APOLOGIES T0 ALEX
-
i have to say his system worked like a charm today. i played for 6 hours and left up $765 and was comped a $90 meal
for the 1st 2 hours my girlfriend calculated the next bet on paper b/c it got rather confusing. however, the pit boses came eventually came over and said there is NO tracking what so ever so we couldnt record anything.
my highest bet was $46 but i do not know the win/loss %.
i really think this idea will work, but i think you need to reevaluate your hole every so often and readjust to how bad the cards are. -
KY121 said:i have to say his system worked like a charm today. i played for 6 hours and left up $765 and was comped a $90 meal
for the 1st 2 hours my girlfriend calculated the next bet on paper b/c it got rather confusing. however, the pit boses came eventually came over and said there is NO tracking what so ever so we couldnt record anything.
my highest bet was $46 but i do not know the win/loss %.
i really think this idea will work, but i think you need to reevaluate your hole every so often and readjust to how bad the cards are.
Well, Congratulation!
Could you please tell us some details like: what game, how many players on the table, what was your setup hole and what percentage of the hole you were betting. We know that your top bet was $46 but I have to know how you got into $46 bet. How deep was the hole when you placed the $46 bet? It was: $138, -$184 or $230?
Now, you have to reevaluate the hole at all times after every hand. An easy way to do that is divide the hole by 3 (like NEXT_bet = hole /3) if you go for the KILL and bet 33% of the hole. This percentage index will definitely break the game. I can give you some guidance in regard with what to expect on average: If you setup a starting hole at $25 and bet 33% at all times and reset it as soon as the hole become $14 or less then you are good for about $75 per hour as income and this is at full table in 6D H17 game. When the hole is under $15 you will not be able to bet 33% anymore because you will be betting less than table minimum. So, you reset it again at this point. If you going to bet 25% of the hole than your income is about $55 per hour and if you bet 20% than you can expect on average to make about $40 per hour. But 20% betting is kind of a slow grind game with less action.
I will definitely go for 33% and a -$25 hole in blackjack because the game is choppy most of the time and the more choppy game you have the more money you make. .., :wink: -
sorry i didnt put more details. i was exhausted from the drive home. but anyway it was 6 deck s17. $10 minimum. so i started at $50 hole and used 20%. i was -$230 when i bet $46.
what i didnt understand until last night is that you have to REevaluate after each and every hand. also i am going to set a stop loss point if the count is really bad. i havent decided what i will put it at yet.
i played at mostly full tables, usually 4-5 people. at one point there were 5 of us and 2 of the older guys and the dealer started making fun of all my $12 and $14 bets. all in good fun. other than the pit boss problems the dealers were cool with all my bets.. -
KY121- You can round to the nearest $5 without changing the accuracy.
Make sure you do the same for each situation(after a loss, after a win)
You may be correct about the upper limit stop. A big loss will happen, but
you can adjust by trying to identify when that is about to happen. If you
can overcome that part of the game, who knows...
Question: Do you play accross the river from Derby city or up/down the
river from there. I'm in Lex.
Ray -
KY121-I've got to stay away from caesars for a while because of my
results from last yr. I don't like the alternatives, but that is just the
way it goes. Down the river is about 3 hrs. for us, but it's a pretty good
game. I usually make it an overnight thing. I don't like the up I75 run,
but I go there if it's just for two sessions(afternoon,evening).
I've been working on the upper limit thing for about a week now and
the biggest problem that I see is more than likely what happen to you
on your first try. A series of short loss runs can add-up over time.
I have not played much in the last 60 days because we have been going
here and there or had family company almost every week. Usually, two
times a wk is about right for me. I'll start going back to caesars on a
limit bases.
Ray -
KY121 said:sorry i didnt put more details. i was exhausted from the drive home. but anyway it was 6 deck s17. $10 minimum. so i started at $50 hole and used 20%. i was -$230 when i bet $46.
what i didnt understand until last night is that you have to REevaluate after each and every hand. also i am going to set a stop loss point if the count is really bad. i havent decided what i will put it at yet.
i played at mostly full tables, usually 4-5 people. at one point there were 5 of us and 2 of the older guys and the dealer started making fun of all my $12 and $14 bets. all in good fun. other than the pit boss problems the dealers were cool with all my bets..
KY121,
Ray is correct, You can roundup to the nearest $5 after a loss and round down to the nearest $5 after a win. You have to create an imbalance so that a little more money are earned for the same number of wins vs. losses.
The setup hole determine the betting leverage that you create going up and down. As I told you before, make sure that going up after a loss is a little bigger than going down after a win to make sure the average winning bet (AWB) is bigger than average losing bet (ALB).
