How would this betting strategy not work

[aslan]

i do keep track of how i play.winning is my objective ,but after i get comped for my room and meal ,breaking even isnt so bad.i usually play once a month , and over the last three years ,i am up low four figures.not enough to retire or quit my day job, but enough to have fun .i dont risk my bankroll since i only bet my base bet after a loss.even a long losing streak, i only bet the base bet.i dont mind losing a big bet ,since that means i was on a good streak .

I have a friend who plays fairly good basic strategy, and gauges his bet size by his feeling that he is due to win one. He has done remarkably well over the past 4 years during which time I have been following his play. I don't like his prospects for the long run, but I must admit, he's doing very well up to now.

 

[gamblingghost]

I have a friend who plays fairly good basic strategy, and gauges his bet size by his feeling that he is due to win one. He has done remarkably well over the past 4 years during which time I have been following his play. I don't like his prospects for the long run, but I must admit, he's doing very well up to now.

My bet is that he is a counter and his commitment to cover is so good even
Mr. Aslan doesn't know it!:laugh:

 

[aslan]

My bet is that he is a counter and his commitment to cover is so good even
Mr. Aslan doesn't know it!:laugh:

Well, there's always that... If that's the case, he is really good! Sometimes, I almost want to see him lose a really big one, just to reinforce my AP training and mindset, but I can't do that. I can't wish bad luck to my friend,... :joker:and I can't help but hope he strikes at the heart of my arch enemy, that evil scourge of gamblers everywhere, that dour, heartless man who secretly owns half of all the casinos in the world under numerous aliases.
--Sherlock John Aslan Holmes View attachment 7413

 

[gamblingghost]

Well, there's always that... If that's the case, he is really good! Sometimes, I almost want to see him lose a really big one, just to reinforce my AP training and mindset, but I can't do that. I can't wish bad luck to my friend,... :joker:and I can't help but hope he strikes at the heart of my arch enemy, that evil scourge of gamblers everywhere, that dour, heartless man who secretly owns half of all the casinos in the world under numerous aliases.
--Sherlock John Aslan Holmes View attachment 7413

Let me guess! He raises his bet when he wins. Backs off when he loses.
And.... and..... wait for it!!..... he has a four point lose stop thingy!!! If you
say yes............mmmm, I'll try it myself!!!!

 

[aslan]

Let me guess! He raises his bet when he wins. Backs off when he loses.
And.... and..... wait for it!!..... he has a four point lose stop thingy!!! If you
say yes............mmmm, I'll try it myself!!!!

No. He plays one table, then another. Sometimes he raises his bet if he has lost a few, figuring he'll probably hit soon and this way he'll get his money back. If it doesn't go his way, he switches tables. He bets minimum bet a few times. If he loses, he bets minimum bet some more, at least, until he feels that things just have to change. When he gets to the "I'm due" point he raises his bet several units. Man, he's all over the board, playing this table, then that table, betting this bet, then that bet, bobbing and weaving. I don't know what the hell he's doing. Then he plays a little slots, then a little craps. Then he's back to the blackjack table, betting a few $25 or $50, and if he's lucky, ramping it up, but if it turns south, keeping it down. If you can keep up with this guy, you're a better man than I am. Usually, somewhere along the line he finds himself winner and then he says he's pulling up, doesn't want to take a chance on losing what he's already won. I don't know how he does it. I don't think he knows either.

 

[gamblingghost]

No. He plays one table, then another. Sometimes he raises his bet if he has lost a few, figuring he'll probably hit soon and this way he'll get his money back. If it doesn't go his way, he switches tables. He bets minimum bet a few times. If he loses, he bets minimum bet some more, at least, until he feels that things just have to change. When he gets to the "I'm due" point he raises his bet several units. Man, he's all over the board, playing this table, then that table, betting this bet, then that bet, bobbing and weaving. I don't know what the hell he's doing. Then he plays a little slots, then a little craps. Then he's back to the blackjack table, betting a few $25 or $50, and if he's lucky, ramping it up, but if it turns south, keeping it down. If you can keep up with this guy, you're a better man than I am. Usually, somewhere along the line he finds himself winner and then he says he's pulling up, doesn't want to take a chance on losing what he's already won. I don't know how he does it. I don't think he knows either.

