the pendulum swings

[SleightOfHand]

Jason,

Here is my advice from my recent success, even though you think I am a fake...

The + playing conditions are indeed critical. If you want to reduce your variance, try the "progressive ploppy" approach. Never increase your bet after a loss, and never decrease after a win. When spread to 2 hands, this is defined as net cash win on hand. This will drop your win rate a good amount, but adds cover fairly significantly, and you can increase your spread 2 more X (i.e. 12 >> 14) to compensate for the lost E(R). Ever since I did this, my variance dropped considerably, and my % of winning days went up a lot. I recall early on, before playing this way, having shoes where I lost ~100 units. These have been extremely rare since I did this. Check Ian's book for further explanation.

I am obviously well aware that each hand is independent and "streaks" don't exist, but clusters of losing hands do exist, and by increasing bets further when you are losing, no matter how good the count, you are increasing both exposure and variance.

Hope this helps buddy...

I have to say this has been some AWFUL advice. Ian Anderson's advice on cover costs an incredible amount. It should not be followed by any means. Splitting to 2 hands does not decrease your EV, you are putting the same amount of cash on the table with the same advantage. It does, however reduce your variance and putting down 1.5x is suggested, as covered in D.S.'s BJA3.

 

[The Chaperone]

How could you lose so much in one day? I spread $25 to $450 in shoe game. So my max bet is 18 units. Theoretically if I split three times and double on each, I could lose 114 units in one hand. But it never happened. I can only remember I put 54 units on the table. And it happened very scarcely. If I lost 100 units in one day, I will call it a day.

Funny because I was wondering how he could have never lost this much in a day in the 7 years or whatever he's been playing. If you put the money out when you are supposed to, you will lose it sometimes. If you put in the work to find and play the best games, you will be putting the money out a lot as there will be a lot of times when you have a decent edge.

 

[The Chaperone]

I seen people loose a lot more then that when the dealers are hot, unless you want to burn up your BR it time to call it a day.

Your logic is nearly as strong as your English.

 

[The Chaperone]

I posted some thoughts a while back that kind of go against the grain. During my first 5 years of full time play, most of my play took place in AC, where the games and penetration are very mediocre at best. Most would say poor. During most of that time I experienced rather steady winning results. Very minimal swings. Basically my results chart looked like a very small, but steady incline. No wild swings. Poor penetration means fewer big plus counts and fewer big bet opportunities, So no big wins , no big losses. a seemingly smoother ride, but in the end a smaller winrate as well.

In retrospect I feel that may have been beneficial as at the beginning I was very underfunded and just didn't really know it. I was playing a smaller unit at the time, but a large negative swing like I just experienced would have all but wiped me out and I would probably be punching a time clock somewhere today.

So I don't want to encourage anyone to seek inferior conditions, but it could have that benefit. Will be interesting to hear other experienced players thought on the matter, although I suspect they may not agree with me. (won't be the first time...:laugh

You are way wrong in this post. The variance does not go up with better games (unless you are meaning that they have more liberal doubling rules, but I think you are referring to penetration and increased betting opportunities). The 'swings' do increase, but this is how we make our money. All playing bad games does is decrease the number of max bets we place over a given time period. Even worse than that the average edge on said max bets will be lower than if we were playing a better game. Even if the average edge were the same, our bankrolls will be drawn down by expenses as we wait for betting opportunities. In this case, expenses are: food, gas, hotels, living expenses (if this is your primary source of income), and the -EV of waiting bets.

Many ploppy counters believe this same nonsense about bad games being lower variance. The truth is you were very lucky to win playing such bad games. Your experience is anecdotal and not a typical result. If you don't believe me, try playing a promotion with a >1% player edge off the top. You will be flat-betting 2x16 units nearly the whole time. The swings will be tremendous, but do you really think the crappy AC games are preferable? If you don't have access to such a promo try spreading 4-16 'units' on a good rules Reno single deck game. Bet 16 units any time the running count is +2 or greater. You will see that the swings are bigger in better games. This is not an increase in variance (you actually double and split less often in SD when compared to shoes). It is just a result of more favorable betting opportunities and an increased 'swing' in the short term.

 

[Gamblor]

I have to say this has been some AWFUL advice. Ian Anderson's advice on cover costs an incredible amount. It should not be followed by any means. Splitting to 2 hands does not decrease your EV, you are putting the same amount of cash on the table with the same advantage. It does, however reduce your variance and putting an extra 1.5x is suggested, as covered in D.S.'s BJA3.

