Any successful Progression Players?

[Sonny]

How much winning at the tables would a successful system have?

That’s the problem. In the short-term a losing player might experience a winning streak while a winning player might suffer a losing streak. The losing player might be fooled into thinking that his system is successful only to hit an even bigger losing streak later on. This website is filled with posts from people who thought they had a winning system ended up losing it all. There’s no way to know what the true results are unless you play enough hands to get past the short term swings and get to the long run averages where the good/bad swings cancel out.

The more hands you play, the more confident you can be that your results are accurate and not skewed by short-term randomness. For example, the results after playing less than a million hands of blackjack are pretty much worthless. It might give you an idea if the system is a winning system or a losing system, but you won’t know how powerful it is or how reliable it is. That is why people simulate billions of hands before accepting the results.

-Sonny-

 

[Sonny]

Anyone out there really care that playing the next 400,000 hands at a profit is "voo-doo" simply because if you played 1,000,000 hands you'll probably (actually, only, might) lose?

That’s exactly what it comes down to. Let’s look at it another way: If 100 people each played 200,000 hands and 90 of them went broke, would they care? Probably most of them wouldn’t as long as they were expecting to lose. They were just trying to beat the odds with a few hundred dollars they had laying around. No big deal, and they had some fun for a while. I believe that is what most gamblers are like. As long as that is the case then everything is fine.

The problem, in my opinion, comes when people are expecting to win or are playing with money they can’t afford to lose. Maybe they think they have an advantage over the house, or maybe someone sold them a “foolproof” betting system that is guaranteed to make them rich. That is what I’m trying to protect people against on this forum. I don’t want people being fooled into thinking that these systems give them an edge or can consistently make them a winner. I want to make sure that people know the truth and know what the risks are before they decide how to bet their money.

As long as people have realistic expectations and gamble responsibly there really isn’t anything wrong with using a progression system.

-Sonny-

 

[ScottVegas]

That’s the problem. In the short-term a losing player might experience a winning streak while a winning player might suffer a losing streak. The losing player might be fooled into thinking that his system is successful only to hit an even bigger losing streak later on. This website is filled with posts from people who thought they had a winning system ended up losing it all. There’s no way to know what the true results are unless you play enough hands to get past the short term swings and get to the long run averages where the good/bad swings cancel out.

The more hands you play, the more confident you can be that your results are accurate and not skewed by short-term randomness. For example, the results after playing less than a million hands of blackjack are pretty much worthless. It might give you an idea if the system is a winning system or a losing system, but you won’t know how powerful it is or how reliable it is. That is why people simulate billions of hands before accepting the results.

-Sonny-

MY STRATEGY:
Play a basic card strategy ... always. Play within win/loss trends. A change in trend is signified by 2 wins or losses in a row. Play a minimum bet when the trend is bad. Play 2x bets when the trend is normal. Play 4x bets when cards are trending to your favor and you're tied or winning hands (not $) in a shoe. I prefer machine shuffled 6 deck shoes, but I can adapt the system to double deck hand deal (and other methods of dealing). Progress through each of the three levels both up and down. I avoid tables with people not playing a basic strategy or jumping in and out (although this is not a requirement, it will take a lot longer to reach your goal). IMHO, there's no need to leave the table when cards are trending badly. That's just the way the cards fall. You'll catch the trend back up if you don't leave and lock in your losses.

I have experience trading stocks and inspired from that paradigm. For those of you that have experience day trading or swing trading, you'll have an idea of what that means.

There is absolutely no card counting at all. When things are going ok, I'm not even looking at anything else besides my cards and the dealer's. I'm always watching my bets and bankroll. There have been some days loosing, but I've had many more winning days. I'm ahead of the game, overall.

 

[Sonny]

Play a basic strategy ... always.

This is about the only thing that I can agree with. Everything else is just pure superstition. The thought that “bad” players will hurt you or that “trends” can be recognized and taken advantage of are completely bogus. That is a fact. Disagree if you want but it has been proven for centuries.

For those of you that have experience day trading or swing trading, you'll have an idea of what that means.

Unfortunately, many day traders fall for the same fallible systems that gamblers do:

“The reason that people go broke in the stock market is the same reason that they go broke in casinos: They don’t invest (bet) wisely. Many of the day traders try to plan their investments based on “trends” or “indicators” of a particular stock. We’ve seen these same people in casinos raising their bets after a win (trends) or a loss (indicators) and waiting for the roulette ball to land on black 3 times before betting.”

http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=7038

There are system sellers for stock trading just like the ones who hawk blackjack system. You can see the infomercials on late night TV for seminars that can turn someone with no experience into a pro in 2 hours, or software that can predict trends in the market and tell you when to buy and what to buy. It’s just as bogus as the people trying to sell progression systems or trend prediction software for blackjack. It simply doesn’t work.

If you want to get the most out of the stock market you have to stick with the proven mathematical models. In fact, several of those investment models (Sharpe Ratio, Black-Scholes model, Modigliani-Modigliani model) have been used in blackjack as well. To invest based on imaginary trends, streaks, indicators, or any other nonselse is just another form of gambling.

-Sonny-

 

[ScottVegas]

This is about the only thing that I can agree with. Everything else is just pure superstition. The thought that “bad” players will hurt you or that “trends” can be recognized and taken advantage of are completely bogus. That is a fact. Disagree if you want but it has been proven for centuries.



Unfortunately, many day traders fall for the same fallible systems that gamblers do:

“The reason that people go broke in the stock market is the same reason that they go broke in casinos: They don’t invest (bet) wisely. Many of the day traders try to plan their investments based on “trends” or “indicators” of a particular stock. We’ve seen these same people in casinos raising their bets after a win (trends) or a loss (indicators) and waiting for the roulette ball to land on black 3 times before betting.”

http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=7038

There are system sellers for stock trading just like the ones who hawk blackjack system. You can see the infomercials on late night TV for seminars that can turn someone with no experience into a pro in 2 hours, or software that can predict trends in the market and tell you when to buy and what to buy. It’s just as bogus as the people trying to sell progression systems or trend prediction software for blackjack. It simply doesn’t work.

If you want to get the most out of the stock market you have to stick with the proven mathematical models. In fact, several of those investment models (Sharpe Ratio, Black-Scholes model, Modigliani-Modigliani model) have been used in blackjack as well. To invest based on imaginary trends, streaks, indicators, or any other nonselse is just another form of gambling.

-Sonny-

Sonny, I'm not going to debate with you. If it doesn't make sense to you, then don't use it. The thread says ... "Any successful Progression Players?" I've used the system and I am a successful progression player.

 

[Sonny]

The thread says ... "Any successful Progression Players?" I've used the system and I am a successful progression player.

Fair enough. That's all you had to say. My only arguments have been with your system, not your success. Thank you for your input.

-Sonny-

 

[aslan]

Fair enough. That's all you had to say. My only arguments have been with your system, not your success. Thank you for your input.

-Sonny-

ScottVegas:

Go back and read what Sonny wrote very carefully. You may be a successful system player, I'm not disputing that, but if Sonny is right (and all the necessary logic is right there for you to understand) heeding his timely message may save you a rude and expensive awakening in the very near future. No one here is a know-it-all; we're just trying to share some common knowledge with scientific bases (nothing subjective) for the benefit of all. Last June I told my friend who was using a modified martingale (I know this doesn't apply to you) that he was risking some serious losses. He had picked his system up from a book and he claimed he had never lost. He reasoned, "What chance is there to lose four hands in a row using PERFECT basic strategy" (he prided himself on that). We went to Reno in June and he proceeded to lose his shirt. The warning was in time, but he failed to heed it, even though I presented to him all the scientific evidence to the contrary. You can run billions of simulations and you will find that 2 losses or whatever indicator you use is no sure indication of the end or beginning of a trend. Foretelling the future is not scientifically based. Even if you have a sixth sense, what is it's source, how do you know you can depend on it, why do you have it and hardly anyone else does? Mathematical probabilities, however, are dependable as shown by mathematical logic, as well as billions and billions of simulations. They allow you to minimize your risk, while they point the way to making dependable long-term profits.