I love this story! This is the way I would envision the 'gifted one' would do it!
I have delt at local charities and have seen this technique in action. It is this guy that has all the funny money at the end to bid on everything!

 

[blackjack avenger]

Martin Who?

From my understanding of Blackjack there should be (to a very small amount) anti-streaky. Blackjack games are not memoryless (because of the shoe), and hence not necessarily streak-less. The chance of winning a hand depends on the composition of the shoe, and with an excess of high cards you are more likely to win. However after you did win - which has happened more likely with high cards - the shoe is more likely to have less high cards, and you are more likely to lose. Think of a natural, once you got one (and won the hand), chance of getting another one decreases immediatly (because an ace is removed).
But I don't think such an anti-streaky behaviour can ever be noticed without a very large number of hands played (asking for a sim), or has any practical value in terms of progression systems...

I believe this is known:
On a push or win your expectation goes down because you probably used 10s and As. On a loss your expectation goes up probably because the dealer pulled a multi card hand. Expectation can increase about .1% after a loss in SD. However, even with multiple losses in a row this is very weak information with high variance.

Amusing how this confounds the perfect kelly bettor. As the kelly bettor loses he would bet less, even though as he loses his chances of winning increase! Of course with knowledge of the count his bets would be fairly accurate.

:joker::whip:

 

[blackchipjim]

The system?

I knew of a system that used a double up on wins and had a loss limit of hands in a row. Your five hand loss limit kept you table hopping but without any real plan of attack other than blind luck.

 

[lothariorowe]

Why are there continued betting discussions when it's scientifically impossible to win in the long run? I slaved away days and nights scribbling math formulas in hope of creating a long term fail proof system - but that only lasted as long as I thought there was hope. Once hope is removed from the equation, what's left to chase?

 

[MangoJ]

Why are there continued betting discussions when it's scientifically impossible to win in the long run? I slaved away days and nights scribbling math formulas in hope of creating a long term fail proof system - but that only lasted as long as I thought there was hope. Once hope is removed from the equation, what's left to chase?

System bettor are doomed if you play -EV games. Because the only betting "system" is not to play.
This is no longer true if you have +EV games. Depending on your target, there are several betting systems. If your target is bankroll growth, the betting system optimal is "Kelly betting".

 

[aslan]

Why are there continued betting discussions when it's scientifically impossible to win in the long run? I slaved away days and nights scribbling math formulas in hope of creating a long term fail proof system - but that only lasted as long as I thought there was hope. Once hope is removed from the equation, what's left to chase?

Like you, many must slave away days and nights... for some, only this will convince them, and even then some with limited powers of logic will never give up. Until they come to see the impossibility of a fail proof system as a universal principle, they are condemned to scribble their lives away.

 

[blackjack avenger]

I Agree 100%

If your target is bankroll growth, the betting system optimal is "Kelly betting".

Also, if your target is bankroll preservation and/or certainty of growth then the optimal betting system is a fraction of kelly resizing.

 

[MangoJ]

Yeah right. Full kelly is only handy if you never touch your bankroll (i.e. a bonus for retirement).

I was once on a loss rebate promotion (which is +EV). For loss rebate you do want to lose (then you have value in your rebate), hence you play high odds (i.e. numbers on roulette). However due to lower table max limits, you would normally just hit table max on numbers, until you max out your rebate or hit.

But maxbetting was high variance and viewd higly abusive, so I decided to martingale on number bets, starting rather low and "chasing" my losses for a still decent return on high probability, while keeping total risk (losing all bets) in Kelly regime.

I really like this camo, it makes you look like a true gambler, and gives you somehow a better reason to eventually hit table max (better than flatbetting table max).

 

[blackjack avenger]

Looking is Free to Touch I Have to Charge You

Yeah right. Full kelly is only handy if you never touch your bankroll (i.e. a bonus for retirement).

I don't follow you?

 

[MangoJ]

Sorry my english is not that good. I meant, for full Kelly bets in theory one assumes that the bankroll is used for gambling exclusively (and not for paying the rent).
In the "Kelly world", there isn't such a thing as paying for food and rent. All there is is the game and your bankroll. The only consequence in Kelly world is, that you cut your stakes and recover in the long run.

