Locking in Profits???

[aslan]

Let's say you're playing a $25 table, two hands. Let's say the count goes plus 4 and above and you are betting $200 a hand and you get lucky and win several hands including some with splits and double downs in a row so that you are up, say, $2,000. The count is still high, say, +11.

What I did in this instance is reduce my bet to $100 a hand. Why? For one thing, to lock in my profits. For another thing, I know that even in plus counts, the odds are that the dealer will win more hands than the player. I have had a nice run of wins, but I don't want to tempt fate or get greedy. Am I thinking wrong? Formerly, I used to follow the counter's script religiously, and often found myself winning big, only to lose it all back by the end of the shoe. Now that I have modified my betting behavior, I seem to be doing a lot better. Am I just lucky, or is it a prudent policy to lock in profits? I'd especially like to hear from experienced players. Theories are fine, but I'm more interested in where the rubber meets the road, that is, what have you found that works best for you?

 

[callipygian]

What do you mean by "lock in"?

If you play for a sufficiently long time, every single hand looks like one long blackjack session. Only if you care what your single trip result is like would you want to lock in a win.

That being said, if locking in a win for the short term makes you feel happier as a general psychological win, maybe it'd be worth it.

 

[sagefr0g]

Let's say you're playing a $25 table, two hands. Let's say the count goes plus 4 and above and you are betting $200 a hand and you get lucky and win several hands including some with splits and double downs in a row so that you are up, say, $2,000. The count is still high, say, +11.

What I did in this instance is reduce my bet to $100 a hand. Why? For one thing, to lock in my profits. For another thing, I know that even in plus counts, the odds are that the dealer will win more hands than the player. I have had a nice run of wins, but I don't want to tempt fate or get greedy. Am I thinking wrong? Formerly, I used to follow the counter's script religiously, and often found myself winning big, only to lose it all back by the end of the shoe. Now that I have modified my betting behavior, I seem to be doing a lot better. Am I just lucky, or is it a prudent policy to lock in profits? I'd especially like to hear from experienced players. Theories are fine, but I'm more interested in where the rubber meets the road, that is, what have you found that works best for you?

of course your wrong doing that voodoo and you know it! lol.
that said i'm in total agreement and do it sometimes and other variations of that theme as well. lmao.
IMHO it's a more complicated issue than the ' game of blackjack is just one big long game' view point. i think it's only one big long game if you play the same way every time for a long time. so but what your doing will slow you down getting to N0 but you know that. and if your playing at an advantage there's no reason to ever quit or to not bet according to Hoyle, but then you know that as well. but you also know that you could get ruined doing so.
it can have implications for your ROR as well. the question of how is hard to say because there is probably the question of how consistently are you going to vary from Hoyle in the long run. just as over betting can raise your ROR under betting can do so as well. you could however protect your self in that sense by watching your bottom line and results and holding those results up against the yardstick of what a perfect player should realize for the same number of rounds played. and then going back to proper orthodox betting accordingly if your off that mark.
then there is the psychological benifit arguement for doing what your suggesting and the benifit to your hippocampus. http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showpost.php?p=96637&postcount=5 which your aware of as well. (your body & mind probably scream it to you continuously).
so those are just things you want to take into consideration as far as do you want to do that voodoo.
one thing i think about is the issue of the question of is the ' game of blackjack is just one big long game' view point. to me it's not, i should think that for a professional it probably is. me i don't play enough or play consistently enough for it to likely ever be one big long game. but one thing i do know is for some game what a perfect player could expect to make if he was playing one big long game. if i do any where near that 'ideal' dude i'm happy and will quit or lower a bet in a heart beat to like you say lock that money in. i could care less about being greedy but i want that money and i want it now not in some fuzzy date in the future lmao. but i'll take it in the future if need be lmao.
thing is when you do something to lock that money in you don't know maybe you guessed it right and you just avoided some negative fluctuation or maybe not and you just didn't win a bunch more loot. so to me it's just a matter of deciding on the spot which is more important to you. so but this fluctuation stuff is another consideration. one of four things could happen with it (maybe more), you could win a whole lot, you could win a 'decent' amount, you could lose a little or your could lose a whole lot (maybe enough to ruin your bankroll). me i prefer to win a 'decent' amount or lose a little for any given session. i'm an imperfect player even when i try to do it right. if i was a perfect player who could do so painlessly maybe i'd see it differently. and yeah if you do this over and over there is the idea that everything should smooth out and you'll eventually hit some big losing session or sessions or have a bunch of little losing sessions to smooth it out sort of thing. maybe that's right but i'm not sure it's written in stone. maybe if your as inconsistent as i am or maybe if you switch up what you do then perhaps it's harder for that smoothing process to happen. maybe it'll happen to some body else instead of you lol. so if it's all just one big game after all. then maybe this question could come into play.
http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showpost.php?p=94931&postcount=51
http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showpost.php?p=98942&postcount=164
point being are there things that can happen that maybe a simulation wouldn't expect? or if you don't play that much isn't it true that 'in the short run anything can happen'? if that's the case might it be possible for your judgement and thoughtful actions to help that anything along?
maybe those questions can become considerations if your blackjack play is no big deal and nothing life changing sort of thing instead of being a professional.
so a bunch of speculation on my part. thing is did you notice in that one link that went to QFIT's blackjack book page about having quiting points (and i would think it could relate to underbetting as well) that says "Obviously, if you play out the shoe or wait for the count to drop back before ending the session, you won't see any decrease."
http://www.blackjackincolor.com/useless1.htm
the point being what your doing may slow you down reaching your long term expectation but you could still get there. the biggest worry would be that you increase your ROR by underbetting. if your gonna do that voodoo stuff you should definately play against a yard stick and guard that bottom line so as to not wade into a ROR over your head.