What are the odds that all the pros who post here are wrong, and you are right? Believe me, as the Bible says, "There is wisdom in many counsels."

 

[ScottVegas]

Winning Progressive Strategy

MY STRATEGY:
Play a basic card strategy ... always. Play within win/loss trends. A change in trend is signified by 2 wins or losses in a row. Play a minimum bet when the trend is bad. Play 2x bets when the trend is normal. Play 4x bets when cards are trending to your favor and you're tied or winning hands (not $) in a shoe. I prefer machine shuffled 6 deck shoes, but I can adapt the system to double deck hand deal (and other methods of dealing). Progress through each of the three levels both up and down. I avoid tables with people not playing a basic strategy or jumping in and out (although this is not a requirement, it will take a lot longer to reach your goal). IMHO, there's no need to leave the table when cards are trending badly. That's just the way the cards fall. You'll catch the trend back up if you don't leave and lock in your losses.

I have experience trading stocks and inspired from that paradigm. For those of you that have experience day trading or swing trading, you'll have an idea of what that means.

There is absolutely no card counting at all. When things are going ok, I'm not even looking at anything else besides my cards and the dealer's. I'm always watching my bets and bankroll. There have been some days loosing, but I've had many more winning days. I'm ahead of the game, overall.

My ante's have changed to only 1x when the trend is bad/normal and 2x when cards are trending to my favor as explained earlier. Everything else is the same.

~ Scott

 

[aslan]

I've used the system and I am a successful progression player.

If you want to continue being a successful player, I suggest you quit now. Sonny doesn't argue opinion; he argues from mathematically established fact.
But I understand why you are hard to convince--you're made money. His concern, and most anyone's here, is that you don't repeat the same mistakes that countless others have. It's not said in arrogance, or from a know-it-all attitude.

I myself searched high and low for "betting systems" that would give me that fabled advantage. Luckily I used spreadsheet simulations before trying it in the real world...most of the time. I once used a system of modified martingale in blackjack. I didn't even know basic strategy, but I won. When I got home from Vegas I ran my "system" through a spreadsheet simulation and found that it consistently lost money over time, and not a very long time, at that. Occasionally I have thought I found the Holy Grail in the past, only to find some error in my formulas. I now know from probability theory that it is a futile quest. Thank God I found counting. And even it is a perilous journey if you don't follow the guidlines for risk avoidance. I really hope we become friends here and you don't think that everyone is a know-it-all. And I hope you continue winning whether you continue your system or you try something new.

 

[ScottVegas]

What is a successful Progression Player

What is a successful progression player in real terms? I haven't gotten a direct answer to this yet; only spreadsheet and program projections. Is it a certain amount of hours or days of winning? Is it building a ___ bankroll? This is a chart of my progress. I don't claim to have the final answer. I only know that I'm giving my best shot. Please advise.

 

[aslan]

What is a successful progression player in real terms? I haven't gotten a direct answer to this yet; only spreadsheet and program projections. Is it a certain amount of hours or days of winning? Is it building a ___ bankroll? This is a chart of my progress. I don't claim to have the final answer. I only know that I'm giving my best shot. Please advise.

From what I've heard, a successful progression player is one who dies before the odds catch up to him.

 

[CharlieChip]

GREAT INFO on this thread! Thanks to Sonny, Aslan, ScottVegas, and everyone else. I wish I had known that this site existed 6 months ago before I started playing BJ and learning basic strategy...

I totally understand what you are saying Sonny and I appreciate you looking out for the guys new to BJ. I post a lot on a sports betting site and there are always guys talking about their new "can't lose" strategy for roulette, craps, BJ, or whatever. It usually involves some variation on the Martigale System, and I usually tell them that they are in for a big surprise, so be careful. I had a buddy that swore his Martingale System would work at Roulette, so I did the math for him (in his case 1035-1 that the red could come up nine times in a row, vs. his having to win 1100 times in row to make up for one single loss -9 reds in a row). The math quoted above isn't exact, but it was something like this. So, I showed him how he couldn't win, and he just would not accept it. The only reason I bring this up is because when you get ahead big using your own progression, there is a feeling that you have discovered something that no one else has.

