A winning streak.

[EasyRhino]

Aren't winning streaks just weird?

A while I ago I sat down at a DD table, and the first shoe I played, heads-up, I never lost a head.

I was just grinding through some online play, started up a session, and won my first 9 hands. Then pushed 1, won another 2, then finally lost a hand. (If I was anti-martingaling, I would have been up to a $2500 bet).

I mean, I know that it's the losing streaks that are always more memorable, but every once in a while, you get those stretches where you just can't lose a hand no matter how terrible it is.

... those times always make me suspicious.

 

[Knox]

What amazes me is just how streaky, good or bad, this game can be. You would think with all the tiny little transactions (hands), you would be able to just grind out a tiny dependable profit counting cards. The reality of the magnitude of the variance is pretty wild.

 

[Doofus]

One of the more remarkable sessions I had was one recently on The Strip where I was playing DD heads up with a chatty dealer who talked about how he used to count cards. I was playing two hands, and he observed that the left hand one was doing better than the right hand one. I immediately started playing 3x on the left hand than I did on the right side, and I'll be damned if that hand didn't mostly win while the other one mostly broke even. I've been wondering if this was truly just random. It must have been. But hmmm.......

 

[sagefr0g]

i've had some pretty good runs but never have had one of those you just can't do anything wrong sort of streaks. never had a really long series of wins not even on practice sessions on CVBJ.
maybe it has something to do with just playing multiple deck games.
well anyway i can't wait till it happens

 

[ColorMeUp]

What amazes me is just how streaky, good or bad, this game can be. You would think with all the tiny little transactions (hands), you would be able to just grind out a tiny dependable profit counting cards. The reality of the magnitude of the variance is pretty wild.

And just think - the variance of blackjack is WAY WAY less than slots or even video poker!

 

[zengrifter]

One of the more remarkable sessions I had was one recently on The Strip where I was playing DD heads up with a chatty dealer who talked about how he used to count cards. I was playing two hands, and he observed that the left hand one was doing better than the right hand one. I immediately started playing 3x on the left hand than I did on the right side, and I'll be damned if that hand didn't mostly win while the other one mostly broke even. I've been wondering if this was truly just random. It must have been. But hmmm.......

Was it at SlotsFun?

Tactics like that in bold will cost you! Only use for COVER. zg

 

[EasyRhino]

Well, if the aggregate bet between the two hands adds up to your intended total aggregate bet, then you're not in horrible shape. Except it would probably increase your variance.

And if it was me at Slotsafun, it would probably trigger a preferential shuffle.

 

[BJinNJ]

Practicing Counting Down a Deck...

over the weekend I noticed a long streak of negative tag
cards. Using Renzey's Mentor, I got to -22 count for 1 deck.

Seemed very odd, and difficult NOT to notice.
Actually was scary, once I realized that this could happen
with money on the table. Of course, a WO strategy would
eliminate a lot of this.

And I WILL use a WI/WO strategy, whenever possible.

BJinNJ

 

[Mimosine]

This belongs in VOODOO
bahahahaha
i had to say it...

 

[Dopple]

I was down $500 from various places and got it all back in one shoe at the Stratosphere once. I was only betting about $5 - $20 but it was one of those shoes you see once in 30 years. I must have won 90% of the hands.

In retrospect I wish I was betting a heck of alot more if I could have just realized what a very rare shoe I was enjoying.

 

[Kasi]

Well, if the aggregate bet between the two hands adds up to your intended total aggregate bet.... Except it would probably increase your variance.

I'm thinking no effect at all on variance. Could be wrong of course.

If so, then not a bad "free" cover play to make you look like a superstitious better putting more on the "winning" hand?

 

[InPlay]

i've had some pretty good runs but never have had one of those you just can't do anything wrong sort of streaks. never had a really long series of wins not even on practice sessions on CVBJ.
maybe it has something to do with just playing multiple deck games.
well anyway i can't wait till it happens

Good thing you did not use up all your luck on CVBJ practice session you want to wait for the real deal. Luck only goes so far and you only have so much in your lifetime. Don't waste it. Good Luck in your real games !

 

[Diver]

Timing

Good thing you did not use up all your luck on CVBJ practice session you want to wait for the real deal. Luck only goes so far and you only have so much in your lifetime. Don't waste it. Good Luck in your real games !

Isn't the whole point of CVBJ to play it until you hit a good streak then rush out to a casino while you're still hot? Conversely, when things are tough with CVBJ, it's a good sign to avoid real play like the plague.

 

[sagefr0g]

Good thing you did not use up all your luck on CVBJ practice session you want to wait for the real deal. Luck only goes so far and you only have so much in your lifetime. Don't waste it. Good Luck in your real games !

naw you know lady luck keeps on comming back lol. but then unfortunately but then unfortunately so does her ugly sister ...

 

[Mimosine]

Isn't the whole point of CVBJ to play it until you hit a good streak then rush out to a casino while you're still hot?

Winner!

quit while you're up, quit while you're up, rule #3 in Lucky Ned's course!

 

[zengrifter]

Isn't the whole point of CVBJ to play it until you hit a good streak then rush out to a casino while you're still hot? Conversely, when things are tough with CVBJ, it's a good sign to avoid real play like the plague.

Just the opposite - play untill you have a serious loss and then go to casino because... YOU'RE DUE!

Also, when at home, change tables when losing - move the laptop to the kitchen table, then the coffee table, etc. zg

 

[Knox]

I'm thinking no effect at all on variance. Could be wrong of course.

If so, then not a bad "free" cover play to make you look like a superstitious better putting more on the "winning" hand?

I think you are losing some of the benefit of playing two hands when you play unbalanced like 1 x 3 with 1 x 1. Stats was ages ago for me, but Sonny mentioned covariance between the two hands that simply stated, means they can cancel each other out in such as way that you reduce risk without sacrificing EV. If you were to play two hands unbalanced, you keep the EV but you increase the risk (vis a vis two equal bets) by lessening the covariance effect between the two hands.

That's my theory with only anecdotal evidence to support it, but I stand by it until disproven.

 

[Sonny]

If you were to play two hands unbalanced, you keep the EV but you increase the risk (vis a vis two equal bets) by lessening the covariance effect between the two hands.

I agree. If the two hands are equal then the results will tend to average out. If the two hands are asymmetrical then the results will tend to cluster around the hand with the larger bet. The results will be skewed towards the larger bet so the variance will increase as the difference between the bets increases.

-Sonny-

 

[zengrifter]

I think you are losing some of the benefit of playing two hands when you play unbalanced like 1 x 3 with 1 x 1. Stats was ages ago for me, but Sonny mentioned covariance between the two hands that simply stated, means they can cancel each other out in such as way that you reduce risk without sacrificing EV. If you were to play two hands unbalanced, you keep the EV but you increase the risk (vis a vis two equal bets) by lessening the covariance effect between the two hands.

That's my theory with only anecdotal evidence to support it, but I stand by it until disproven.

Its a good cover play - I've seen it done with $25-$500, changing the order, following the trend, etc. zg

 

[Knox]

I can't believe I actually typed "vis a vis"!

D@mn I must be getting old! Next thing you know I will even be talking like that...

:grin: