How many people keep track of results?

[Automatic Monkey]

Exactly

Otherwise, how does anyone ever have a friggin' clue of whether they are merely unlucky or, perhaps, simply put, just really suck?...

Whoa, just one thing, you cannot rely on accounting to tell you whether or not you are playing a winning game. The N0 of these games is 10,000-20,000 hands and results for measurements of shorter length than that are random. If you play that many hands in a bad way all your money might be gone by then. If you try and make that judgment based on less than an N0 you'll be basing your estimation of your game on a random number.

In other words, you need to know whether or not you're playing a winning game before you sit down at the table.

A good use for accounting is as Shadroch says, keeping track of expenses tipping drinking etc., because these are expenses you really can control, unlike the randomness built into the game. But what I would do is track the expenses relative to the EV of the play, not the results, because we only want the accounting to include things we can do something about (and playing games with higher EV is something we can do) and not let good or bad variance deceive us. If you play a session with EV of $50 and have fantastically good variance and win $2500, tipping $25 is not the way to go, because it may seem like a 1% tip but in reality it's a 50% tip.

 

[SilentBob420BMFJ]

i only write down my end result.. i used to write down the hours i played too, but since i wong now, thats kind of hard..

 

[nightspirit]

zg, the links doesn't work...

 

[Automatic Monkey]

i only write down my end result.. i used to write down the hours i played too, but since i wong now, thats kind of hard..

Not at all, your Wonging play has a definable EV per hand or hour just like play-all.

 

[blackchipjim]

tracking

I geuss I'm not as through as I should be as far as tracking goes. I just track starts and ending amounts totals. I track my results for overall win or loss for the month and year. I do remember quite accuratly that my best wins seem to start with only forty bucks. I can't explain why but it just happens more times than not. blackchipjim

 

[zengrifter]

zg, the links doesn't work...

Try again. zg

 

[nightspirit]

Try again. zg

Thanks!

 

[SilentBob420BMFJ]

Not at all, your Wonging play has a definable EV per hand or hour just like play-all.

yes, but if the count is bad for 45 out of 60 minutes, and i lose $100, that is not the same as the count being good for 45 out of 60 minutes, and me losing $100.. EV is the long run, and i sure as hell dont play enuf to have thousands of trips written down to average it all out

 

[rogue1]

One really good thing to note!

I always make sure to make a note if a particular dealer gives exceptionally good pen-way important. That's a dealer to REMEMBER!

 

[Automatic Monkey]

yes, but if the count is bad for 45 out of 60 minutes, and i lose $100, that is not the same as the count being good for 45 out of 60 minutes, and me losing $100.. EV is the long run, and i sure as hell dont play enuf to have thousands of trips written down to average it all out

The count is on the average always going to be bad for 45 minutes out of 60 whether you have any money down on the table or not.

You calculate the EV for a Wonging game just like for a play-all game with two exceptions:

1. When you don't have an advantage, your bet is zero.

2. When a shoe gets really bad (usually TC= -1 in level 1 and TC=-2 in level 2 systems) you tell the dealer to shuffle the bad count away. Well, not really, but you just walk over to another shoe where the dealer has just shuffled and count that one. It's the same thing.

 

[Kasi]

Whoa, just one thing, you cannot rely on accounting to tell you whether or not you are playing a winning game. The N0 of these games is 10,000-20,000 hands and results for measurements of shorter length than that are random. If you play that many hands in a bad way all your money might be gone by then. If you try and make that judgment based on less than an N0 you'll be basing your estimation of your game on a random number.
In other words, you need to know whether or not you're playing a winning game before you sit down at the table.

My understanding of N0 is that one's results will be within one standard deviation of expected results over that many hands. Is that yours?

If one keeps no records how will one know if one's results are reasonable after an N0 number of hands?

If one is down 4 standard deviations in 5000 hands in a game with an N0 of 10,000 hands, would one really attribute those results to "bad luck"? At that point it would not be difficult to figure out just how "good" one's results would have to be over the next 5000 hands to meet my definition of N0. Perhaps still time, while one may still have a bankroll, to take a fresh look at things.

So, yes, I firmly believe that accounting can give a very good idea of whether one is playing a winning game and that results from a fewer number of hands are anything but "random".

I can think of no reason at all why any serious card-counter risking a bankroll would not keep detailed track of results.

10,000 hands may seem far away but, if you're gonna play them, record them.

Of course one problem might be to only include results of a similar game with identical bet spreads, etc.

How many of u guys that do keep detailed records actually try to compute your results in terms of standard deviation? And, if you do, how often?