On to my progression. My dad worked for a famous old gamble named Nick The Greek. He would always share great Nick The Greek stories with me and before my dad died, I had him write down all of Nick's gambling techniques(I'll be happy to post if anyone is interested). For craps he used a 1-1-2-4-4-4 progression until he finally lost. The progression works better for craps betting Don't Pass/Don't Come until you have three bets going, because although you have to place the long-end of the odds, the odds getting on a roll of seven outs is better than 50/50. Meaning there are a lot more streaks of cold dice than there are of hot dice.

Without totally writing a book here, I was going to be in Vegas last summer with a bunch of girls (none of which played craps, and all of which played BJ) and wanted to play at the tables with them (also wanted to get into the clubs without being hassled), so I began experimenting with Nick The Greek's progressions on BJ. I ended up pretty close to how he played, which was a progression of 1-2-2-4-4-4 until you lose then back to 1. Leave at the end of a progression when a loss comes if you are ahead for the session. If you lose twice in a row, you end the session. The bankroll was $1500 and if I felt the table wasn't very postitive I would leave at -1000. Oh well, it worked well, really well. After 400 sessions I am +$37,000, not incredible, but up non-the-less.

I realize guys like Sonny know their stuff, and if they say that progressions don't work in the long run, then I believe them. But, for the fun of it, can anyone let me know which programs I can test this progression on. I see there is a link on the BJinfo home page. Is there software that I can easily test this on (without having a PHD in mathematics)?

Finally, since I spent so much time on this black jack (and craps) progression, I could probably apply myself to learning how to count cards. My only hesitation is that I have read on this site and others, that the opportunities to count and make some money at it are drying up (because of casino heat, games not being as good as they once were, ...). Is there still opportunity for new Advantage Players in this new world of blackjack?

Thanks for any advice or insight...

 

[Sonny]

I realize guys like Sonny know their stuff, and if they say that progressions don't work in the long run, then I believe them.

Don’t take my word for it. See what the pros have to say:

http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=7109

But, for the fun of it, can anyone let me know which programs I can test this progression on.

Someone asked about this a few weeks ago:

http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=8073

Unfortunately, there really isn’t much software out there for testing progression systems. The problem is that most people who use progression systems don’t understand the math, and the people who understand the math don’t spend their time thinking about progression systems. It’s tough to find people who fit into both categories.

Is there still opportunity for new Advantage Players in this new world of blackjack?

There are still plenty of opportunities out there, but they are tough to find and can sometimes be difficult to exploit. Getting an advantage is pretty easy and you can make a little extra cash here and there, but it’s not something that most people can consistently make big money doing. Most players are recreational players who are happy to earn a little extra money and get free vacations.

-Sonny-

 

[Kasi]

Unfortunately, there really isn’t much software out there for testing progression systems. The problem is that most people who use progression systems don’t understand the math, and the people who understand the math don’t spend their time thinking about progression systems. It’s tough to find people who fit into both categories.

Hey I resemble that remark lol.

For me it begins with the results that are already out there, verified, and readily available.

Like how often a flat-better will be at least 0.5 or 1 unit ahead at some point in X hands with y-unit bankroll before losing all y units in a defined BJ game.

Like how often even a flat-betting, or with some other basic system, roulette or craps bettor might be either 10 units ahead or lose his X-unit bankroll trying.

While using no "system" in the sense I always do exactly the same thing at exactly the same time forever, I do use such systems with different multiples of betting that, with adequate roll, seem to allow for more longevity than I think most people believe.

If a card-counter's profit per hour equalled his average initial bet per hour, after playing for 1900 hours, assuming 100 hands per hour, would you call him successful?