Please do this exercise at home on paper, give yourself some bad runs which contain some losing streak followed by win, lose, win, lose and do not give yourself any advantage whatsoever. Make sure the total wins and losses comes out to have a house advantage of 10 to 12%. Set a hole identical to what you do in casino and bet from the start 20 or 25% of that. You will WIN but make sure you understand how the bets can climb and what is the effect of dropping the bet down after a winning hand and than having a losing hand again. As I say it before if the house edge for a specific session, like last night for you during 6 hours, do not get over 12% while you bet 25% you have created a lock on the game for that session. Is not a fair game anymore! Which is exactly what we are looking for. I'm looking to create an unfair game! :wink: The casino could not beat you unless it gets to have an edge greater than 12% and even if that happen you still can reajust the betting index and force casino in bend over position :wink:
Now, what if casino would have a game where you the player will always win unless the house gets to have 12%. What if you win when casino gets to have 10% against you? Would you play that game? Of course you would! This is exactly what is happening here.
In theory and during simulation this system is winning at all times. If you run one million hands where the house we all know it will have no more than 0.50% and if you bet at all times 2% of the hole starting from any hole, you will ALWAYS win. Practically you can create an universal lock system over the game of blackjack over the long run. The problem is that if you lose control the bets could get very big. To avoid this make sure you are aware where are you at all times in regard to the depth of the hole. You start at -$50 and bet 20% this will give you nice income per hour and have casino as your office. :wink: Take some money from winnings and readjust the hole or even abandon a hole all together and reset it back to $50 to avoid getting to deep. You will make it back soon as the house edge drops under half of your betting index percentage.
Now, practice this and make some money on BJ for now. The baccarat betting system is similar but it gets a little complicated at times when you play both the player and banker together. Why is that? Because playing both ways it really creates the lock over the game from the start. You have two separate holes and they can be transferred from one hand to the other and is a function of the depth. Sometimes, you abandon a hand and sometimes you continue playing them both. Is a function of how deep it gets. This creates an almost perfect lock over baccarat. In blackjack you cannot to this because you cannot play on the dealer. BJ is a one way game.
PS:
I played last night too, for about 4 hours in 6D, H17 and made about $370. Setup hole =-$25 with a betting index of 33% -
Alex- So you might say: What's the problem and rightly so? From my
point of view, it comes down to risk management and the theory of
managing risk in a reasonable way. I think all will agree that if bets
increase to the point of being outlandish then we don't have a viable
system and we need to reject it. So, do they or don't they?
This system has the same type of risk as does the run of the mill
martingale(very large bets), but we don't want to imply that the system
is a martingale because it is not. The martingale does, however, provide
a good contrast that should aid our understanding. To some extent the
martingale is a race against some well know probabilities. Example:
4,5,6,7,8,9,etc in a row. If you have the BR and the casino will allow very
large bets, there is 100% probability that you will win everytime. A very
simple strategy, a lock so to speak, but not a viable system. Alexs system
does not attempt to null each and every loss by doubling the bet after
each loss. It gains an advantage by increasing the bet by some prcentage
after any loss. This method relates the percentage to an excess in losing
hands that will occur by some well know percentage. If the mathematical
relation of the percentage is equal to the excess in losing hands you will
over time come out even. If its greater, you will over time make a profit.
All of this, like the martingale, assumes that you have the BR to cover
all possible bet sizes, but it has one problem that the matingale does not
have and that is the effect of a long series of small losing steaks that does
not give you cause for concern until it is too late or any corrective action
that you might take (increase the %) simply compounds the problem
rather than correct it. If you are not doing well and increase the percent,
isn't that, at best, a shot in the dark, a guess to what the future will be?
Don't bet the farm on that and above all else don't expect to win everytime. You can be sure that sometimes the bets will exceed your
ability to respond and other times you will make some money. But,
isn't that the case for all methods?
Ray -
Ray,
my answer to that problem is to cut your loses at a set point. and dont go above a set max bet. also what i was doing last night is after a shoe was over if i was betting higher than i liked i would recalculate my ACTUAL hole. and if i was still up i reset the imaginary hole back to 50. -
Ray - Excellent post.....Everything you said is correct, and your explanation is right "on the money"......The tests I am running will back up everything you have said with results from real hands.
KY121 - The tests I am running will also confirm/show that you must have a stop loss point, and since both you and Ray stated this earlier in the week it appears Alex is taking your advice and agreeing. The trick is to establish exactly what that stop loss should be.
Regards....Grifter -
Im in Vegas, just got back in my room and trying to browse the Internet to check my email. So far this week since Sunday up to half an hour ago when I took a break from play.
hours 32
hands 2080
profit $1875
$/hour $58.59
action $41600
my edge 5.01%
min unit $5
avrg bet $25
max bet $55
Im looking to put eight more hours tonight and some tomorrow. I have to get into 40 hours this week. The games are bad here downtown Vegas. 1D h17, 2D h17, 6D h17 with 4-5 players at all times.
This week I dumped the hole 5 times after losing the $55 bet. So, I guess, I dumped about $1,100 total. Reset it again and continued from there. I play very thigh. The difference between starting hole and 33% bet from it is only couple bets.
Starting hole = -$25 and betting 33%. So, practically Im resetting the hole many times during one hour unless it slips away like a runaway truck and then I have to work on.
Looking back now, I recall that at least two times after dumping $220, I won some hands right after. If I would have not dumped I would be at $2,500 right now. Well, I will have to work more 8 hours to be there. It is amazing how much money you can make by betting with Mickey Mouse bets like ( 8, 11, 15, 20, 27, .. , 55 whatever.)