The part about progression isn't necessarily bad advice. I do it myself. Lets just say there's ways to compensate for lost EV. Why just yesterday I spread to x 24 on a +1.5 count. Think I wound up surrendering that hand

 

[creeping panther]

Bash

This is going to be a main topic at the BASH where a skillz AP using straight counting, playing 22 hours a week or more and betting full optimal on a very good game, but not a fine+ one, will speak of his experiences in detail and it will be an eye opener, this I guarantee,,,,no cyber BS, no unknown quantity, no ghost typing on a key board.

Other subjects, Shuffle tracking, Surveillance, count types, team play, networking, cover plays.

CP

 

[kewljason]

You are way wrong in this post. The variance does not go up with better games (unless you are meaning that they have more liberal doubling rules, but I think you are referring to penetration and increased betting opportunities). The 'swings' do increase, but this is how we make our money. All playing bad games does is decrease the number of max bets we place over a given time period. Even worse than that the average edge on said max bets will be lower than if we were playing a better game. Even if the average edge were the same, our bankrolls will be drawn down by expenses as we wait for betting opportunities. In this case, expenses are: food, gas, hotels, living expenses (if this is your primary source of income), and the -EV of waiting bets.

I don't think I said variance goes up with better games, did I? I said I am experiencing more extreme swings in the last 14 months since I have had access to double deck games and deeper penetration, 6 deck games, with the worst of these swings both good and bad occuring rather recently. I was strickly talking about results and bankroll swings. If I said, variance, which I don't believe I did, that was a mistake, Mr Chap.

 

[Eye of the Tiger]

Your logic is nearly as strong as your English.

Typo dude. I didn't know you were the English police. Lighten up and enjoy your life not always a stiff upper lip. :laugh: :joker:

 

[zengrifter]

I can only conclude that this extreme fluctuation is the result of some better condition, mostly penetration that I have been lucky enough to play of late. Deeper pen means more high counts with high wagers and unfortunately, sometimes you lose these. Lol

This experience shows the need for a substantial bankroll, that I thought might be helpful to our rash of new members.

Amen Brother Kewl.
Our biggest losses occur in our most profitable games. Its a paradox. zg

 

[The Chaperone]

I don't think I said variance goes up with better games, did I? I said I am experiencing more extreme swings in the last 14 months since I have had access to double deck games and deeper penetration, 6 deck games, with the worst of these swings both good and bad occuring rather recently. I was strickly talking about results and bankroll swings. If I said, variance, which I don't believe I did, that was a mistake, Mr Chap.

Fair enough. Perhaps I misunderstood. But your suggestion that the mediocre AC games helped preserve your small bankroll is erroneous. All playing those games did was subject your BR to far greater expenses per betting opportunity and a smaller edge on those betting opportunities.

It's true that playing better games may have accelerated the possibility of going bust (although also would have greatly decreased that likelihood), but seriously, would anyone prefer to go broke over say a 12 month period of time, instead of a 1 month period of time? The goal is not to 'stay in the game' as long as possible (unless you are a ploppy lol). The goal is to win money, grow the bankroll, get to the point where you can make a living without having to worry about going broke, etc.

 

[Freightman]

How could you lose so much in one day? I spread $25 to $450 in shoe game. So my max bet is 18 units. Theoretically if I split three times and double on each, I could lose 114 units in one hand. But it never happened. I can only remember I put 54 units on the table. And it happened very scarcely. If I lost 100 units in one day, I will call it a day.

**** happens - you obviously have a loss limit. Kewl does not - nor do I. For the record, he beats me on most units won in one day (250 for me) and I beat him on most units lost in 1 day (400). I also had 2 monster losses this month in May (only 5 days in) totalling 400 units - I'm only down 20 units for the month. I have not had a losing month since last August, and am up approx 2400 units this year. The key to Kewl (which he can confirm) is hours played - win lose or draw. He knows that the rollercoaster happens and the math will work to his advantage despite the downswings. No question that it is an interesting topic with philosophies on both sides of the fence.