Of course it depends on the game and spread, etc but, in general, I think you would.

How many of us would complain of such results using only BS and voodoo betting systems?

And, of course, even when true, that's with playing with an average advantage versus a constant disadvantage.

I'm not saying 1000000 hands proves anything but it's a start for a lot of people who would be happy breaking even over 1000000 hands.

 

[sagefr0g]

Hey I resemble that remark lol.

For me it begins with the results that are already out there, verified, and readily available.

Like how often a flat-better will be at least 0.5 or 1 unit ahead at some point in X hands with y-unit bankroll before losing all y units in a defined BJ game.

Like how often even a flat-betting, or with some other basic system, roulette or craps bettor might be either 10 units ahead or lose his X-unit bankroll trying.

While using no "system" in the sense I always do exactly the same thing at exactly the same time forever, I do use such systems with different multiples of betting that, with adequate roll, seem to allow for more longevity than I think most people believe.

If a card-counter's profit per hour equalled his average initial bet per hour, after playing for 1900 hours, assuming 100 hands per hour, would you call him successful?

Of course it depends on the game and spread, etc but, in general, I think you would.

How many of us would complain of such results using only BS and voodoo betting systems?

And, of course, even when true, that's with playing with an average advantage versus a constant disadvantage.

I'm not saying 1000000 hands proves anything but it's a start for a lot of people who would be happy breaking even over 1000000 hands.

ok mr Kasi i'm curious about this. lemme try and put some of it in my own words. i think your saying that using stuff that AP's apply such as ROR, EV,
BS, Kelly betting, knowledge of edge per various game, ect. that you can have an idea for a given game just where you stand edge-wise if you are playing basic strategy and you have an idea how your bankroll is going to fluctuate as you play some number of hands or hours of play. so what it seems to me you are not saying but maybe implying is that you know what the gamble is. and then knowing the gamble you take a shot at it (by what decision process i don't know). and it's been working well for you. well good so i'm curious as to what the decison process would be for when you do increase your bets.

 

[Kasi]

ok mr Kasi

Hey - what's with this mr stuff?!

But I liked the way you put it and that's pretty much what I was trying to say. Also I was not including any card-counting in the above.

But, yes, that's basically it. When I do play only BS, my goal every session is pretty much "not-losing". If variance is naturally positive, I come out ahead by flat-betting. If variance is negative, I try to make up units with "bigger bets" knowing how likely that is to happen assuming it is a new flat-bet. I have a clear idea of how many original flat-bet units, almost always the table min lol, I'm up or down by. When I "bet bigger", I have a clear idea of how many original flat units I've made up by coming out ahead a unit at the bigger bet size. Then I adjust how many original flat-units I'm now down by and take it from there based on stuff like how much longer will I be playing etc.

Unfortunately, as I tried to say, when I do this is just based on even I don't know what lol. For the most part, I don't linger long at higher bet levels content to win one higher-bet unit and then drop back. Like I'm usually pretty ecstatic if I come out ahead one unit betting $20 at a $5 table because I've made up 3 bets. And I know that's very likely to keep me even for the next 9 hours. I try not to get too many original flat-units behind and often am content to cut into the deficit a little at a time.

Conversely, if I play a bunch of bigger flat-bets, never getting ahead by even a half-unit, I adjust my original unit accordingly as to how far down I am. Maybe I drop back for a while hoping for some + variance, maybe I up the bet size again, either then or later. Depends lol. I already know what bankroll I am willing to commit to either breaking-even or lose trying. It's not like I've never lost a session bankroll or anything.

Anyway, I freely admit it's purely "voo-doo" - it has to be since the assumption is that it's a neg EV game. I just think the longevity of being able to bet at different sizes at various times is generally greatly underestimated.

It's no surprise to me how long Cipher lasted spreading 700-1.

So it's not a "system" in the sense something is always done at a certain time. Not programmable in any way. Completely up to an individual's preference and goals. Just a way of achieving a goal with a much higher probability than if one always only flat-bets.