 

[sagefr0g]

......My understanding of N0 is that one's results will be within one standard deviation of expected results over that many hands. Is that yours?........

http://www.dictionaryofgambling.com/gambling_terms/all_gambling_terms/n/

 

[SilentBob420BMFJ]

my log just has the final result, not a date or hours played.. but i only play blackjack.. its the most important stat you can keep, because if you are down a lot (relative to your bankroll), you can think "i need to either get a bigger bankroll, find a way to increase my advantage, or quit"

 

[Kasi]

http://www.dictionaryofgambling.com/gambling_terms/all_gambling_terms/n/

Thanks once again O Wise Frog

I didn't state it as precisely as that but that's what I was thinking!

How many times has a princess kissed you and you turned into a prince anyway?!

 

[Kasi]

my log just has the final result, not a date or hours played.. but i only play blackjack.. its the most important stat you can keep, because if you are down a lot (relative to your bankroll), you can think "i need to either get a bigger bankroll, find a way to increase my advantage, or quit"

That's OK.

And it's great you are keeping track of results in any way, shape or form.

All I can suggest is that, over time, you consider a way to more precisely define "alot", etc.

After all, being down 20 units after 20 hours is not the same thing as being down 20 units after 100 hours, even though in both cases you have lost the same percentage of your bankroll. (assuming same game played in same way etc)

Just a thought to perhaps inspire you to ever greater detail. And I think you are a guy who likes detail.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

My understanding of N0 is that one's results will be within one standard deviation of expected results over that many hands. Is that yours?

If one keeps no records how will one know if one's results are reasonable after an N0 number of hands?

If one is down 4 standard deviations in 5000 hands ...

...one no longer has a bankroll. What good is accounting then?

The problem with BJ is that you can have a full Kelly bankroll and play perfectly and still lose it all 13% of the time and that is a fully unremarkable percentage. If the next three cards you are dealt are red, would you consider that odd or worth investigating? That's about the same odds as going bankrupt playing perfectly at full Kelly.

 

[sagefr0g]

Thanks once again O Wise Frog

......How many times has a princess kissed you and you turned into a prince anyway?!

thank God never but i've had a lot of double downs on 11 where i get the ace :joker:

 

[SilentBob420BMFJ]

That's OK.

And it's great you are keeping track of results in any way, shape or form.

All I can suggest is that, over time, you consider a way to more precisely define "alot", etc.

After all, being down 20 units after 20 hours is not the same thing as being down 20 units after 100 hours, even though in both cases you have lost the same percentage of your bankroll. (assuming same game played in same way etc)

Just a thought to perhaps inspire you to ever greater detail. And I think you are a guy who likes detail.

um, its relative to what you think; why would i define what everybody else thinks? if i said "if you are down a lot ($1000).." would that be a lot to u? what about me? the next person? etc.. yes i do like detail, but whats the point you know? things change so much that i would have to have a seperate log for $3 (no longer available), $5, $10, then 6 deck, 8 deck, the casino, it would get too confusing.. alls i want to know is, how am i doing..

 

[Kasi]

...one no longer has a bankroll. What good is accounting then?.

I'll just take your statement that, generally speaking, you do not believe in "accounting", at all. And, that it is a waste of time, to record any results whatsoever? Would that be correct?

Just as I was, generally speaking, pulling numbers out of the air to try to indicate one has nothing to lose by making the attempt anyway.

While, I'm guessing, if I actually did this stuff, I'd probably tend to, or at least try to, analyze each and every session, thinking to myself "what's the harm?" And probably combine results, at least that's how I imagine it, for similar games with similar bet spreads and penetrations as I go along, I recognize that apparently I may be one of the few way "out there" on the bell-shaped curve having recorded the results of a few hundred thousand internet hands lol.

So, yeah, maybe I suffer from OCD and I don't wish that on anyone lol.

Although, even I have never cared if the next 3 cards are red

In fact, sometimes I think I don't "do this stuff" just because it would be such a pain in the ass to keep accurate records and it would drive me absolutely crazy whether I was "unlucky" or "sucked" or maybe just was doing something differently than what I originally thought that might explain any results.

Anyway, good luck to you and may your faith in your original system(s) remain unshakeable!

 

[Kasi]

whats the point you know? things change so much that i would have to have a seperate log for $3 (no longer available), $5, $10, then 6 deck, 8 deck,

Exactly.

Perhaps in both units and dollars.

Especially units, the more so since you seem to be basically a flat-better.

Like you play 10000 hands at $3 and finish net 1000 units ahead, up a cool $3K.

Then you play 10000 more hands exactly the same way in exactly the same game at $10 and finish 400 units down. And you're now broke having lost your original $1K roll.

You've now played 20,000 hands, up 600 units, luckier than a hobo finding a ham sandwich, but you're broke.

What are going to think to yourself - "man, I can't believe how lucky I was, even though I'm broke"??

I doubt it.

or "I can't believe how unbelievably unlucky I was"?

Even though you weren't.

or "I suck because perhaps I overbet"?

Exactly what have you learned by merely knowing "how I am doing?"

You know you're broke but that's all you know.