name |
message |
date |
| Renzey |
To Bug -- Here's why you need at least a $30 wager to pay a $1 bonus for somebody else's blackjack.
It's true, if the dealer never had the 10 underneath, then you would net a $1.50 profit each time you bought a $5 blackjack for $6. But in reality, the dealer will have the 10 four times out of thirteen. Those four times you'll lose $24 total. Then the other nine times you'll win $1.50 each totalling $13.50 in wins. That's a $10.50 net loss after thirteen averaged hands (-80 cents per hand).
Now if the bet were $30, you'd lose $31 four times for $124 in losses, while winning $14 nine times for $126 in wins. That's a $2 net gain, or +15 cents per hand. |
2003-07-27 20:15:36 |
| BuGhOu§eMASTER |
EXCATLY. Dont waste our time with such childish and ignorant questions, clicky. |
2003-07-27 19:47:51 |
| Desert Dog |
clicky, you're asking people if they do something illegal. Even with the anonymity of our fake names, I don't think you're going to get any yes answers. Federal agents have the means to trace anyone on internet boards and chat rooms. I don't gamble online. Most of us here want the fun and challenge of the real thing, in a legally-sanctioned setting. |
2003-07-27 19:14:22 |
| clicky |
Does anybody here gamble online? |
2003-07-27 14:28:59 |
| AceofSpades |
Thankx Doc, but I can honestly say I don't travel east to much.Will be in Vegas for a glorious week late Sept. Just picked up Walt's book this morning, and will be getting busy with this progression buzz today. |
2003-07-27 07:44:56 |
| Desert Dog |
You're welcome, Mike. The benefit we all get from this board, aside from the information shared, is the fact that it takes up some time and therefore leaves us less time to spend in a casino where we might actually lose money. |
2003-07-26 20:59:23 |
| Desert Dog |
Just to clarify my previous post, the stats on CSM's indicate a lower House Advantage on them than on other multidecks, not that they actually tilt the overall edge to the player. The house still wins more. |
2003-07-26 20:53:29 |
| Mike |
DD: but the difference is this: had it been a regular shoe, all those low cards, once they're out, they stay out, and are therefore a mild predictor of high value clump coming up. And when you get your first win at the beginning of that clump, you'd increase your bet to ride that streak if you're using a positive progression strategy. *Thanks, I think I finally get it. I just started experimenting with progressive betting last year, and what you say makes alot of sense. Thanks |
2003-07-26 20:51:21 |
| Desert Dog |
Mike, you asked: "Question: Unless you're counting, Does a CSM really alter the odds on a religiously played BS session? I feel like that the more they try to make the crds random the more chance they in turn can also clump, however unpredictable that may be."
So you're suggesting that the only players affected by CSMs are card counters. We all agree counters certainly are thwarted by CSMs. As for altering the odds on a "religiously played BS session", from the stats at customstrategycards.com, if anything, CSMs tilt the odds slightly in FAVOR of THE PLAYER who plays perfect basic strategy. For example, the CSM tables at Bellagio with S17 and other friendly rules have a house advantage of only 0.19%, the best I've seen anywhere for multideck. But then we get to the question of dollars winnable rather than just hands winnable. I still think CSMs throw a monkey wrench into progression betting, and if I'm not misinterpreting or overstating his reply to my earlier post, it seems Walter Thomason agrees. Sure, you're still going to see clumps of low (or high) cards spill out all at once with a CSM, but the difference is this: had it been a regular shoe, all those low cards, once they're out, they stay out, and are therefore a mild predictor of high value clump coming up. And when you get your first win at the beginning of that clump, you'd increase your bet to ride that streak if you're using a positive progression strategy. With a CSM, those just-played low cards go right back into the hopper and neutralize the mix once again. Sure, as you say, there could still be clumps, but also as you say, they are completely unpredictable. And we don't want that complete unpredictability if we're using a progression. (As an aside, I believe the reason CSM's have such a low house advantage is because Basic Strategy is always the right play, while in a shoe that gets really rich or really lean, certain hands should no longer be played by BS.) A friend of mine had harsh remarks about the CSMs here in Arizona, and I wondered why. I mean, after all, it's still Blackjack and fun, right? Then I remembered he has an engineering degree from MIT so of course the only Blackjack he'd consider legitimate is the kind you can count. |