In the real world, there is no distinction between money for gambling and money for rent. Hence paying rent IS draining your bankroll. But Kelly betting does not respect this drain, and thus must be (at least) sub-optimal (in fact it's catastrophic).

The only exception justifying full Kelly bet is (a) you have additional sources of income which pays food and rent - or (b) it's not your personal money you're gambling :laugh:.
Then your bankroll lives in "Kelly world" and is allowed to fluctuate heavily (but will grow long term), because there is no drain. But without drain you have no personal benefit - until you retire from your job (or from gambling) and are "allowed" to spend your money.

Hence Kelly betting is only a long term investment. My advice, whenever one might need the bankroll for rent in shorter-than-long-term: never bet full Kelly. It's easy to lose a job just tomorrow, especially if your boss finds you "gambling". So one might need the bankroll any time for food and rent, and then one does care what the actual balance is.

 

[leatherguyray]

pogostick ?????

Just curious. What is 1&3? Thanks

 

[Tarzan]

Brilliant!

say table min is 5. every time you lose you double your bet. And everytime you win you bet the minimum. this would mean that everytime you win a hand you will end up with 5 bucks profit. Assuming you have the bankroll to cover for the long streaks of losing hands and repetitive need to continue doubling your bet. You will always come out ahead if you leave after a win. You cant lose every blackjack hand you play for the rest of your life. Or even the rest of the night. The only thing that I can see getting in the way of this is the max bet at the table.

Sounds interesting and maybe you are really onto something here! I don't think anyone has ever thought of anything like that before. What can I say other than load up all the cash you have on hand and get right down to the casino because you are obviously onto a sure winner if I ever saw it...

 

[pogostick]

Just curious. What is 1&3? Thanks

1 & 3 system> Bet one unit ,win bet 3 units ,lose go back to 1 unit. It works good if you can win 3 or 4 hands in a row. You can lose more hands then you win & still come out a winner,but this is no guarantee especially when you win lose ,win lose.

 

[aslan]

Sounds interesting and maybe you are really onto something here! I don't think anyone has ever thought of anything like that before. What can I say other than load up all the cash you have on hand and get right down to the casino because you are obviously onto a sure winner if I ever saw it...

Too late. The system is out. But maybe we can keep it quiet from here on out. Moderators, can you delete the posts in question? This is way too important to let get out to the general public. Thanks, Tarzan. I owe you.

 

[tthree]

If you must entertain idiotic ideas about winning money with progressions rap your mind around this one. It has all the same issues as a martingale(bankroll max bet etc) but it should help with the table max issue.

Bet 1 unit til you win press to 2 units until you win then press to 3units etc
At five units you start to press 2 units every time you win
After 5 wins and presses of 2 units you up your press to 3 units for 5 win/presses then go to 4 unit press etc.


your win/press progression looks like this:
1-2-3-4-5=7-9-11-13-15=18-21-24-27-30=34-38-42-46-50=55-60-65-70-75=81-87-93-99-105=112-119-126-133-140=148-156-164-172-180=189-198-207-216-225=235-245-255-265-275=286-297-308-319-330=342-354-366-378-390=403-416-429-442-465=479-482-496-

You probably reach table max by that point if you have the bankroll to move to higher limit table and continue I trust you understand what would come next. The 5 bet steps are chosen somewhat arbitrarily to make the step up point when your bet is divisible by 5. It may not be optimal.

1) your bet at any time is geared to win no more than 1 unit for the progression if it wins. The bet after losing this(smaller bet due to this criterion) bet and thereafter winning causing a press is the next bigger bet in the list(ie. you win 110 drop to 28(27 behind in progression) lose that bet but eventually win 28 bet, next bet 30)
2) Bet returns to 1 unit once your progression shows a profit(1+ units)


This crazy scheme seems to like blackjack more than other games, with bonus payout for blackjack, chances to split or double down when you are at a player advantage, and the chance to surrender in particularly bad situations. If you have the bankroll to make table limit(who does) you will rarely need it, you may hit it and lose at a small net loss (a little more than twice table limit).

I have fun with these things in moneyfree games but in a casino??????? The real life issues are difficult to justify the attempt.