 

[Traveller]

I'm not sure i agree with some of the previous post.

To be honest with you, i don't think it is going to make any difference to your risk of ruin if you bet smaller because you are winning enough. I personally would not reduce my bet in these circumstances as the chances of losing/winning more today at +11 when you are up 2k are the same as losing/winning if you come back tomorrow and get another +11.

However if you feel that you have reached a point where winning more might bring unwanted attention then it might be best to call it a day. This is something that is hard to judge as it is sometimes hard to tell what the pit is thinking. They might be happy for you that you did well.

If you reduce your wager you are still betting in an advantageous count and as a one off it will only cost you your EV on the difference for the remainder of that positive count.

If you make a habit of doing this however then you need to go away and recalculate you EV and your ROR based on the predominant spread you are playing.

T.

 

[aslan]

of course your wrong doing that voodoo and you know it! lol.
that said i'm in total agreement and do it sometimes and other variations of that theme as well. lmao.
IMHO it's a more complicated issue than the ' game of blackjack is just one big long game' view point. i think it's only one big long game if you play the same way every time for a long time. so but what your doing will slow you down getting to N0 but you know that. and if your playing at an advantage there's no reason to ever quit or to not bet according to Hoyle, but then you know that as well. but you also know that you could get ruined doing so.
it can have implications for your ROR as well. the question of how is hard to say because there is probably the question of how consistently are you going to vary from Hoyle in the long run. just as over betting can raise your ROR under betting can do so as well. you could however protect your self in that sense by watching your bottom line and results and holding those results up against the yardstick of what a perfect player should realize for the same number of rounds played. and then going back to proper orthodox betting accordingly if your off that mark.
then there is the psychological benifit arguement for doing what your suggesting and the benifit to your hippocampus. http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showpost.php?p=96637&postcount=5 which your aware of as well. (your body & mind probably scream it to you continuously).
so those are just things you want to take into consideration as far as do you want to do that voodoo.
one thing i think about is the issue of the question of is the ' game of blackjack is just one big long game' view point. to me it's not, i should think that for a professional it probably is. me i don't play enough or play consistently enough for it to likely ever be one big long game. but one thing i do know is for some game what a perfect player could expect to make if he was playing one big long game. if i do any where near that 'ideal' dude i'm happy and will quit or lower a bet in a heart beat to like you say lock that money in. i could care less about being greedy but i want that money and i want it now not in some fuzzy date in the future lmao. but i'll take it in the future if need be lmao.
thing is when you do something to lock that money in you don't know maybe you guessed it right and you just avoided some negative fluctuation or maybe not and you just didn't win a bunch more loot. so to me it's just a matter of deciding on the spot which is more important to you. so but this fluctuation stuff is another consideration. one of four things could happen with it (maybe more), you could win a whole lot, you could win a 'decent' amount, you could lose a little or your could lose a whole lot (maybe enough to ruin your bankroll). me i prefer to win a 'decent' amount or lose a little for any given session. i'm an imperfect player even when i try to do it right. if i was a perfect player who could do so painlessly maybe i'd see it differently. and yeah if you do this over and over there is the idea that everything should smooth out and you'll eventually hit some big losing session or sessions or have a bunch of little losing sessions to smooth it out sort of thing. maybe that's right but i'm not sure it's written in stone. maybe if your as inconsistent as i am or maybe if you switch up what you do then perhaps it's harder for that smoothing process to happen. maybe it'll happen to some body else instead of you lol. so if it's all just one big game after all. then maybe this question could come into play.
http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showpost.php?p=94931&postcount=51
http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showpost.php?p=98942&postcount=164
point being are there things that can happen that maybe a simulation wouldn't expect? or if you don't play that much isn't it true that 'in the short run anything can happen'? if that's the case might it be possible for your judgement and thoughtful actions to help that anything along?
maybe those questions can become considerations if your blackjack play is no big deal and nothing life changing sort of thing instead of being a professional.
so a bunch of speculation on my part. thing is did you notice in that one link that went to QFIT's blackjack book page about having quiting points (and i would think it could relate to underbetting as well) that says "Obviously, if you play out the shoe or wait for the count to drop back before ending the session, you won't see any decrease."
http://www.blackjackincolor.com/useless1.htm
the point being what your doing may slow you down reaching your long term expectation but you could still get there. the biggest worry would be that you increase your ROR by underbetting. if your gonna do that voodoo stuff you should definately play against a yard stick and guard that bottom line so as to not wade into a ROR over your head.

