Doubling bet after a losing hand..

[aslan]

But your simulations don't take comps into account,do they?
I'm certainly not advocating progression systems, but an astute comp counter can make some use of them,and in the long run recieve comps that far exceed his cash losses.
I've yet to see anyone factor that into a sim.

I'm not sure what comps you are referring to, but I would prefer not to be wined, dined and lodged on the condition that I lose my money, which is end of all habitual martingalers. And if you're not going to use a martingale habitually, why use it in the first place? Unless.... you're suggesting that one's play is too trivial to add up to the comps being offered. What casino is going to offer that for long? And what's the point? You might just as well play BS on a small scale and enjoy whatever comps you can get. It's a lot less risky.

I had a friend who thought he could beat roulette. He bet $5,000 on the numbers 1-12 and $5.000 on 13-24. He also placed a smaller bet on 0 and double 0. He reasoned that he had about 67% the best of it. The first time he won $10,000, and boy did he feel good. We discussed it after his latest trip to AC and he would not divulge the amount of his loss.

The moral of the story is, you might beat it for a while, but it will sure as h___ catch up with you in the end, and as I said before, maybe even in the beginning---you have NO assurances.

 

[aslan]

I'm extremely skeptical about comp winnings

No offense,my friend,but you don't understand the potential of comps.
Lets say you are a black chipper. You can get your airfare for you and your wife refunded.From NYC,on Jet Blue that would be about $650. But what if your flew first class? Now its about $4,000? Okay?
But how about if you buy tickets on both airlines,use the Jet blue ones but show your host the First Class ones and get $4,000 in cash,then return the fully refundable ticket.Thats about $3400 in your pocket.
How about getting four tix to the hottest boxing match from your host and selling them to a ticket agency for face value? Thats about $800 in your pocket? I could go on,but do you begin to see the possibilities?
You should read "Comp City" by max rubin. It is both eye-opening and highly enlightening.

Why would a casino pay such extraordinary comps for someone who loses very little? It's not good business and I first of all must assume that casinos are in business to make money. Why would they let me fly first class? I might be able to fool them once, but I think the jig would soon be up. I mean no disrespect, but the book you refer to sounds like material the casinos themselves would finance. Comps are much better counted along side winnings than losses. No one should ever embark on a losing propostion (martingaling) in order to acquire side benefits IMHO.

 

[shadroch]

You are entitled to your opinions,but you need to start thinking outside of the box.
See if you can follow this.
You sit at a pretty full $25 table in a busy pit. You buy-in for a grand, give the PB your players card and bet $100. Win or lose,you bet $100 a second and a third time. Now the PB has you down as being a $100 player.
As the pit is busy,he has other things to do. When he leaves you drop your bet to $50,sometimes even $25, while keeping an eye on the PB. As he comes towards your table you bet $100. Its a cat and mouse game.
Additionally,you sit out a few hands when someone messes with the flow,and you take a bathroom break,not to mention leaving the table to have a smoke as a polite gesture to your fellow players and the dealer..
The Pitboss has you down as a $100 bettor,and is giving you credit for about sixty hands an hour.Thats $6,000 in action.
In reality,you are betting $100 maybe 10 hands an hour($1,000),$50 twentyfive hands an hour($1250),and $25 maybe 10 hands an hour($250).
You are betting $2500 an hour but being credited with $6,000.
Over a three day weekend,you are betting $25,000 but being credited with $60,000.
Lets say that the house assumes an average player loses 5%.Thats about 3,000. And they will give about 50% of expected losses back as house comps-rooms,show tix,and food. Thats $1500 worth of comps you can expect .
In reality,as a sharp player,your losses were about 1%. But not of the 60,000 that the casino has you down for,but instead its 1% of $25,000 or $250.

If you could buy $1500 worth of MGM comps on eBay for $250,would you pass it up?
Now you have a nice room,great food,entertainment and you can go play your Advantge Blackjack elsewhere,leaving your legend intact at your host casino.

 

[Rspeirsmlb]

You are the man Shadroch....I never looked at comps that way.

 

[shadroch]

You are the man Shadroch....I never looked at comps that way.

Nor did I until ZG recomended "Comp City". The play I describe is literally a page out of Mr Rubins book.

 

[aslan]

You are entitled to your opinions,but you need to start thinking outside of the box.
See if you can follow this.
You sit at a pretty full $25 table in a busy pit. You buy-in for a grand, give the PB your players card and bet $100. Win or lose,you bet $100 a second and a third time. Now the PB has you down as being a $100 player.
As the pit is busy,he has other things to do. When he leaves you drop your bet to $50,sometimes even $25, while keeping an eye on the PB. As he comes towards your table you bet $100. Its a cat and mouse game.
Additionally,you sit out a few hands when someone messes with the flow,and you take a bathroom break,not to mention leaving the table to have a smoke as a polite gesture to your fellow players and the dealer..
The Pitboss has you down as a $100 bettor,and is giving you credit for about sixty hands an hour.Thats $6,000 in action.
In reality,you are betting $100 maybe 10 hands an hour($1,000),$50 twentyfive hands an hour($1250),and $25 maybe 10 hands an hour($250).
You are betting $2500 an hour but being credited with $6,000.
Over a three day weekend,you are betting $25,000 but being credited with $60,000.
Lets say that the house assumes an average player loses 5%.Thats about 3,000. And they will give about 50% of expected losses back as house comps-rooms,show tix,and food. Thats $1500 worth of comps you can expect .
In reality,as a sharp player,your losses were about 1%. But not of the 60,000 that the casino has you down for,but instead its 1% of $25,000 or $250.

If you could buy $1500 worth of MGM comps on eBay for $250,would you pass it up?
Now you have a nice room,great food,entertainment and you can go play your Advantge Blackjack elsewhere,leaving your legend intact at your host casino.

Just my luck, the PB will hang around. And I don't get to play advantage due to that bathroom break. But in all seriousness, I understand your drift. I didn't realize they computed comps in the way you describe. Were you ever a PB by any chance. :grin:

 

[shadroch]

No,but "Uncle Max" was.:devil:

 

[Mr. T]

All that is said in this cat-and-mouse game is to be a smart mouse. How about the smart cat who is a professional.
Throw away your comp book and find out about the casinos that give good comps.

 

[Knox]

Nice comp discussion, I'll remember that one!

One major weakness I did not see mentioned with the martingale progression was losing a double down. I admit that I only read the first couple of pages then jumped to the end, so sorry I missed it.

This guy who swears by progressions at work tried to use a coin flip analogy to convince me. He wanted me to flip a coin until I got 7 heads or tails in a row to prove how hard it would be to lose using his "system". Needless to say, my opinion of his intellectual ability went down quite a bit.

What happens when you lose a double down? How about two double downs sandwiched around one or two regular lost hands. Now you have lost 5-6 hands in a row much faster than the statistics showed. Not only that, the 1.5% chance of losing 6 hands in a row compounds itself and becomes much higher over time. There is a large cumulative effect to the probability you are banking on.

 

[GeorgeD]

Nice comp discussion, I'll remember that one!

This guy who swears by progressions at work tried to use a coin flip analogy to convince me. He wanted me to flip a coin until I got 7 heads or tails in a row to prove how hard it would be to lose using his "system". Needless to say, my opinion of his intellectual ability went down quite a bit.

I can see how a coin toss analogy can make people think progressions can win, but if you look at the logic, it's a losing proposition in BJ ....... or any casino game

As kids we probably all knew a guy who wanted to flip a coin, and then talk you into double or nothing when he lost ("come on, give me a chance to get my money back"), then he'd end the game when he was even, or better yet ahead. Often when he won the first flip or two he would walk with your money. If you were stupid enough to *always* fall for this (and he was usually the bigger kid) he would take your money in the long run.

Problem is: 1) BJ isn't a 50/50 game and 2) Your BR or the table max can't sustain you through enough doubling loses to **always** wind up at least even. When you hit those limits, your losses are usually huge; when you walk away a winner you're probably only ahead a few units.