2003-07-26 19:51:22 |
| BuGhOu§eMASTER |
Desert Dog, glad you liked my post man :)
Doc, I love doubling for other people, splitting, etc. The term for this aggressive style of play is called OFFENSIVE HAND INTERACTION, as opposed to DEFENSIVE HAND INTERACTION when you attempt to get rid of a crappy hand, such as a hard 15 or 16. My favorite type of OFFENSIVE hand interaction is Fred Renzey's suggestion to OFFER a $1 more to someone who normally takes EVEN MONEY (the COWARD way out) because they're too scared to risk their pretty blackjack (eventhough they dont realize that taking even money is TANTAMOUNT to taking insurance!!) and are too greedy and want their money NOW. But, offering this to a player and him accepting it is kind of a risk cuz it usually pisses them off, especially those ignorant asian players who barely speak english and therefore dont understand whadafuk I'm offering them when the situation arises. But yeah, Fred Renzey said that in order for this to work, you must do it ONLY when they bet at least $30 (i dont know why because it works the same way if you offer $6 to someone with a $5 bet... you still make $1.50 profit!). But yeah, offensive hand interaction is fun. |
2003-07-26 18:41:00 |
| Doc |
As alwayways A of Ss you come across as a landmark of coolness, let me know if you ever get to Elvisville and we'll team up on a 6 decker. |
2003-07-26 18:05:08 |
| Ace of Spades |
Must be everyone ran out to the tables this wknd. Me: hung out by the pool, stayed cool, and listened to thhe Cub's loose.O'yea, put my finishing touches on my homemade blkjk table. It's looking pretty cool, will be dealin 6dckrs. buy tomorrow night. Whats up Bug? Peace Out. |
2003-07-26 16:02:56 |
| Doc |
Been to a meeting in St Louis so haven't been on the board. Only played the Casino Queen across the river in E. St Louis and did well with a little help from my friends on this board, came out about 17 units ahead on 3 hours of play, the games were OK, all 6 deck, mostly auto-shuffle. Mr Thomason its great to see your comments especially on the CSMs, I wonder what the effect of a continuously shuffled deck would be on negative progressions? I along with Desert Dog have noted that in the customstrategycards.com web site the CSMs seem to have a have a pretty low house advantage at several casinos. Still haven't played them yet but if they make the rules even better because no one is playing them, and certain strageties are found to be useful, maybe playing would start to be worthwhile? Glad to see you cite Mr. Renzey, I'm still very impressed with the new edition of his book, the one Midnite described earlier, and used several of his helpful hints this last week. No one commented on my diversions from strict basic strategy either, they were all too busy playing without any semblance of strategy. Of note I again missed several excellent opportunities to use Renzey's advice on buying into other peoples hands, most notably against a dealer 5, my neighbor didnt double her 10, no matter what card she pulled she would have stood, but it happened too fast for me to ask her if I could share the hand by putting in the double money. |
2003-07-26 14:54:06 |
| Walter Thomason |
Ace -- I LOVE Las Vegas! NOTHING beats Vegas, not even the HoChunk Casino in Baraboo, Winconson!
Yes, I use the surrender rule. When applied to my progression I consider it a loss and start over with my minimum bet. |
2003-07-26 07:41:37 |
| AceofSpades |
Walt, do you use the surrender rule? What are your thoughts about todays "Las Vegas"? I still love it(avg.4-5 trips a yr.), for a certain mystic is still in the air, not to mention still alot of pure CLASS.Thankx |
2003-07-26 07:34:57 |
| Walter Thomason |
Mike -- Oops! I meant Las Vegas. I like the Claridge in AC. |
2003-07-26 07:34:19 |
| Walter Thomason |
Mike -- Without a doubt, Treasure Island in Atlantic City. Great comp program, great crew, including pit bosses, casino hosts, etc. Plus, I've never lost there (five trips) and I had my largest-ever win playing there. |
2003-07-26 07:30:17 |
 |
|
|
|
