zengrifter
Banned
Its not working because,,,texbjphan said:
it doesn't work!
Betting Systems And Blackjack
- Thread starter zengrifter
- Start date
it doesn't work!
zengrifter said:
Maybe need to define "work" I understand that these betting systems will never overcome the house edge. I thought, however, based upon some of the posts in this thread that this system would allow for longer sessions, in essence, slowing the bleeding.
Is that not accurate? IS the rate of loss the same for flat betting as would be for this system? Assuming the same level of competence (or lack there of) of playing by the book?
Thanks
zengrifter
Banned
No, not accurate - rate of loss remains the same, but with greater variance (ie swings) zgtexbjphan said:
Sonny
Well-Known Member
Well, that depends. The loss rate might be higher using a betting progression because you are raising your bets fairly often. For example:texbjphan said:
House edge = 0.5%
Player 1 flat bets $5
Player 2 uses a $5-$10-$15 progression system (average bet of $10)
Players play 100 hands per hour
Player 1 looses $5*100*.005 = $2.50 per hour
Player 2 looses $10*100*.005 = $5 per hour
As you can see, the progression player is losing twice as much. However, if the average bet is the same then the loss rate will be the same.
-Sonny-
zengrifter
Banned
I was assuming that flat-bet = average bet. zgSonny said:
zengrifter
Banned
The "bleeding" is a function of the housEdge - if the housEdge remains constant than the "bleeding" remains constant. zgtexbjphan said:
steve mitchell
New Member
a betting system that works
Two axioms relating to gambling that are true are;
No gambling system can convert a losing game into a winning game .Over betting when you have an advantage will result in reducing or losing that advantage.
The Kelly Criterion stipulates that the formula for the ultimate bet is percent advantage times bankroll. Example. You’re a card counter and you come into a situation where you have a true count of +6 which is about a 3% advantage. You have $5000 in risk money available. Your optimum bet is 3% of $5000 or $150. That’s not to say that if you were to bet $200 in situations like this you’d wind up losing in the long run. You’d just win less the more you over bet until you finally over bet so much that you do wind up losing.
I’m not a mathematician but I am a retired computer analyst and I check these things out by writing simulation programs that generate millions of trials. Trust me! It’s true!
Now for the system that works:
Assumtions:
6 deck game
80% penetration
bet spread of 1 to 10+
Usable bankroll relatively infinite since we always manage to replenish it if were to run into hard times.
I’m an accomplished card counter playing with a 1.5% advantage under the above mentioned conditions (proven by 5 million hands simulations). With the help of Peter Griffin’s great book, I have developed a modified version of Thorpe’s Ultimate strategy and have been using it for more than 20 years. (A three level point count and a tens count used concurrently) .
In six deck games it takes quite a while before we see a favorable situation but when we do, quite frequently the deck will remain favorable for as many as 5 or 6 (sometimes even more) consecutive hands. Make table minimum bets until the count reaches a true + 2 or more. When the deck goes favorable, double you’re minimum bet and as long as the deck stays at least a true +2 and you keep winning hands, use the following progression, (1,2,3,5,5,7,10). If you lose a hand and the deck is still favorable, revert back to a double minimum bet and start the progression over. If you continue losing hands but the deck is +2 or better, continue betting twice the minimum bet.
Example: you begin betting $25 chips and continue until the deck is true +2 or more. When you begin the progression, your unit size is $50. (twice the minimum bet). So if you win 4 in a row in a +2 or better situation your bets would be 50,100,150,250.
Long losing streaks won’t devastate you because you are only betting 2 units after a loss.
This system provides excellent camouflage but won’t win as much in the long run as using a Kelly but if you string some wins in plus situations, at times it could win a lot more.
Steve Mitchell (Dead link: http://www.blackjackpokermentor.com)
Two axioms relating to gambling that are true are;
No gambling system can convert a losing game into a winning game .Over betting when you have an advantage will result in reducing or losing that advantage.