If you could always walk ahead or "double or nothing" until even like the coin toss, you could win some money. Unfortunately it can't happen except as short term voodoo luck.

I know most of the regulars here understand this, I just can't imagine why I see an occasional idiot playing martingales or arguing it here. Can't they even grasp the logic?

 

[Kasi]

I know most of the regulars here understand this, I just can't imagine why I see an occasional idiot playing martingales or arguing it here. Can't they even grasp the logic?

While I think I understand that no betting system will win in the long run, I also recognize that some betting systems will, indeed, increase your chances of winning x units with a bankroll of y units betting z flat units compared to other betting systems.

How would you flat bet baccarat with a $1000 bankroll if your goal is to win 20% before u lose 100% and what would those chances be?

If u had a $1024 bankroll and u'd be paid $1MM if u finished $1 ahead in the next 10 hands, would u martingdale or flat bet $1?

Call me an idiot but, to me, it just depends on winning goals and bankroll units and time to win whatever in how long while realizing betting exactly that way will eventually make u lose.

Now, insisting the same progression will win u money in the long run, like u say, is pretty ridiculous.

 

[GeorgeD]

While I think I understand that no betting system will win in the long run, I also recognize that some betting systems will, indeed, increase your chances of winning x units with a bankroll of y units betting z flat units compared to other betting systems.

How would you flat bet baccarat with a $1000 bankroll if your goal is to win 20% before u lose 100% and what would those chances be?

If u had a $1024 bankroll and u'd be paid $1MM if u finished $1 ahead in the next 10 hands, would u martingdale or flat bet $1?

Call me an idiot but, to me, it just depends on winning goals and bankroll units and time to win whatever in how long while realizing betting exactly that way will eventually make u lose.

Now, insisting the same progression will win u money in the long run, like u say, is pretty ridiculous.

If you have certain "make it or break it" goals I can see where a progression will give you a better chance of making your goal. Problem is you have to accept that the "break it" might happen. I'm OK with that (after all it's your money), but so many progression players seem to believe the method has long term winning potential. To me *those* are the idiots, not somebody who knows what he's getting into with progressions.

 

[NDN21]

Doubling

Nice comp discussion, I'll remember that one!

One major weakness I did not see mentioned with the martingale progression was losing a double down. I admit that I only read the first couple of pages then jumped to the end, so sorry I missed it.

This guy who swears by progressions at work tried to use a coin flip analogy to convince me. He wanted me to flip a coin until I got 7 heads or tails in a row to prove how hard it would be to lose using his "system". Needless to say, my opinion of his intellectual ability went down quite a bit.

What happens when you lose a double down? How about two double downs sandwiched around one or two regular lost hands. Now you have lost 5-6 hands in a row much faster than the statistics showed. Not only that, the 1.5% chance of losing 6 hands in a row compounds itself and becomes much higher over time. There is a large cumulative effect to the probability you are banking on.

Or how about splitting? If he doesn't have enough money to split (under the proper circumstances, of course) there goes his BS as well.

That kid just didn't seem to understand about progressions. The one thing I didn't read from him was the effect of this "starting over" that he wrote about. He said after, say four losses he began his martingale over because he had done the smart thing and "set a limit". He didn't write about losing four hands, starting the martingale a the minimum bet again, and continuing to lose. It was a losing streak was always followed by an eventual win to get you back ahead a little bit and it always stopped there and that was the point of his post.

He also avoided having many, many 2-3 loss streaks with only a win here and there which is how blackjack goes alot of the time. The effect of that would he that he would have avoided the big loss but still be down overall.

And I got the feeling that he treated each session as different. That is if he lost $700 one session, $350 another, then finally won $650 he treated it as though he were actually "ahead" $650 instead of down $400 overall.

Why do so many people come on here and spout about some researched (sometimes even three sessions worth of data!!!) tactics, like they have come across something that professionals have somehow overlooked and they, due to their superior intellect, were able to unlock secrets of aspects that were never considered before?