PS: Use card counting for INSURANCE, 16 vs. T on single deck and when NOT to DOUBLE. :wink: -
Alex,
i dont see how you can figure how many hands you have played while counting and calculating your hole.
But anyway, i just returned from a 5 hour session. it was a grind but i ended up $215. i was playing $10 table most of the night and some $25. at the $25 table there was a guy betting table max just about every time, $2500. so that was fun to watch.
i did not use the 20% strategy the entire time. i counted alot as well.. -
KY121 said:Alex,
i dont see how you can figure how many hands you have played while counting and calculating your hole.
But anyway, i just returned from a 5 hour session. it was a grind but i ended up $215. i was playing $10 table most of the night and some $25. at the $25 table there was a guy betting table max just about every time, $2500. so that was fun to watch.
i did not use the 20% strategy the entire time. i counted alot as well..
KY121,
Wow, .., You made over $1,000 in 11 hours today. That is great!
You can combine the hole strategy with card counting if you want. I did that too before and find out that I make less money. I also find out that if I dump the hole to often I make less per hour too. So, balance here is very important.
You don't have to count how many hands you played. You know that if you played 40 hours in a week at full table at all times, than you have 40 * 60 = 2400 hands played. A full table is good for 60 hands per hour.
Now, if you know your setup hole and your max bet you can figure the average bet. Now, multiply that average bet by the number of hands played and you get your total $ action. Obviously you know how much money you earned in that week, so you divide that number by the total action to find out your EDGE in percentage.
Anyway, I made couple hundreds more. Nothing spectacular. Now I'm going to sleep. Is 2:30AM here in Vegas and I want to put some play this morning again. I have to get 40 hours this week. -
Alex Wrote:
Well, how many times in your BJ career have you encountered an hour of play in which casino had an edge >= 16%?
I assume you mean how many times have you had a WP of </= 42% for 100 hands.....<u>The answer is hundreds of times, and all of the people here who play on a regular basis here will tell you the same thing. It is not that unusual for this to occur over 100 hands; and conversely, it is not that unusual to have a WP of 53-54% over a short span of 100 hands. -
Grifter said:Alex Wrote:
Well, how many times in your BJ career have you encountered an hour of play in which casino had an edge >= 16%?
I assume you mean how many times have you had a WP of </= 42% for 100 hands.....<u>The answer is hundreds of times, and all of the people here who play on a regular basis here will tell you the same thing. It is not that unusual for this to occur over 100 hands; and conversely, it is not that unusual to have a WP of 53-54% over a short span of 100 hands.
Of course you are correct. My point is you are not always correct.
Never happen with me. Im playing BJ for over 25 years and I never encountered a casino edge >= 16% per 100 hands. But I'm ready to deal with. Im always over 42% in winning hands. This includes doubling downs and BJs put all together. On the other hand, If I get a WP of 54% I will hit the big score for that hour and if I get only 42% then I will break even if I use 33% betting index.
Now, of course I don't double on A2,A3,A4,A5 or 8 vs. 5,6. Never split 6,6 and that sort of garbage because is completely irrelevant to my winnings. It just increase variance and not much gain. So, if you play those hands like basic strategy says than expect to lose most of them and gain a little $$ over the long run. I apply statistical logic as a rule of thumb to many situations where the conditions are very different from the conditions that the statistical logic is based on.
Let's be careful about applying statements based on large numbers to situations strictly in the small number range. Naturally, the advice of basic strategy is good about getting all the edge you can. But there may be many intelligent other decisions to avoid introducing too much variance into bankroll. Most gambling "experts" tend to advise about playing in a manner that maximizes expectation. Business people like myself tend go for maximizing expected monetary value.
In it's simplest form, expected monetary value is the probability of success times the amount of the gain minus the probability of failure times the amount of the loss.
One instance in blackjack where a person might make a smart decision based on utility rather than probability might be insuring a natural when a big bet has been made but the count is not yet high enough to make insurance the statistically-best move. Another might be hitting rather than doubling on a hand such as A-4 vs. 4-up where doubling is statistically better, but not by much :wink:
For instance, you've been in the sewer hole and have ground your way back to being one unit behind. You'd be happy about a break-even and get 5-5 vs. a dealer's 7-up. In a six-deck game, expectation for doubling is +.2930 and expectation for hitting is +.1995. Doubling is therefore normally the choice. But, making an estimate based on these figures one can determine that you'll win if you take a hit 63% of your hands and you'll win if you double 60% of your hands. Somewhat more often if you hit.
Now, .. , What's more important to you at the moment -- the 3% gain in success rate or the 9.3% increment in expectation :?: -
AlexD30 said:Of course you are correct. My point is you are not always correct. Never happen with me. Im playing BJ for over 25 years and I never encountered a casino edge >= 16% per 100 hands. But I'm ready to deal with. Im always over 42% in winning hands. :
Alex, do you really expect anybody to believe that?....Less than 42% in 100 hands happens to all of the rest of us. Perhaps Ray, Nickels, or one of the other good "numbers/theory" guys can explain the mathematics that make your statement impossible in real play.