 

[kewljason]

**** happens - you obviously have a loss limit. Kewl does not - nor do I. For the record, he beats me on most units won in one day (250 for me) and I beat him on most units lost in 1 day (400). I also had 2 monster losses this month in May (only 5 days in) totalling 400 units - I'm only down 20 units for the month. I have not had a losing month since last August, and am up approx 2400 units this year. The key to Kewl (which he can confirm) is hours played - win lose or draw. He knows that the rollercoaster happens and the math will work to his advantage despite the downswings. No question that it is an interesting topic with philosophies on both sides of the fence.

I do have a loss limit, Freight, and that is when I run out of money. :laugh:

I am actually only half joking. I head out to play with XX bankroll. I have never sat down at a table and loss the entire amount that I brought and not be able to finish play on a hand or shoe, but I have lost enought that I don't feel I have enough funds to start a new session a number of times. Usually it is just a matter of adding a bit of funds to replace lost funds, which I can do via ATM (pre-arrange for higher daily limit withdrawls on a couple accounts) If the beatdowns was so severe that I can't replace enough funds to continue from ATM, then I it's a matter of finding a physical bank location or stopping by home, which I have only had to do a handful of times. If neither option is close, I would probably call it a day.

And you are so right about putting in the time. At the end of the years these swings won't matter much. Results will be a direct measure of how many hands I played for the year. That is why on these days that I do have big swings, either win or loss and quit early to regroup, I really kick myself for lost time. Unforetunately I have had a few of these days this year. :sad: I know a more experienced player probably wouldn't need to take this regroup time, but I do. As much as I try to eliminate the human element sometimes, I am human, and have human emotions, and while I am not afraid of steaming after a big loss, I want to be sure that my head is clear and not dwelling on other things. With my limited brain capacity, I need all available brain cells focused on the task at hand. :laugh:

 

[exgriffinman]

I do have a loss limit, Freight, and that is when I run out of money. :laugh:

I am actually only half joking. I head out to play with XX bankroll. I have never sat down at a table and loss the entire amount that I brought and not be able to finish play on a hand or shoe, but I have lost enought that I don't feel I have enough funds to start a new session a number of times. Usually it is just a matter of adding a bit of funds to replace lost funds, which I can do via ATM (pre-arrange for higher daily limit withdrawls on a couple accounts) If the beatdowns was so severe that I can't replace enough funds to continue from ATM, then I it's a matter of finding a physical bank location or stopping by home, which I have only had to do a handful of times. If neither option is close, I would probably call it a day.

And you are so right about putting in the time. At the end of the years these swings won't matter much. Results will be a direct measure of how many hands I played for the year. That is why on these days that I do have big swings, either win or loss and quit early to regroup, I really kick myself for lost time. Unforetunately I have had a few of these days this year. :sad: I know a more experienced player probably wouldn't need to take this regroup time, but I do. As much as I try to eliminate the human element sometimes, I am human, and have human emotions, and while I am not afraid of steaming after a big loss, I want to be sure that my head is clear and not dwelling on other things. With my limited brain capacity, I need all available brain cells focused on the task at hand. :laugh:

I too play like kewl, When Im out of cash...I'm out of play. I was in the Palms one night and bought in for $2500 and playing green action $25 to $200x2 and had some bad runs. I bought in again for the same amount and was up then down again. I had lost my bankroll...200 units. Feeling disgusted I went across the street to the Gold Coast and took a marker. I had great penetration with this one dealer and had a great run. I got my $5k back and paid my marker...I was done for the night and felt pretty good about it..."he who runs away, lives to play another day"

EXGM

 

[kewljason]

I too play like kewl, When Im out of cash...I'm out of play. I was in the Palms one night and bought in for $2500 and playing green action $25 to $200x2 and had some bad runs. I bought in again for the same amount and was up then down again. I had lost my bankroll...200 units. Feeling disgusted I went across the street to the Gold Coast and took a marker. I had great penetration with this one dealer and had a great run. I got my $5k back and paid my marker...I was done for the night and felt pretty good about it..."he who runs away, lives to play another day"

EXGM

EX-Griff, You give an good opening line like "when I am out of cash...I'm out of play". And then go on to give a detailed example contradicting it. :laugh:

 

[exgriffinman]

EX-Griff, You give an good opening line like "when I am out of cash...I'm out of play". And then go on to give a detailed example contradicting it. :laugh:

I was outta cash...I don't consider markers cash, just a pain in the ass loan...Thats not part of my bankroll..