Of course the smaller the original unit, the less HA to begin with, the bigger the bankroll you play with all contribute to liklihood of success for how long you think a session will last.

I already know I've "made up" one average bet unit every 100 hands for 190,000 hands. So that's 1900 avg bet units. Put another way, it's 3-6 times that compared to original bet unit. So, being conservative, should I choose, going forward, to only bet my original flat unit, I'd have to lose 5700 units just to get back to even profit-wise, let alone to a number that would be EV.

And that would most likely be a few million hands from now. And then I'd be even. And then maybe I'd do it again just like I did starting from zero when I first played. Quite possibly another few million hands lol.

Also I would like to point out that, based on a W/L/T point of view, there is absolutely nothing at all unusual of the results if I had flat-bet every hand. Up about 200 units. Slightly positive, as luck would have it, but nothing unusual.

So, if one wants to call, cumulatively, whatever I've done a "negative progression system" of some kind and no doubt add with sure and certain knowledge "I will lose in the long run", I'm not going to disagree with you. I do agree with you. I will point out, however, with near certainty, unfortunately I won't live long enough to prove your point. Which is pretty much my point.

And, if you choose to call it just one way to play, based on little more than the application of known probability distributions, that's OK too.

Guess it's both lol.

Sprinkle in a little "fuzzy counting" and a little "fuzzy betting" and you can't (hardly anyway go wrong.

 

[sagefr0g]

Hey - what's with this mr stuff?!

lol, i dunno i think i was trained up to use phrases like that when i was a kid.

But I liked the way you put it and that's pretty much what I was trying to say. Also I was not including any card-counting in the above.

But, yes, that's basically it. When I do play only BS, my goal every session is pretty much "not-losing". If variance is naturally positive, I come out ahead by flat-betting. If variance is negative, I try to make up units with "bigger bets" knowing how likely that is to happen assuming it is a new flat-bet. I have a clear idea of how many original flat-bet units, almost always the table min lol, I'm up or down by. When I "bet bigger", I have a clear idea of how many original flat units I've made up by coming out ahead a unit at the bigger bet size. Then I adjust how many original flat-units I'm now down by and take it from there based on stuff like how much longer will I be playing etc.

and as you've said before you are counting as well in the back ground, just maybe not ramping your bets according to a pre-set game plan gleaned say from a simulation or proportional betting maths. again in my words it's like you are trying to gamble conservatively but not so conservatively that you kill any advantage you may have but all the time knowing that you might tap out. but it's also as if your trying to take some conscious advantage of the positive fluctuation that does come your way. and i think i remmember that you might take a breather at times if the count has gone to far south...

Unfortunately, as I tried to say, when I do this is just based on even I don't know what lol. For the most part, I don't linger long at higher bet levels content to win one higher-bet unit and then drop back. Like I'm usually pretty ecstatic if I come out ahead one unit betting $20 at a $5 table because I've made up 3 bets. And I know that's very likely to keep me even for the next 9 hours. I try not to get too many original flat-units behind and often am content to cut into the deficit a little at a time.

Conversely, if I play a bunch of bigger flat-bets, never getting ahead by even a half-unit, I adjust my original unit accordingly as to how far down I am. Maybe I drop back for a while hoping for some + variance, maybe I up the bet size again, either then or later. Depends lol. I already know what bankroll I am willing to commit to either breaking-even or lose trying. It's not like I've never lost a session bankroll or anything.

ok, as i'm reading on here i can't help but think there is an element of what is classicaly termed as 'chasing loss's' going on here. but i don't want to ignore the fact that you are also at least 'coasting on wins' too. but i get the sense that if there is some chasing that it's being done with a goal in mind that is reasonalby realistic and that there isn't any steaming going on and you seem to switch out of the chase mode according to your own decision reasons and then maybe take it from there.

Anyway, I freely admit it's purely "voo-doo" - it has to be since the assumption is that it's a neg EV game. I just think the longevity of being able to bet at different sizes at various times is generally greatly underestimated.

It's no surprise to me how long Cipher lasted spreading 700-1.