Regards.....Grifter
p.s. No response if required, especially a long, off-topic one :wink: -
well i can tell you i hit a VERY bad run for the 1st hour or more last night. i blew $300 in about 30 mins. so i am sure my win % was less than 42%
-
KY - Yep, it happens to everyone who actually plays in casinos. The last really bad one I remember was last fall playing up at Midnite's local casino. Lost 40 units in less than an hour, basically flat betting. I figured it up later and my WP for those hands was about 29%......Grif'
-
"Now, of course I don't double on A2,A3,A4,A5 or 8 vs. 5,6. Never split 6,6 and that sort of garbage because is completely irrelevant to my winnings. It just increase variance and not much gain. So, if you play those hands like basic strategy says than expect to lose most of them and gain a little $$ over the long run. I apply statistical logic as a rule of thumb to many situations where the conditions are very different from the conditions that the statistical logic is based on. "
I presume you try to keep the game of 21 as close to a pure W/L situation as possible. No ties, splits DD, or 21's. I have yet to encounter the Hand Decision strategy that goes along with the method of Financial Strategy you set forth here in this forum. As grifter points out, you win 42 to 43%, the rest of the time you do not win. Those odds look like 4 to 3 odds. Basic Strategy allows the player to gain the most money with a flat bet from this situation. But it isn't enough to profit. Any progression-based strategy has to alter some decisions according to risk. Be it I can't afford to play the hand, or my bet is too big for the bad hand I'm given, and FINANCIAL variance needs to be reduced, as opposed to STRATEGY variance. Once again I point out that none of your posted results show the typical variance encountered in Blackjack, such as DD, SPLIT, BJ, or SURRENDER. I do NOT accept those results as valid. -
When we say that we will win 42% of the hands in BJ, what does that
mean? It is ,of course,an average and that means that part of the time
we are above or below the average number 42%. All right then, what are
the contributing factors for the variance:
Pushes- 20% of the time you will have some positive count that increases
the probability of a push. Why else would you take insurance on a natural?
Also, the dealer hand on average is about 19 and that does not give us much room to win. A push is more likely during high counts and lets say
it amounts to 13% during the positive counts. Something has got to give
and it is more that likely a reduction in your and the dealer win rate. It
could also be a reduction in your win rate only. How about mid 30's?
Bad Luck- How many times have you ask yourself, how the hell does the
dealer get that many 20's or 21's and you can't get any? Well, in any 4
hr session I'm going to say that you will ask that question at least onced.
win rate=30% or less
Streaks- Your going to have them and they can take all kinds of forms.
If you start off a shoe with a 6 loss streak or a series of small losing
streaks: win rate 32%
When you say average, there has got to be some numbers above and
below and furthermore, it may take you a lifetime to reach the 42%
number or perhaps never. Not likely unless your a born loser, but
possible.
Ray -
Grifter said:KY - Yep, it happens to everyone who actually plays in casinos. The last really bad one I remember was last fall playing up at Midnite's local casino. Lost 40 units in less than an hour, basically flat betting. I figured it up later and my WP for those hands was about 29%......Grif'
What interest I have to lie? I have none!
Im telling you guys that I never been in less than 45% per short run in an hour since I start playing different than basic strategy recommends. I have no reason whatsoever to make up a story like this. The most I ever lost as far as I remember was 45/55 and this is very rarely indeed. Thats why I developed my betting index by percentage of the hole. Otherwise my method would be suicide because if I would lose at a rate worse than 17% I could not recover and I would get into deep hole from where I couldnt dig myself out. I know all this that playing perfect basic strategy you can and will at times win less than 45% or even less than 42%.
The way I play, I get a steady win rate better than 47% vs. 53%. That includes double downs and BJ all together (single win = 1, single loss = -1, win double = 2, lose double = -2 and BJ = 1.5) The 6% against me is the worse ever. My betting will easily break it.
Now, when I told you about the red-black test most of you didnt believed it at first until some of the guys got into details and try it for real. Ray is the one and he figure it out that was a setup and indeed is a lock over the decks. Well, believe me that in real casino blackjack I'm creating a lock and an "unfair" game during an hour of play. I'm doing this over and over every hour.
Anyway, I've reached 40 hours for this week and I'm a little over $2,500 and very exhausted too.
Best Regards, -
AlexD30 said:Im telling you guys that I never been in less than 45% per short run in an hour since I start playing different than basic strategy recommends I have no reason whatsoever to make up a story like this. The most I ever lost as far as I remember was 45/55 and this is very rarely indeed. .............The way I play, I get a steady win rate better than 47% vs. 53%. That includes double downs and BJ all together (single win = 1, single loss = -1, win double = 2, lose double = -2 and BJ = 1.5) The 6% against me is the worse ever. My betting will easily break it.
So you are telling us that with your playing strategy (i.e. "your modifications to basic strategy"), and because of it, you never go below a 45% WP over 100 hands.
Is my statement correct?...."Yes" or "No"?
Grifter -
Grifter said:[quote=AlexD30]Im telling you guys that I never been in less than 45% per short run in an hour since I start playing different than basic strategy recommends I have no reason whatsoever to make up a story like this. The most I ever lost as far as I remember was 45/55 and this is very rarely indeed. .............The way I play, I get a steady win rate better than 47% vs. 53%. That includes double downs and BJ all together (single win = 1, single loss = -1, win double = 2, lose double = -2 and BJ = 1.5) The 6% against me is the worse ever. My betting will easily break it.
So you are telling us that with your playing strategy (i.e. "your modifications to basic strategy"), and because of it, you never go below a 45% WP over 100 hands.
Is my statement correct?...."Yes" or "No"?
Grifter[/quote]
What Im saying is that all the single wins counted as +1 each, plus all the double downs wins counted as +2 each, plus all the BJs counted as 1.5 each, do not add up to less than 45 per 100 decisions. Im not taking in consideration pushes. So, the dealer at times may get to have 55 while I get 45. Most of the time I am able to hold the game around 6% against me or better. Some time the game comes to be close to even, other times I get more wins than losses but the worse is around 6% and in very rare circumstances ever I face a 10% like 45/55.
You see, if I bet the way I bet and play diferend that basic recommends, I cancel many losses during an hour. If I win more money in less hands that I lose in more hands than obviously some losses are canceled because my average winning bet is bigger than average losing bet. This is a fact. What I lose in 20 hands is LESS that what I win in 16 hands. And that will offset the game. I only need to offet a couple bets to turn the balance. That alone creates an UNFAIR environment vs. flat betting where even if you get 49.75/50.25 you will still lose. Im not! :wink: -
Alex- You know how sims work so lets take a simple example about win
rates: Flat bet any amount, play perfect basic strategy for 100 mill hnds.
Your win rate is equal to 42%(SD means nothing)
In real life you will never reach the 42% level muchless exceed it, because
you will make mistakes and plenty of them. The fact that you don't double
this or that does not alter your win rate, it alters your variance and EV,but
not your win rate. How can you say that you will win an amount greater
than 42%? What is it that allows that to happen? In your example above
you are altering the way wins are counted in doubles and BJ to some number that may not be justified and at the same time lowering your
variance and EV. It looks like you are trying to convert bj to something
close to a very choppy flip of the coin game, it gets more complex with
each post.
Ray -
Ray said:The fact that you don't double this or that does not alter your win rate, it alters your variance and EV,but not your win rate.
Ray
I'm a newbie, so can you explain this for me? It seems to me that doubling or not might affect your win rate, because doubling limits you to one additional card, rather than hittiing until you are happy. -
Asman, even if you decide to just HIT a double down situation, you will keep hitting until your hand composition is optimal against whatever the dealer's up card is. So your chances of winning or losing the hand stay about the same. Over millions of hands, the margin between winning and losing becomes even smaller.
-
I'm talking about win rate in terms of number of hands and this is
different from win rate in dollars. Doubles give you the greater
potential to win money only and do not add to your hand win rate.
The 42% rate is determined by a sim of flat betting and playing
perfect basic strategy for all hand types over millions of hands.
If basic strategy tells you to hit,stand,double or split thats what
you do and the result is the hand win rate.
Ray -
Ray said:I'm talking about win rate in terms of number of hands and this is
different from win rate in dollars. Doubles give you the greater
potential to win money only and do not add to your hand win rate.
The 42% rate is determined by a sim of flat betting and playing
perfect basic strategy for all hand types over millions of hands.
If basic strategy tells you to hit,stand,double or split thats what
you do and the result is the hand win rate.
Ray
Here you have 50 sessions of 100 rounds each results while betting 20% of the hole. House edge is 3.22% and my edge on $$ is 5.03%
My average bet is $25. Please note that even when the house has an edge I win. I also drop the hole when losing $55 bet but I'm not losing much. If I would have used 33% and never drop the hole I would have been winner for all sessions and made much more money. AND, please note, when I have the edge on W/L I win much more than that edge would give a flat bettor.
Here you have it!
