Blackjack results

[Kasi]

one problem.. there is absolutely no way to even estimate how many hands i played in 10 hours because i only play positive counts.. sure there is an average, lets say 44% of hands, but in 10 hours the variance could be huge, which is why i listed it as so.. hands is more accurate, but not everybody can say "oh, 1000 hands? thats ~X hours".. most people see 5000 hands and think "is that a lot? how many hours?"

Hey, nothing wrong with an average if that's what u think it is.

Of course then, you might have to think about number of hands observed per hour lol.

One alternative is to make a low guess and a high guess and at least figure the range you likely fall into.

Keeping a contemporaneous diary after every session (do you?) with your best guess at the time isn't a bad thing to consider. Later, you can try to group games with similar rules and penetration. I know you like exactitude, and there's nothing wrong with striving for that, but, in reality, we make our best guesses and go with it. It ain't black-and-white, it's grey. But a hundred hours from now, clarity will likely emerge from the grey.

If you want to get anal, make a hash mark on a sheet of paper for each hand you play. What, you think they'll kick you out for card-counting?

If you want to make Monk look like a normal guy, write down a W or L or T instead of a hash mark. Just as easy. Just as quick. Much more accurate.

Or, if you want, continue to believe "there is absolutely no way to even estimate how many hands i played in 10 hours because i only play positive counts."

That way, a hundred, or a thousand, hours from now, you'll still be making excuses.

C'mon buddy. There is no problem that you cannot overcome. You know it and I know it lol.

 

[SilentBob420BMFJ]

Hey, nothing wrong with an average if that's what u think it is.

Of course then, you might have to think about number of hands observed per hour lol.

One alternative is to make a low guess and a high guess and at least figure the range you likely fall into.

Keeping a contemporaneous diary after every session (do you?) with your best guess at the time isn't a bad thing to consider. Later, you can try to group games with similar rules and penetration. I know you like exactitude, and there's nothing wrong with striving for that, but, in reality, we make our best guesses and go with it. It ain't black-and-white, it's grey. But a hundred hours from now, clarity will likely emerge from the grey.

If you want to get anal, make a hash mark on a sheet of paper for each hand you play. What, you think they'll kick you out for card-counting?

If you want to make Monk look like a normal guy, write down a W or L or T instead of a hash mark. Just as easy. Just as quick. Much more accurate.

Or, if you want, continue to believe "there is absolutely no way to even estimate how many hands i played in 10 hours because i only play positive counts."

That way, a hundred, or a thousand, hours from now, you'll still be making excuses.

C'mon buddy. There is no problem that you cannot overcome. You know it and I know it lol.

your the one that wanted this information not me.. besides, everytime i make an estimate on something, somebody gets on my ass.. as for my log, i write down the date, the casino, the result, and the comps

 

[Kasi]

your the one that wanted this information not me.. besides, everytime i make an estimate on something, somebody gets on my ass.. as for my log, i write down the date, the casino, the result, and the comps

No big deal Bob. I think it's absolutely great that you keep a log. Was just suggesting writing the rules of the game, how u played it for how long, etc might add to its value in the long-term. Probably wouldn't take but an extra 30 seconds.
Maybe something like 6D S17 DAS 80%, +RC's only, flat $10, 2 hours.

I know it's hard to tell sometimes but just trying to help lol.