The Kelly Criterion stipulates that the formula for the ultimate bet is percent advantage times bankroll. Example. You’re a card counter and you come into a situation where you have a true count of +6 which is about a 3% advantage. You have $5000 in risk money available. Your optimum bet is 3% of $5000 or $150. That’s not to say that if you were to bet $200 in situations like this you’d wind up losing in the long run. You’d just win less the more you over bet until you finally over bet so much that you do wind up losing.
I’m not a mathematician but I am a retired computer analyst and I check these things out by writing simulation programs that generate millions of trials. Trust me! It’s true!
Now for the system that works:
Assumtions:
6 deck game
80% penetration
bet spread of 1 to 10+
Usable bankroll relatively infinite since we always manage to replenish it if were to run into hard times.
I’m an accomplished card counter playing with a 1.5% advantage under the above mentioned conditions (proven by 5 million hands simulations). With the help of Peter Griffin’s great book, I have developed a modified version of Thorpe’s Ultimate strategy and have been using it for more than 20 years. (A three level point count and a tens count used concurrently) .
In six deck games it takes quite a while before we see a favorable situation but when we do, quite frequently the deck will remain favorable for as many as 5 or 6 (sometimes even more) consecutive hands. Make table minimum bets until the count reaches a true + 2 or more. When the deck goes favorable, double you’re minimum bet and as long as the deck stays at least a true +2 and you keep winning hands, use the following progression, (1,2,3,5,5,7,10). If you lose a hand and the deck is still favorable, revert back to a double minimum bet and start the progression over. If you continue losing hands but the deck is +2 or better, continue betting twice the minimum bet.
Example: you begin betting $25 chips and continue until the deck is true +2 or more. When you begin the progression, your unit size is $50. (twice the minimum bet). So if you win 4 in a row in a +2 or better situation your bets would be 50,100,150,250.
Long losing streaks won’t devastate you because you are only betting 2 units after a loss.
This system provides excellent camouflage but won’t win as much in the long run as using a Kelly but if you string some wins in plus situations, at times it could win a lot more.
Steve Mitchell (Dead link: http://www.blackjackpokermentor.com)
zengrifter
Banned
Steve, you are a card-counter super-freak! zgsteve mitchell said:
Ps - I see that you corrected the spelling of Kenny's last name in your bio.
You may enjoy reading my interview here -
http://www.blackjackinfo.com/interviews.php
Mikeaber
Well-Known Member
Damn, I wish we had a way to "Flag" some of these posts! It never occurred to me to use a positive progression in conjunction with counting. Oft times, ramped betting looks to be a progression but not as closely as that which was outlined by Mr. Mitchell. I was accused of betting a progression tonight but it wasn't. Just a 1:10 spread with a 6-deck game using KO. I'd bought the dealers each a cheap key chain out in Vegas and they were cutting the deck off very deep!
zengrifter
Banned
When I play with these psuedo-progression for camo I like a neg-progression in a posi-deck and a posi-progression in a neg-deck. BUT these things only add more variance. Best to slam the money out in proportion to the count and then scoot after an hour or so. zg
steve mitchell
New Member
My man!
Hey Zen. I read your interview this morning.
. "My Man!!!. I'm guessing our paths might have crossed in the seventys. I've been to Larry's home, A small single level little home in downtown Vegas. I remember that he looked like the now deceased movie actor Burgess Merridith, who played Rocky's trainer in the Rocky movies. As A data analyst working for the City of LA, I had access to a huge IBM main frame. I worked with him doing simulations as he developed his advanced point count.
If my card counting abilities are still intact, you are about 50 years old now and worked with Larry about 32 years ago when you were a mere boy of 18?
I also was involved in the "George" project (the blackjack computer). I was selling them for $4000 each and teaching people how to use them.
Sorry about misspelling Ken's last name. At my age I misspell my own name most of the time as well.
We need a movie about your life, Zen. I'd cast George Clooney in the present and Leonardo De Caprio in your younger years.
I don't see much on the forum about bonus hunting. Have you gotten your fair share of that bounty yet? I start off my students on Bonus hunting. It gives them a starting bankroll for casino play and to pay me as well. A good bonus hunter has at least a 50% advantage.
Best of luck.
Steve.
Hey Zen. I read your interview this morning.