====================================
Wins, Loss, Push, W%, L%, H_Edge%, Alex_Edge%, action_$, profit_$
43 48 9 47.25% 52.75% 5.49% 2.755% 2500 69
44 50 6 46.81% 53.19% 6.38% 1.867% 2500 47
47 49 4 48.96% 51.04% 2.08% 6.167% 2500 154
45 43 12 51.14% 48.86% -2.27% 10.523% 2500 263
44 47 9 48.35% 51.65% 3.30% 4.953% 2500 124
46 44 10 51.11% 48.89% -2.22% 10.472% 2500 262
40 49 11 44.94% 55.06% 10.11% -1.862% 2500 -47
43 47 10 47.78% 52.22% 4.44% 3.806% 2500 95
42 51 7 45.16% 54.84% 9.68% -1.427% 2500 -36
44 49 7 47.31% 52.69% 5.38% 2.874% 2500 72
47 45 8 51.09% 48.91% -2.17% 10.424% 2500 261
44 47 9 48.35% 51.65% 3.30% 4.953% 2500 124
44 53 3 45.36% 54.64% 9.28% -1.028% 2500 -26
40 53 7 43.01% 56.99% 13.98% -5.728% 2500 -143
46 50 4 47.92% 52.08% 4.17% 4.083% 2500 102
46 46 8 50.00% 50.00% 0.00% 8.250% 2500 206
45 48 7 48.39% 51.61% 3.23% 5.024% 2500 126
44 50 6 46.81% 53.19% 6.38% 1.867% 2500 47
46 48 6 48.94% 51.06% 2.13% 6.122% 2500 153
43 50 7 46.24% 53.76% 7.53% 0.723% 2500 18
45 45 10 50.00% 50.00% 0.00% 8.250% 2500 206
52 38 10 57.78% 42.22% -15.56% 23.806% 2500 595
46 49 5 48.42% 51.58% 3.16% 5.092% 2500 127
40 48 12 45.45% 54.55% 9.09% -0.841% 2500 -21
42 47 11 47.19% 52.81% 5.62% 2.632% 2500 66
43 50 7 46.24% 53.76% 7.53% 0.723% 2500 18
49 44 7 52.69% 47.31% -5.38% 13.626% 2500 341
49 44 7 52.69% 47.31% -5.38% 13.626% 2500 341
50 45 5 52.63% 47.37% -5.26% 13.513% 2500 338
48 45 7 51.61% 48.39% -3.23% 11.476% 2500 287
42 50 8 45.65% 54.35% 8.70% -0.446% 2500 -11
46 46 8 50.00% 50.00% 0.00% 8.250% 2500 206
39 45 16 46.43% 53.57% 7.14% 1.107% 2500 28
51 43 6 54.26% 45.74% -8.51% 16.761% 2500 419
48 45 7 51.61% 48.39% -3.23% 11.476% 2500 287
42 52 6 44.68% 55.32% 10.64% -2.388% 2500 -60
44 46 10 48.89% 51.11% 2.22% 6.028% 2500 151
40 48 12 45.45% 54.55% 9.09% -0.841% 2500 -21
41 42 17 49.40% 50.60% 1.20% 7.045% 2500 176
47 44 9 51.65% 48.35% -3.30% 11.547% 2500 289
44 49 7 47.31% 52.69% 5.38% 2.874% 2500 72
45 46 9 49.45% 50.55% 1.10% 7.151% 2500 179
43 51 6 45.74% 54.26% 8.51% -0.261% 2500 -7
42 53 5 44.21% 55.79% 11.58% -3.329% 2500 -83
43 50 7 46.24% 53.76% 7.53% 0.723% 2500 18
38 51 11 42.70% 57.30% 14.61% -6.357% 2500 -159
48 43 9 52.75% 47.25% -5.49% 13.745% 2500 344
44 51 5 46.32% 53.68% 7.37% 0.882% 2500 22
46 48 6 48.94% 51.06% 2.13% 6.122% 2500 153
41 44 15 48.24% 51.76% 3.53% 4.721% 2500 118
hands 5000
action $125000
profit $6288
my edge 5.03%
$ per hour $126
wins 2221 48.39%
loss 2369 51.61%
house edge 3.22%
=================
Can you see how the game is a lock setup. I win no matter what.
I turned a house edge of 3.22% into a player's edge of 5.03% and the beauty is that I can do it even in most of the short runs per hour. The results are very consistent with real casino experience for years. -
i think the major discrepancy is Alex is talking in terms of $$$ while everyone else is talking in terms of ACTUAL wins/losses.
However, in either terms I still find it hard to believe you have never seen less than 45% -
KY121 said:i think the major discrepancy is Alex is talking in terms of $$$ while everyone else is talking in terms of ACTUAL wins/losses.
However, in either terms I still find it hard to believe you have never seen less than 45%
No!
I am going to get less than 45% but I'm still wining as long as the house edge is not greater than half my betting index or I'm abandoning the hole. Once in a blue moon I get 16% against, but I'm losing much less than a flat bettor or a card counter. I abandon the hole at $55 bet. -
Alex- Last winter around XMAS I had a 4 hr session that my win rate
could not have been over 20% and at the time I told Midnite about
the session....cried on his shoulder. I also had a push rate that must
have been close to 20%. The high push rate is the only thing that kept
me in the game at all. This went on for maybe 3hrs without getting any
better and I finally just gave it up and went home. No system will beat
that type of game. It was just bad luck and it can and will occur........
I think what all of us would like to see you do is to lay out your system
step by step and give us the exact reasons for steps. It seems like we
have a moving target and are only looking at parts depending on the day
of the week. Example: holes which one is it and at what % and why. If
it changes, then what is the logic for the change. B/S variation: reasons/
logic would help here as well. Don't worry about bet amounts and how
that may apply to others. We or at least some of us would like to see
the completed product, start to finish.
Ray -
Ray said:Alex- Last winter around XMAS I had a 4 hr session that my win rate
could not have been over 20% and at the time I told Midnite about
the session....cried on his shoulder. I also had a push rate that must
have been close to 20%. The high push rate is the only thing that kept
me in the game at all. This went on for maybe 3hrs without getting any
better and I finally just gave it up and went home. No system will beat
that type of game. It was just bad luck and it can and will occur........
