green gambit).

That said:

1. Do you raise your bet after a loss?

2. If so, how much do you raise your bet by (assume the TC just jumped from 0 or 1 to 3 or 4 and you've got just 1 or 2 units out there)?

3. How much do you feel you can safely raise by after a loss and just appear like everyone else: guessing a parlay is always OK?

4. Or do you never raise your bet after a loss (and agree with Andersen that doing so is suicide and a major red flag to the pit)?

Best regards,

FD

 

[hawkeye]

Last wknd, nearly full 6D table, dealer kills everyone through the first half of shoe. Everyone leaves except for me and one old lady. The count is now ripe, shoe is hot. After 5 losses in a row at minimum bet I spread to two hands and upped the bet, and called out "Time for some good cards!" and pounded my fist on the table twice next to each spot like some weird ritual. No one batted an eye.

Acting the part can't hurt.

 

[QFIT]

Never is a word I never use.

 

[shadroch]

1)sometimes
2) not more than half the last bet
3) I'd feel okay raising up to 100%
4) see 1-3

 

[tfg]

I don't get this. I would think that raising after a loss would be something that would attract less attention. Especially if you're doing some kind of progression.

 

[Finn Dog]

I don't get this. I would think that raising after a loss would be something that would attract less attention. Especially if you're doing some kind of progression.

I hear you on the progression angle, but Ian Andersen claims in Burning The Tables that normal Ploppie behavior after a loss, is to repeat the same bet after losing; and that mainly only counters would continue to raise their bets after a loss (in accordance with the count, that is; and that doing so is a reg flag to the Pit).

I suppose Andersen's whole point is that while it may appear that raising your bet after a loss is at first glance only following the actions of a progression bettor--but doing so as a counter is deadly--because unlike a progression bettor, a counter would be doing so only in accordance with the count; that is, they wouldn't ever mimic the actions of a progression bettor when the count is going down.

In fact, he stresses over-and-over again, all throughout the book, that he never raises after a loss--which he claims accounted for his unusual longevity--even while playing 3 Blacks as a minimum unit.

He claimed that by never increasing after a loss--combined with all of his UG cover plays--that when he was finally backed off (due to cume wins of over 150K), they never actually thought he was counting cards; rather, they thought he was only a BP called in when the count was high.

Best regards,

FD

 

[daddybo]

hmm...

I think it probably depends on who's watching, tolerance, etc. I up my bet after a loss frequently... I try to have appearance of betting erratically anyway. (being careful not to kill the edge). The only time I've had the privilege of knowing exactly how I was spotted, they never mentioned the bets. They said it was by my play. In particular the ?? vs 10 plays and they saw a ? vs 2 double they didn't like. ( yeah, I know, I was there too long.)

 

[Finn Dog]

( yeah, I know, I was there too long.)

DB: curious how long was too long? PM if nec.

Best regards,

FD

 

[ihate17]

I love my steamer act

I will raise my bet after a loss very often if the count calls for it and I play for pretty high stakes. Perhaps Ian Anderson always thought someone was watching him from the time he walked in the door or perhaps he did not think he could come off well as a steamer, I do not know. What I know is that it has worked for me for years at many casinos and at certain casinos over and over again.

You also have to measure this against the casino you are in if you can.
Do you think they are already evaluating you?
Do you think they will begin evaluating you right after you push those bets way up?
Are you playing rated or not?
How long have you been there?
What kind of reputation does the casino have or what is your past experience there?
Did you suddenly become the big player in the pit?

Often a combination of answers to these questions convinces me to leave once I bring my bets down. Every steamer needs to cool off, yet in some isolated areas I might not leave the casino but go eat something or play a little VP and then return later.

ihate17

 

[Grisly Dreams]

It seems to me that it's the kind of thing you can do if it's consistent with your act. If you're acting like an emotional bettor, yeah, sometimes those guys just can't help but up the bet after a tough beat -- it's more an act of defiance against the Fates than any kind of calculated economic decision.

 

[moo321]

The question you need to ask is would I ever NOT raise my bet after a loss with a jump in the count, and why the hell not? Are you a red chipper, then no! Are you a green chipper, then, unless you're protecting a monster game, no! And if you're a black chipper, I still wouldn't do it without a very good reason.

Counting is hard enough on its own, without throwing in betting cover.

 

[DownUnderWonder]

I don't see a problem with it, just act appropriately. Its especially easy if you have lost a few in a row, just put a bigger stack down, being a little rougher about it, like slamming the chips down in disgust after throwing your hands up after the last lost. It will look like you are just chasing your losses. Watch ploppies, they do so much that counters are afraid of, and just see how they act when they do certain things, like raising after a loss.

 

[jack.jackson]

Authors, such as Bryce Carlson, recommends, NOT to raise your bet on a LOSS, of 2 or more units, after 50% or more, of the pack, has been dealt.

 

[moo321]

Authors, such as Bryce Carlson, recommends, NOT to raise your bet on a LOSS, of 2 or more units, after 50% or more, of the pack, has been dealt.

Well, this results in MASSIVE losses in EV. I have no idea how to calculate how much, but I'd estimate at least 25%, especially in a pitch game.

 

[Cardcounter]

If you look like your chasing it is fine! After losing people have a couple of differen't reactions leave the table, chase loses or bet small. I remember one time I lost and doubled my bet I lost again and doubled my bet again and the dealer said you are doing the parley system right. I said yep, the count was going up the whole time though.

 

[jack.jackson]

Well, this results in MASSIVE losses in EV. I have no idea how to calculate how much, but I'd estimate at least 25%, especially in a pitch game.

Well maybe, but this is how his 'betting strategies' are presented in his book. Ive read a couple interviews on him, and learned he was really big on camo.

Just for the record, I always raise after a loss.

 

[daddybo]

Well maybe, but this is how his 'betting strategies' are presented in his book. Ive read a couple interviews on him, and learned he was really big on camo.

Just for the record, I always raise after a loss.

I've read his book. His counting system works fine (AOII), but I think most people will tell you his betting strategies aren't up to par for today's games.

 

[Finn Dog]

Just for the record, I always raise after a loss.

Only when the count is going up, right?

 

[jack.jackson]

I've read his book. His counting system works fine (AOII), but I think most people will tell you his betting strategies aren't up to par for today's games.

Ya, its probably a little outdated. They seem to still work OK though. Its pretty easy to change your betting strategies up though.

Only when the count is going up, right?

Copy that!

 

[ihate17]

Mr Carlson and AOII

I have used AOII for a long time but I only use it for single and DD games and feel that for me hi-lo is better at shoe games.
With that in mind, I also find his betting strategies better for pitch than shoe games, and combined with the fact that casinos watch fitch closer than shoe games, it is a no brainer to me.
Simply, without any other variables, you can spread wildly, go to two hands and put on a major steamer act with extremely less worry in a shoe game than in a pitch but one must remember that when the book was written and the game Mr Carlson concentrated on was the pitch game.

I think Blackjack for Blood is still a very valuable book for even today's decent single and double deck games.

ihate17