So it's not a "system" in the sense something is always done at a certain time. Not programmable in any way. Completely up to an individual's preference and goals. Just a way of achieving a goal with a much higher probability than if one always only flat-bets.

Of course the smaller the original unit, the less HA to begin with, the bigger the bankroll you play with all contribute to liklihood of success for how long you think a session will last.

well it sounds like to me that you know what it is that you are doing. it does soumd like there are elements of a progression but the differance being you seem to temper that with decision making and an understanding of how it goes with the game of blackjack. i just wonder how much having that count going on in the background influences your decisions lol. and reading on down below what you say about the 190,000 hands i can see that you do indeed have some wiggle room as far as continuing to enjoy playing and hopefully scoring some more wins....

I already know I've "made up" one average bet unit every 100 hands for 190,000 hands. So that's 1900 avg bet units. Put another way, it's 3-6 times that compared to original bet unit. So, being conservative, should I choose, going forward, to only bet my original flat unit, I'd have to lose 5700 units just to get back to even profit-wise, let alone to a number that would be EV.

And that would most likely be a few million hands from now. And then I'd be even. And then maybe I'd do it again just like I did starting from zero when I first played. Quite possibly another few million hands lol.

Also I would like to point out that, based on a W/L/T point of view, there is absolutely nothing at all unusual of the results if I had flat-bet every hand. Up about 200 units. Slightly positive, as luck would have it, but nothing unusual.

So, if one wants to call, cumulatively, whatever I've done a "negative progression system" of some kind and no doubt add with sure and certain knowledge "I will lose in the long run", I'm not going to disagree with you. I do agree with you. I will point out, however, with near certainty, unfortunately I won't live long enough to prove your point. Which is pretty much my point.

And, if you choose to call it just one way to play, based on little more than the application of known probability distributions, that's OK too.

Guess it's both lol.

Sprinkle in a little "fuzzy counting" and a little "fuzzy betting" and you can't (hardly anyway go wrong.

yeah well being a forty-niner (what ever that is lol) i'm pretty much in the same boat as you are. investment models for folks in differant age brackets are suppose to be quite different according to the experts but what do i know. i just know that the time element that i have to get into the casino's pockets is considerably less than our younger friends around here. i think where i'm at is that i'm willing to take relitively little gambles at a time (with respect to my financial health) that are in the plus EV ballpark and monitor the results of those gambles, re-asess and then take it from there or what ever lol.
it's funny to me how it seems that so many advantage players dislike casino's. i myself get a real kick out of them. i think it's some kind of vicarious thing seeing all that money flowing and i don't have to be playing as i get a real hoot out of just rooting for the various players lol. and of course i'd like to tap into a bit of all that money that is flowing. so anyway i had a pretty good ride for a couple of years going the orthodox counting route before i suffered about a one seventh loss of my meager winnings. had fun and won a little. but that tangle with some pretty nasty negative fluctuation gave me the opportunity to examine my play and more importantly i think my own self. pretty much what i found that i want to do is have fun and hopefully come out on the plus side money-wise, lol the more plus side money-wise the better lol. well that isn't very significant with respect to what my two year history of orthodox counting means and my subsequent tangle with some serious negative fluctuation. but what i know is the biggest downer to me about all that was the degree of effort i extended measured against the degree of pain that i suffered. i was a really conservative orthodox counter and i guess i was lucky to not experience the downside of being overly conservative in my betting. it was when i took the plunge and increased my max bet and ramp that i hit the negative fluctuation (wouldn't you know it lol ). it was amazing to me the significance both psychologically and result-wise that just a relatively small increase in max bet really brings about. the biggest drag for me about orthodox counting was keeping the RC. TC calculation and deck estimation were for me a cinch. and what made having to keep that RC even worse for me was how often it was just an obviously crap count. the dissapointment of that was always a real downeer. but one thing that it did do for me was to make me realize from a experience point of view just how much the house has really got it going on over the players.
so i think what so far i've come up with is the idea of making my blackjack play more of a sport and a bit more of a gamble. thats where the fuzzy counting came in. i try and model what i'm doing closely to orthodox counting for a given game measured against some simulation and ROR desired. the result i think is that my mind is free'd up and i can experience a lot more fun while at least still being in the plus EV ballpark. but like i was going on about i was a bit over conservative and lucky before. now where it seems i'm headed is that i'm shooting for more opportunistic situations that are a bit more risky with out being to frivolous i hope lol. by that i mean i know i'm ramping my bets more agressively at probably less advantageous counts at times and at other times probably ramping to conservatively and i suppose the converse is true as well, hopefully. but anyway it's still a work in progress for me. i'm pondering now if what i've learned about your approach might fit in with what i'm trying to do.