I think what all of us would like to see you do is to lay out your system
step by step and give us the exact reasons for steps. It seems like we
have a moving target and are only looking at parts depending on the day
of the week. Example: holes which one is it and at what % and why. If
it changes, then what is the logic for the change. B/S variation: reasons/
logic would help here as well. Don't worry about bet amounts and how
that may apply to others. We or at least some of us would like to see
the completed product, start to finish.
Ray
Ray,
I am on your side Ray. I am on Grifters, Midnites and everybody else side too. I, in no way want to imply that you guys dont know what youre doing. To play this game you have to be sharp, agile, intelligent and cool under pressure. I know how the game goes. It did happen with me too until I totally changed my game plan. I did lose while card counting. I won on average but as Ive stated before I din not make much $$. The most I made was about 2 average bets per hour with huge fluctuations. Now the biggest fluctuation is when I drop the hole after losing the $55 bet and that is $165 + $55 = $220
Playing the way I do today with an average of about $25 while bouncing my bets from $8 to $55 I make 10K a month playing in bad games like 1,2,6 decks with h17. I could earn more but I hate to abuse the bankroll, so I drop the hole if losing the $55 bet. I still dont like that but it helps on fluctuations.
I will do my best to come up with the rational of how I do the lockup over the game. Basically almost all details are in my posts and my examples. -
AlexD30 wrote:Anyway, I've reached 40 hours for this week and I'm a little over $2,500 and very exhausted too.
Alex:
Congratulations on your 40 hr effort. If anyone can play 40 hrs in Vegas and win consistently like that IMHO I think it's outstanding. I have been reading your posts with great interest and as you know I have done some number crunching with some real Bac results. These show a positive outcome using your approach. I'm still digesting the info that you provided and I'm looking forward to playing using your approach. The local casino here has $10 min so I'm trying to come up with the proper 'hole' for that situation.
When in Vegas I try to play where they offer LS. I take it that where you were playing they didn't offer LS. Do you think it would make much of a positive difference playing with LS.
:?:
As far as some of the posts dissecting your comments to the enth degree, I'm surprised they aren't focusing on the final result...making money...isn't that why we're doing this.
:wink:
Regards,
Win1 -
42 50 8 45.65% 54.35% 8.70% -0.446% 2500 -11
43 50 7 46.24% 53.76% 7.53% 0.723% 2500 18
42 51 7 45.16% 54.84% 9.68% -1.427% 2500 -36
These selected from your post: Blackjack averages in the long run near these.
The situation for 43 49 8 or 42 49 9 is not in your runs. -
Nickels_n_Bullets said:42 50 8 45.65% 54.35% 8.70% -0.446% 2500 -11
43 50 7 46.24% 53.76% 7.53% 0.723% 2500 18
42 51 7 45.16% 54.84% 9.68% -1.427% 2500 -36
These selected from your post: Blackjack averages in the long run near these.
The situation for 43 49 8 or 42 49 9 is not in your runs.
Please communicate, I don't understand.
These are short runs of 100 hands each.
Where you see negative income there is when I abandoned the hole and reset it to $25 than by the end of the hour I made some $$ and that is added to -$220 hole that was abandoned. As you can see I always won something back even after I dump the hole. Thats why I dont like to drop out prematurely.
The average bet is standard $25 and that number is from simulations. If I bounce back and forth between $8 and $55 than the average is very close to $25. This is inline with casino action too. So thats why when you see the action as $2,500 that is automatic inserted for 100 rounds. Sometime the average gets to be $20 in some hours or a little over but not by much. If I dont abandon the hole after losing the $55 bet than the average get much bigger. It depends how soon I drop the hole. -
Win1 said:AlexD30 wrote:Anyway, I've reached 40 hours for this week and I'm a little over $2,500 and very exhausted too.
Alex:
Congratulations on your 40 hr effort. If anyone can play 40 hrs in Vegas and win consistently like that IMHO I think it's outstanding. I have been reading your posts with great interest and as you know I have done some number crunching with some real Bac results. These show a positive outcome using your approach. I'm still digesting the info that you provided and I'm looking forward to playing using your approach. The local casino here has $10 min so I'm trying to come up with the proper 'hole' for that situation.
When in Vegas I try to play where they offer LS. I take it that where you were playing they didn't offer LS. Do you think it would make much of a positive difference playing with LS.
:?:
As far as some of the posts dissecting your comments to the enth degree, I'm surprised they aren't focusing on the final result...making money...isn't that why we're doing this.
:wink:
Regards,
Win1
Hi Win1,
If they have the minimum $10 than you can set the start up hole to be at -$25. First bet is always $10. If you lose you are now in -$35 hole and next bet is 33% of that or $12. If you lose again than your next bet is 33% from $47 and that is $17. If you lose again than next bet is $22. If lose one more time than next bet is 33% from $86 and that is $30. Lose again and next bet become 33% of 116 that is $40. One more time losing and your next bet will be 33% from 156 and that is $55. If you lose the $55 you drop the hole and start again by resetting the hole to -25.