 

[ihate17]

Double or nothing

I can see how a coin toss analogy can make people think progressions can win, but if you look at the logic, it's a losing proposition in BJ ....... or any casino game

As kids we probably all knew a guy who wanted to flip a coin, and then talk you into double or nothing when he lost ("come on, give me a chance to get my money back"), then he'd end the game when he was even, or better yet ahead. Often when he won the first flip or two he would walk with your money. If you were stupid enough to *always* fall for this (and he was usually the bigger kid) he would take your money in the long run.

Problem is: 1) BJ isn't a 50/50 game and 2) Your BR or the table max can't sustain you through enough doubling loses to **always** wind up at least even. When you hit those limits, your losses are usually huge; when you walk away a winner you're probably only ahead a few units.

If you could always walk ahead or "double or nothing" until even like the coin toss, you could win some money. Unfortunately it can't happen except as short term voodoo luck.

I know most of the regulars here understand this, I just can't imagine why I see an occasional idiot playing martingales or arguing it here. Can't they even grasp the logic?

George
The problem with your double or nothing analogy is the same thing that is wrong with martingale. When the eventual real long losing streak comes in coin flipping or blackjack, and it always comes, you will either run out of money to double up again (no bankroll left) or your opponent will no longer be willing to accept your bet (over table max). So you must lose big periodicaly.

ihate17

 

[GeorgeD]

George
The problem with your double or nothing analogy is the same thing that is wrong with martingale. When the eventual real long losing streak comes in coin flipping or blackjack, and it always comes, you will either run out of money to double up again (no bankroll left) or your opponent will no longer be willing to accept your bet (over table max). So you must lose big periodicaly.

ihate17

Maybe I wasn't clear.

A double or nothing coin flip strategy will win you money IF your opponent AND your bankroll always lets you bet double or nothing after a loss, AND if you always quit when even or ahead. I agree that's not the case in BJ ... even if you have an unlimited bankroll you hit the table limits and can't double so suffer a loss. In the reality of BJ it will lead to some wins and a possible BIG loss.

The memory kids flipping coins for $.25 and going double or nothing is what deludes people into thinking it will work in a BJ game.

 

[ScottH]

A double or nothing coin flip strategy will win you money IF your opponent AND your bankroll always lets you bet double or nothing after a loss

That's a pretty big IF...

 

[ihate17]

I lost 26 or perhaps it was 25 or 27 in a row!

I have had 4 losing streaks in 30 years that were about 20 hands in a row or more and that is not counting a double or split loss as two hands and also not counting a push at all.
Without doing the math, just figure my last bet on 26 in a row when my minimum bet is generally $50. Something around the GNP of a mid sized country but definately more than my bankroll and more than the bankroll of the richest casino. It is not that I do not think martingale can not work, I know it.

ihate17

 

[Cardcounter]

By the 23 rd loss your looking at $43,000,000

If that was true by the 23 rd loss you are looking at somewhere around $43 million dollars to make up for your $15 intial bet. That is a price that most people can't afford to lose. If you had that much money to lose you should just buy your own casino.

 

[Kasi]

One major weakness I did not see mentioned with the martingale progression was losing a double down.

Actually I rarely have seen a Martingdale applied to BJ, perhaps for that very reason. It seems to generally be applied to even-money payoff bets that are independent of prior events.

Guess that would have to be defined in ur betting system.

Easy to say you'll eventually lose, and u will, but a little harder to say how long a certain bankroll might last betting in such-a-such way with a goal of whatever.

And of course bet variation is never allowed in any analysis of how long a bankroll might last.

 

[Moon 111]

After reading your post I dicided to make a simple sim. I let this simple sim run until it lost. The simed player started with $100,000 and with a minimum bet of $1. You think he cant lose? well he did. These are the numbers:

Highest amount of cash reached: $150,000 +/-
Number of hands played before reaching $150,000: 100,000
Number of hands played before losing: 557261
House edge: 0.0%
Highest bet: $65,536

Oh and if the player doesnt have enough money to double the bet he goes back down to $1.

This just proves that if your careful you can earn $50,000 in 100,000 hands although if your playing 50 hands an hour your only earning $25 an hour. So now next time you have 100 grand lying around you know what to do with it :devil: