name |
message |
date |
| J C |
Midnite- I always go back to the beginning of the 2-1-2-3-4-5 etc. after losing. The beginning is always a 2 unit bet not 1. Excuse me if I read your post wrong. |
2003-08-05 03:18:43 |
| ~kinkette |
P.S. - and thanks to the Bug Man too! *g* |
2003-08-04 23:26:05 |
| Neil |
Hey everyone. The new forum software is finished! Feel free to create an account and post messages. In 2 days I will be turning off the old message board (the one you are looking at), but I will still keep it online for reference. The new forum can be found here. |
2003-08-04 23:23:32 |
| ~kinkette |
Midnite - thank you so much for helping me understand :) I was about to 'give up' on this board, thinkin' it way over my head, but you've shown that there are still nice people out there... |
2003-08-04 23:19:21 |
| BuGhOu§eMASTER |
Sigh... IT'S SO CONFUSING TOO!!!!!!!!!!!! |
2003-08-04 22:48:30 |
| BuGhOu§eMASTER |
Sigh... IT'S SO CONFUSING TOO!!!!!!!!!!!! |
2003-08-04 21:56:14 |
| Midnite |
kinkette- Your second bet is always 1. If it keeps winning it is 2-3-4-5. If it loses it is again 1 and stays at 1, until a win. You then bet 2 and 1 again. Losing streaks cost you one unit each hand. |
2003-08-04 21:36:54 |
| BuGhOu§eMASTER |
I dont believe in that strategy nor do I even understand the logic in it. But I think if you lose you stay at the first 2 until you win then you'd move up. |
2003-08-04 21:13:58 |
| ~kinkette |
If you gentlemen would be so kind to a novice...i had asked before and i'll ask again...i'm trying to learn the 212345 betting stratgey...my question is ... if you lose the first hand...do you still revert to one unit? I'd appreciate your kindness in answering and please have patience at my lack of understanding ..... |
2003-08-04 21:07:28 |
| Renzey |
TO SLD007: I still need one clarification on your "63%" post. Combining all your sessions together, did they yield a net gain? I ask this seemingly unnecessary question because it's entirely possible, even easy to adopt money management strategies that will win the majority of sessions, but not make any money overall. Sorry if I seem interrogational. ALSO, on your comment against betting too heavily when excess 10's and Aces are present: It's true that in these cases the dealer is just as likely to get the Ace as the player, but the player makes significantly more money with 10's and Aces than the dealer. Classic examples are the dealer's blackjack against the player's 20 - then vise versa. Or the dealer's pair of Aces against any player's hand, and then vise versa. In fact, how many units should you bet on the next hand if you were playing with a pinochle deck, where that deck is 83% Tens and Aces? Try it just a few times through the deck and tell me how things worked out. |
2003-08-04 17:25:42 |
| Renzey |
TO WALTER: It's true; after 80,000 hands, a perfect basic strategy player has about a 90% chance to be behind and a 10% chance to be ahead of the game. If progressions don't help at all, then the odds would be similar there. I know you're an honest fellow and can't say why you're ahead up to this point. But knowing what I know - and I say this respectfully - I don't like your chances for the future. As time presses on, I suppose it's possible that I may be forced to reconsider. I look forward to future reports from you with interest. |
2003-08-04 17:12:28 |
| JC |
Hi All, just reporting my results from A.C. as I said I would do after vacation. The cards were not there for me this time, dropped about 20 units. Still all in all the New York progression (2-1-2-3-4-5)has worked well for me (6 for 7)so far a good percentage since trying it. Can't always win. Trying to catch up on thepast weeks post, alot of good info, great board. |
2003-08-04 17:08:36 |
| Renzey |
Well, I see lots of opinions have been expressed here today. I'll respond to those addressed to me one at a time, and I really hope to do it without creating any adversarial relationships. Let's just get all our facts out on the table and reach our most honest conclusions : To A NOVICE - Three modes of analysis; cold mathematics, fully perceptive logic and computer analysis indicate that betting progressions will not beat casino blackjack. Those same three modes of analysis have indicated that betting according to the high/low content of the remaining cards will beat casino blackjack. There are probably 300 progressive bettors at the blackjack tables for every card counter. The casino will gladly let all the progressive players play, but if they discover a card counter they will throw him out. |
2003-08-04 16:59:40 |
| Walter Thomason |
Ted: Hit 7's against a dealer 8. |
2003-08-04 16:46:02 |
| okohiored |
What exactly causes the strategy changes from atlantic city and las vegas.Is it the rules changes.Which gives you the better chance and how much better? |
2003-08-04 16:03:25 |
| Ted |
I have 2 charts. The chart at this site and Humble's. The situation is this. Atlantic City, multiple deck and DAS.
One chart says split 7's against a dealer 8 and the other say's "hit". Which is correct? |
2003-08-04 14:22:44 |
| Coug Fan |
SLD - We'll have to agree to disagree on that point. Your experience apparently indicates that a positive progression is a consistent winner. The problem is that one persons personal experience is not a sufficient sample size to draw statistically valid conclusions.
My personal opinion is that you would be better off increasing your bet size every time you see a black 6. At least the appearance of a low value card has a positive correlation with an increased chance of winning the next hand. A winning hand actually has a negative correlation with your future chances of winning. Of course, both of these correlations are absolutely minimal. |
2003-08-04 13:16:15 |
 |
|
|