. "My Man!!!. I'm guessing our paths might have crossed in the seventys. I've been to Larry's home, A small single level little home in downtown Vegas. I remember that he looked like the now deceased movie actor Burgess Merridith, who played Rocky's trainer in the Rocky movies. As A data analyst working for the City of LA, I had access to a huge IBM main frame. I worked with him doing simulations as he developed his advanced point count.If my card counting abilities are still intact, you are about 50 years old now and worked with Larry about 32 years ago when you were a mere boy of 18?
I also was involved in the "George" project (the blackjack computer). I was selling them for $4000 each and teaching people how to use them.
Sorry about misspelling Ken's last name. At my age I misspell my own name most of the time as well.
We need a movie about your life, Zen. I'd cast George Clooney in the present and Leonardo De Caprio in your younger years.
I don't see much on the forum about bonus hunting. Have you gotten your fair share of that bounty yet? I start off my students on Bonus hunting. It gives them a starting bankroll for casino play and to pay me as well. A good bonus hunter has at least a 50% advantage.
Best of luck.
Steve.
zengrifter
Banned
**My responses -
Hey Zen. I read your interview this morning.. "My Man!!!.
**I'm flattered that you are impressed.
I'm guessing our paths might have crossed in the seventys. I've been to Larry's home, A small single level little home in downtown Vegas. I remember that he looked like the now deceased movie actor Burgess Merridith, who played Rocky's trainer in the Rocky movies.
**Yes, Rexford Place down the street from White Cross Drugs. His daughter still lives there and still sells the circa'70s systems.
As A data analyst working for the City of LA, I had access to a huge IBM main frame. I worked with him doing simulations as he developed his advanced point count.
**Yeah? Maybe its your fault that the RAPC'73 doesn't outperform HO2! :laugh:
If my card counting abilities are still intact, you are about 50 years old now and worked with Larry about 32 years ago when you were a mere boy of 18?
**Yes, I was 19 actually when I first approached him - he never knew that I was underage.
We need a movie about your life, Zen. I'd cast George Clooney in the present and Leonardo De Caprio in your younger years.
**My ex-wife says "Sean Penn" is ideal "because he's a bad ass like you..." but I'm better looking than Sean. Title: "Once Upon a Time in the Airwaves"
I don't see much on the forum about bonus hunting. Have you gotten your fair share of that bounty yet? I start off my students on Bonus hunting. It gives them a starting bankroll for casino play and to pay me as well. A good bonus hunter has at least a 50% advantage.
**Naaw, I never pursued it... like video poker - I never was interested in either. After reading Bob Dancer's Million Dollar Video Poker, I wished I had done VP. zg
Hey Zen. I read your interview this morning.
. "My Man!!!. **I'm flattered that you are impressed.
I'm guessing our paths might have crossed in the seventys. I've been to Larry's home, A small single level little home in downtown Vegas. I remember that he looked like the now deceased movie actor Burgess Merridith, who played Rocky's trainer in the Rocky movies.
**Yes, Rexford Place down the street from White Cross Drugs. His daughter still lives there and still sells the circa'70s systems.
As A data analyst working for the City of LA, I had access to a huge IBM main frame. I worked with him doing simulations as he developed his advanced point count.
**Yeah? Maybe its your fault that the RAPC'73 doesn't outperform HO2! :laugh:
If my card counting abilities are still intact, you are about 50 years old now and worked with Larry about 32 years ago when you were a mere boy of 18?
**Yes, I was 19 actually when I first approached him - he never knew that I was underage.
We need a movie about your life, Zen. I'd cast George Clooney in the present and Leonardo De Caprio in your younger years.
**My ex-wife says "Sean Penn" is ideal "because he's a bad ass like you..." but I'm better looking than Sean. Title: "Once Upon a Time in the Airwaves"
I don't see much on the forum about bonus hunting. Have you gotten your fair share of that bounty yet? I start off my students on Bonus hunting. It gives them a starting bankroll for casino play and to pay me as well. A good bonus hunter has at least a 50% advantage.
**Naaw, I never pursued it... like video poker - I never was interested in either. After reading Bob Dancer's Million Dollar Video Poker, I wished I had done VP. zg