Risk of Ruin Help

#1
Hi Guys,
I’m new on here. I have a bank roll of around 1k and want to keep my risk at around 20%. Does anyone know how to figure out what my min to max size bets should be and in terms of dollars and unit size? I.e. $10 units with 1-6 spread? I know there is software for this but I do not have it yet and wanted to see if anyone can help. Thanks!

Ginobili
 
#3
Thanks for the help. Yes I agree it is a small bank roll right now. I’d be okay with risking more. Do you think I should increase my RoR to 40-50% in order to gain a larger bet spread?
 
#4
I dont get something about count systems. I have heard and read horror stories of peopkle counting cards and losing well over 40k because while the count is high the cards still werent in his favor anyway. So if leople are still losing their ass even from a big bankroll and their counts are spot on but still losing, well, i got news, thats gambling. Hahaha
 

DSchles

Well-Known Member
#5
Sneaky_gnome69 said:
I dont get something about count systems. I have heard and read horror stories of peopkle counting cards and losing well over 40k because while the count is high the cards still werent in his favor anyway. So if leople are still losing their ass even from a big bankroll and their counts are spot on but still losing, well, i got news, thats gambling. Hahaha
The distinction is that, because the house has the edge in most instances, true gambling involves playing with the hope of winning but the expectation of losing. Card counting reverses that mindset. Since the player now has the edge, he or she plays with the expectation of winning but the realization that losing is still possible. And, the longer you play, the less likely losing becomes. That is why most people consider owning stocks as an investment rather than a gamble: while you can lose over a short period of time, it is highly unlikely that you will over a longer period.

Still there is the famous quote attributed to the famous philosopher/humorist Will Rogers. When asked what the difference was between gambling on a horse race and investing in the stock market, he replied: When you bet on a horse race, if the horse wins, you make money; if he doesn't, you lose money. When you buy a stock, if it goes up, you make money; if it doesn't, you lose money. See the difference?! :)

Don
 
#6
I see a difference but in the end its still gambling when counting cards. A lot of people that do count want others to believe it isnt gambling but in fact it is. The problem now is that even on a 6 deck shoe you are hoping that while ypou have a good count the dealer wont make any hands when you bet big. In fact its not rare that ypu may even lose your entire bankroll when counting.

There is no way i am going to tell others not to count, if they think they can do it then have at it, but i would think it would be much more effective on a double deck or single deck game, not so much a 6 deck or 8 deck game. In the end its still gambling because you are still taking a risk and even counting has its risks.
 

Zero

Well-Known Member
#7
Sneaky_gnome69 said:
I see a difference but in the end its still gambling when counting cards.
...
In the end its still gambling because you are still taking a risk and even counting has its risks.
So do you consider the casino a gambler? I have walked out of the casino with more money than I walked in with on at least one occasion. So the casino is taking a risk by letting me play, they can still lose.

In the short term your results are indistinguishable from luck. It is the long term that counts. So in order to ensure you are a successful card counter, you have to play enough hands to get to the long term. How many hands do you have to play to get to the long term? Let's do a little math. The standard deviation on a hand of blackjack is 1.16. Let's assume you're a proficient card counter and play with a 1% overall advantage over the house. You play one hand betting $25. Your EV for that hand is $0.25 ($25 * .01). But due to the SD your result will probably be somewhere between -$28.75 and +$29.25 (.25 +/- 25 * 1.16). The thing about standard deviation though, is that it only increases by the square root of the number of trials. So lets say you play for an hour or two and you've played 100 hands. Your EV is $25. The SD will be 11.6 (1.16 * sqrt(100) = 1.16 * 10), so your actual results will probably be between -$265 and +$315. We can see you could easily be down after 100 hands. But now let's say you've been playing for a few years and you've played 1 million hands of blackjack. Your EV is +$250,000. The SD is 1160. So your actual results will probably be between +$221,000 and +$279,000. When I say "probably" that is within 1 standard deviation, or 2/3 of the time. 66% of the time you will be between those two numbers. What about the other 1/3 of the time. Well half of the time you would be below and half above. So only about 1/6 of the time would you have made less than $221,000. But let's looks at 2 standard deviations. 96% of the time you will be within 2 SD of your expected result. So 96% of the time you would have made between $192,000 and $308,000. Only 2% of the time would you have made less than that. And you can expect to be withing 3 SD of your EV over 99% of time (I think it's 99.6%)! So you would *never* be down after a million hands. In fact, you would never have *only* made $100,000 after a million hands.

This is why advantage players, do not consider it gambling. They know in the long term (or in "the end" as you phrased it) they will be ahead. Incidentally, this is why the casinos don't consider what they do gambling either.

0
 
#8
Sneaky_gnome69 said:
in the end its still gambling when counting cards. A lot of people that do count want others to believe it isnt gambling but in fact it is.
Nobody wants you to believe expert counting is not gambling. All real counters know
it's gambling. You have come here with a snarky ignorance that is easily dispelled.
 

ZenKinG

Well-Known Member
#9
Sneaky_gnome69 said:
I dont get something about count systems. I have heard and read horror stories of peopkle counting cards and losing well over 40k because while the count is high the cards still werent in his favor anyway. So if leople are still losing their ass even from a big bankroll and their counts are spot on but still losing, well, i got news, thats gambling. Hahaha

Youre an idiot ignorant degenerate just like 99% of this pathetic society now a days. I bet you know everything about celebrity gossip, but if it comes time to use your little brain for anything, you're clueless. You have no idea what the hell youre talking about or what it means to have a mathematical edge. Having an edge is just the first step. You still can lose a shit load in the short run regardless of the size of your edge, but does that mean the math doesnt work? NO. You just need to manage your bank and bet in proportion to your bankroll to have as low of a risk as possible until the edge finally kicks in and you get to the long run.

From the horror stories you read, a 40k loss doesnt mean anything without providing more information. Did they have 200k and lost 40k as part of the variance of the game, which is perfectly normal or did they overbet and 40k was their whole bankroll and they lost it? If the latter case, they were simply ignorant degenerates using counting as an excuse to feed the need for action at the tables with no understanding of risk and bankroll management.
 
Top