 

[Kasi]

i'm pondering now if what i've learned about your approach might fit in with what i'm trying to do.

You know i don't want to mislead you so maybe I should make a few points.

The 190000 hands were all played with no card-counting and therefore always against basically a constant neg EV since, for the most part, cards are shuffled after every hand. In some games the cards were shufflled after every card. They were played on the internet which is why I know exactly what happened having recorded every hand. They were played over a variety of games with a variety of different HA's with a variety of different bankrolls and different min units.

So the results are what they are - I've never taken the time to figure out some weighted HA, etc. I make guesses as to average starting min unit. But, in general, the min starting units are less than available in real life and the HA is less than available in real life.

I do know how much was wagered and average bet size. I know how many times I won or lost or tied at every different bet size I made, It's not perfect - I counted splits as 2 hands in the above which is not correct. Although, if anything, it would probably make the results look better if I adjusted to number of dealer upcards.

However, I do use the same style of play, more or less, playing at a real casino except that maybe I can make a few playing departures, wait until a positive count to raise my bet but maybe not raise it in all positive counts, like when I'm ahead anyway lol, like I'm supposed to, etc.

No way can I be as accurate about results playing in a casino. About the only thing I know when I leave a casino is how much money I won lol. I don't know how many hands I won, how many BJ's I got, how many splits I had, etc. Then I make a wild-ass guess of how mnay hands I played and write down how many min units I think I made up with "bigger bets". I would never pass such results off as very meaningful. But I'm ahead of the curve lol. Nothing that's going to change my life lol.

 

[aslan]

Jack

What is your overall objective in showing all this? I mean, what will this all demonstrate when you are finished?

 

[jack.jackson]

I was wondering if this would get your attention or not? After all, you've started three different threads regarding oppositional betting. Of course this is a mix between oppositional,negative and progressive betting, coupled with a level 4 count, which uses a secondary for betting and the play of hands. Honestly, I did'nt no wether to put this in advanced or Voodoo.

Jack

What is your overall objective in showing all this? I mean, what will this all demonstrate when you are finished?

Well, Generally speaking it's just for show. Or maybe I'm tryin to outdo Licentia. Who knows?
Call my crazy, or maybe, simply misinformed(Dont care which)...lol, especially after the fact that Ive spent the last six years mastering the A02 count, and have proved to myself that I can keep winning Idefinitely at the leisure of my own Disposal. I guess you could say I've completely (lost my mind)Abandoned the A02 and have taken a chance with this new level 4, why? I dont know? Call me crazy.

Okay, enough with the small talk. This is a good question and I'm glad you asked! Even though I'm afraid to answer. You see, I understand that Blackjack is about numbers, not cards with numbers printed on them. Well, to make a long story short, I believe theres only one true System in Blackjack. One that doesnt Involve fixed fraction betting. One that has the same Expectation in negative counts as well, as the positive ones. I believe it would be one that Revolves completely around the Binary System. I also believe this is why I Count the Aces and face-cards for my secondary. And why fives are counted as +four,in the main count, and why bets five and four in the progression are contingent of the count. This is also why, this count will have a PE .80. (4x5=20,4/5=80)20+80=100 which brings me back to my secondary. Like I said, call me crazy or call it mere subjective opinion but until I can prove this theory, it will simply have to remain in the Voodoo section