Excellent Response!
Sonny said:
You’re exactly right. I was looking at Doktorhook’s post by accident. In fact, you mentioned that you have BS for DD and 8D totally memorized in your first post. My apologies. We get so many posts every week about new systems that it’s easy to get people confused.
In fact, just ignore
everything from that post. My original posts on your original thread still apply, but the last one was about Doktorhook, not you. Again, my apologies for the mistake.
Stanford Wong initially suggested using a flat bet to beat the game by only playing positive counts (sometimes only +3 or more based on your bankroll). That’s about as conservative as it gets. However, the ratio of earnings vs. risk tends to be low, as does the hourly win rate (due to fewer hands played). You will be taking a larger risk to earn a relatively small amount of money and it will take you much longer to have a reasonable chance of approaching your expected results.
We discuss many different ways to beat the game. The only requisite is that they be legitimate techniques that can be mathematically validated and/or simulated. You can search these forums for techniques like shuffle tracking, front loading, cutting/steering, sequencing, opposition betting, consolidation betting, team play, beatable side bets, beating CSMs, comp counting, flashing, spooking, reading warps, rider playing, etc. We’re happy to talk about any methods that exist. The problem is that we often get stubborn ignorant people who rely on progression systems or other worthless “streak” systems. You’ll have to excuse our curt reaction to your sarcasm. We’ve developed a short-fuse for people divulging “homemade” systems.
As I said before, your system is probably effective but we cannot be sure because your counting is vague. The shortcomings of such a system (increased variance, less accuracy, suboptimal betting, longer N0, smaller SCORE) might outweigh the benefits (a small +EV). I’m glad to hear that it has worked for you, but many other players may not experience similar results using your system.
Las Vegas has about 36.7 million visitors every year. How many of them hit a 100,00:1 shot?
-Sonny-
Your comments about Stanford Wong having initally tried a similar system is exactly the type of feedback I had hoped to receive intially. I accept that criticism as totally valid.
My suggestion, however, is that there MAY be a way to use a similar system - which incorporates some other techniques to produce a method which would work at least for the recreational player.
One thing I have never mentioned is that I love the game. My "system" has allowed me many hours of play, thousands of dollars in comps, and a fair amount of cash. I have no illusions about quitting my day job and going pro.
In fact, I would say that my "system" is no system at all because I have not quantified what I am doing in many areas. To qualify as a system I would have to count the cards, give an exact ramping strategy, and a set of exit strategies (for both winning and losing sessions) based on a number of variables.
The following is and has been my goal in developing my personal playing:
1) Use a method which is not taxing mentally. Certainly maintaining an exact count is more effective than my neutral, positive, very positive, negative, very negative. My reason for using this method is that if I don't enjoy my play I doubt I will continue.
2) Minimize the swings in my bankroll. It's a valid argument that I may not be taking full advantage of positive situations, and run a greater risk of total ruin. My position, however, is that I've tried more aggressive ramping my bets more in the past and have encountered large losses as a result. There is a trade-off in terms of aggressive ramping versus more conservative play. The aggressive ramping produces a higher overall return, but carries with it a SHORT TERM higher risk of ruin (ROR for current session). More conserative ramping allows you to stay in the game longer when encountering consistent losses. If my bankroll were unlimited, and I had no fear of getting barred, I'd probably be ramping more aggressively (I may even try this some time at distant casinos).
3) Avoid raising red flags with casino management. Large session wins, aggressive ramping of bets, and varying from basic strategy after hours of following it, draws attention to your play. I don't argue that the agressive ramping and an occasional divergence from basic strategy based on card count is less effective than my style of play. In fact, I would agree that these techinques would produce a higher rate of return!
I'm having fun, winning money and comps, and maintaining a positive relationship with casino management. I have noted, however, that I have been a topic of discussion amongst the pit crews. Certain comments which the pit bosses have made indicate this. To date, there have been no problems.
On the other hand, I had had a pit boss say "Let's hit it, _____", when I started to play the other day. The pit crew and dealers all seem to enjoy seeing me win (I'm a member at my favorite casino, and I allow my play to be tracked). More than once they have made the comment "It's not my money", when discussing players winnings. They see the casino making huge sums on the game.
Ya got me! My statement that I don't believe in 100,000:1 shots was stupid! More appropriately I should have said something like the following:
My difficulty in accepting that I have just been extremely lucky is a result of the following observations:
1) My bet ramping is very conservative. Had I hit some sessions where I ramped my bet 10X and raked in large sums it would seem more likely that it has just been luck. Along the way I have reached a new total high over 60 times, which means I am sitting at a new high over 25% of the time. This appears to me as a sign that my win total has progressed somewhat steadily.
2) Luck to me is short term. I have encountered both lucky and unlucky streaks. I lost 9 straight hands from the start the other day - bad luck. Down another 6 units in the following session before going through another deck - more bad luck. Threw my last $175 of the session up on another day only to have to reach in my pocket to cover 3 splits. Won the 3 hands as the dealer busted. Got 3 blackjacks in a row immediately following this - damned lucky!
3) My results are based on over 10,000 hands of play (I know you consider this small). At 1,000, 2,000 or 3,000 it would be much easier to accept that it's been all luck.
In hopes of devloping a constructive discussion, I pose the following question:
What possible other methods (shuffle tracking, etc) are there to enchance my chances without maintaining an exact count, being more aggressive in ramping, taxing my mind, or raising any red flags with casino management?
Shuffle tracking has some appeal to me as it seems to offer the above, as I do have a simple cutting strategy that I currently use. Much of my play is heads-up so I frequently have the opportunity to use it. Is shuffle tracking really effective? How much should you expect it to add to your return? Can someone reference a good article on it?
-Buzzer