If you win the $55 you are now in -$101 hole and the next bet is 33% of $101 that is $35. If you win that bet you are at -$66 and next beet will be $22 and if you win this one you will be at -$44 and your next bet is now $14. If you win this bet than your next bet is $10 and the hole become -$20. You have reached the minimum bet and have a profit of $5.
Now, lets see what is going on here.
From the beginning you start slipping in the hole and that took you to lose the following bets: -10,-12,-17,-22,-30,-40. You start winning the 55, 35,22,14,10
You lost $131 in six hands and won $136 in 5 hands. You made $5 profit riding the scale all the way to max and back to minimum. You won in less hands more $$ that what you lost in more hands. Your average winning bet AWB = $27.20 and your average losing bet ALB = $21.83. In this case your edge is: 1.87% while the casino won 6 and you only 5 that is 55% losers and 45% winners. That is 10% edge against you. You turned a -10% into 1.87% for you
This offset between AWB vs. ALB is the reason you will always make money as long casino edge do not climbs over half of your betting index like 17% against you. When that happens, once in a blue moon :roll: , you have to abandon the hole. When you divorce yourself from the hole you lose about $220 but dont worry because when the game becomes balanced or choppy you will make tons of money.
Make sure you reset the hole if you win the first bet because the -$25 hole will be $10 less and you cannot bet now 33% from $15, so you reset it to $25 again and pocket the $10. Start over and over until you get tired.
Surrender is OK because during high counts you can bail yourself out if you have a big bet out there. But dont worry to much about because our edge is coming from the fact that we attack the very fundamental nature, essence, spirit, core, heart, and soul of the game. The architecture of BJ is scrambled and not functioning anymore in such a way that casino needs to have and edge of over 17% to break even. And that is not happening very often. When that happen you abandon the hole immediately and start at $25 with $10 bet.
The game was created in such a way that no matter what, the player will lose if he bets flat the game. Because hes got no hope whatsoever. You hit first your 16 with a TEN and bust, you lose, even if the dealer gets to the next player that has a pat hand and than the dealer flips his cards and see a 16, now he hits, gets a TEN too and busts. He took your money already. This is the core of the game. But, we are messing around and screwing up with this fundamental build in advantage. We win more in less hands that what we lose in more hands. -
What I'm getting at is the range of w/l associated with long-term Blackjack didnot occur in your run. Some are close but no cigar. Notice that the best 2 you have:
42 50 8 45.65% 54.35% 8.70% -0.446% 2500 -11
43 50 7 46.24% 53.76% 7.53% 0.723% 2500 18
Ones a winner and ones a loser.
Second, vaiance was ignored, as the same amount of wins and loses produced the same outcome. This is NOT the case in Blackjack. some wins are double, some losses are double, and some wins are 1.5x. If this were simulated for Blackjack and its inherent variances, I would NOT expect the same numbers of w/l to generate the same financial gain/loss. It would vary.
Quite frankly, these results are off-topic, as you are simulating a coinflip, with the ties being due to landing upon a thick edge. They DO NOT represent the game of blackjack. -
Nickels_n_Bullets said:What I'm getting at is the range of w/l associated with long-term Blackjack didnot occur in your run. Some are close but no cigar. Notice that the best 2 you have:
42 50 8 45.65% 54.35% 8.70% -0.446% 2500 -11
43 50 7 46.24% 53.76% 7.53% 0.723% 2500 18
Ones a winner and ones a loser.
Second, vaiance was ignored, as the same amount of wins and loses produced the same outcome. This is NOT the case in Blackjack. some wins are double, some losses are double, and some wins are 1.5x. If this were simulated for Blackjack and its inherent variances, I would NOT expect the same numbers of w/l to generate the same financial gain/loss. It would vary.
Quite frankly, these results are off-topic, as you are simulating a coinflip, with the ties being due to landing upon a thick edge. They DO NOT represent the game of blackjack.
Oh YES, I fabricate all the numbers :!: ....., :roll: -
Alex - Again, stop dodging and simply respond to the issue. Nickels did not say you fabricated your numbers....He said they do not "represent the game of blackjack"; and he is absolutely correct!
-
Grifter said:Alex - Again, stop dodging and simply respond to the issue. Nickels did not say you fabricated your numbers....He said they do not "represent the game of blackjack"; and he is absolutely correct!
42 50 8 45.65% 54.35% 8.70% -0.446% 2500 -11
43 50 7 46.24% 53.76% 7.53% 0.723% 2500 18
In the first instance the house edge was 8.70% and I drop the hole but after reseting it to -25 again I made some money by the end of 100 rounds. That's why is discrepancy.
In the second one the casino edge was 7.53% and I could only pull to .723% for player. There was no droping the hole in the second one.
I did not play like a blind and keep bending myself over and take it all in.
On both instances from above the house edge was 8.70% and 7.53% against me and I lost 11 and gained 18 for a final total of 7 units.
Now if you are able to pull this in real game than the system has got to be powerfull. Don't you think so?
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!