There is one other way to look at it. Instead of thinking of it as one long run forever game, remember that each and every time you start a new session, the game has no memory of past performance, and the "long run" begins anew. Therefore, if you "lock in" a profit, you have completed one "long run" and you are about to begin another. If during that "long run" you have occasion to "lock in" another profit, you can start anew, and the odds are again the very same as when you began the very first time. The cards have no memory, but my stomach that feeds on the "locked in" profit does. It just seems to make more sense to quit winners, than to consider it all one "long run" and not care whether you are winner or loser for the trip. If you wait until you can quit loser every trip, guess what? No matter how well you do in the long run, you'll always be a loser! Voodoo? I think not.

If you begin having losing trips, trips where you never have an opportunity to quit winner, it is not because you failed to bet the max bet in previous trips. The cards have no memory. If you failed a hundred times in the past to maximize your winnings, actually, to give yourself a chance to maximize your winnings because sometimes you would actually be incurring a loss, it still does not influence future events, again because the cards have no memory. Therefore, I am not hurting my chances of winning in the future in any way, because the odds are always the same from every point forward. All I did was fail to take a chance to make more money when the odds were very slightly in my favor. That is not a fatal behavior. I was hoping to make a thousand dollar win and as it turned out I made a $2,300 win. I was happy for the trip.

I have another practice as well. I will only lose so much on any given trip. That does not mean that I won't have a hundred losing trips in a row (although it is highly unlikely because long runs come more frequently than that), but it does mean that I am metering out the amount of pain that I will allow myself to feel at any given time. In this I am also looking at the short run, however my mind and body do not see it that way. They can only take so much punishment at a time, so in effect, I am protecting my self by these behaviors and am able to maintain a healthy positive mental outlook through the worst of times.

 

[Traveller]

In response to walking away losing every time, this is akin to trying to walk away winning everytime. If you play the correct way, make the correct betting and playing decisions then a time will occur when you will get ahead from the off and never fall behind again.

In the end the total ammount you win will be determined by the number of hours you play and the ammount you bet.

If you choose not to believe in this rationale then go ahead and keep quitting and reduce your hours to whatever it is you want to play. Then come back in a years time with your win for 500 hrs play and you will find the rest of us already clocking up 1000 hrs + at an equivalent win rate per hour.

T.

 

[aslan]

I'm not sure i agree with some of the previous post.

To be honest with you, i don't think it is going to make any difference to your risk of ruin if you bet smaller because you are winning enough. I personally would not reduce my bet in these circumstances as the chances of losing/winning more today at +11 when you are up 2k are the same as losing/winning if you come back tomorrow and get another +11.

However if you feel that you have reached a point where winning more might bring unwanted attention then it might be best to call it a day. This is something that is hard to judge as it is sometimes hard to tell what the pit is thinking. They might be happy for you that you did well.

If you reduce your wager you are still betting in an advantageous count and as a one off it will only cost you your EV on the difference for the remainder of that positive count.

If you make a habit of doing this however then you need to go away and recalculate you EV and your ROR based on the predominant spread you are playing.

T.

I only do it when circumstances are right. In this case, I had been playing for many hours over two days, losing hour after hour, and then it finally turned my way. I achieved more than my expectation, plus I couldn't face the prospect of losing it all back after all the grief that I had to go through to get there. So I got conservative and locked in some of my profits. As it turned out, and as it usually does, the dealer won more hands than I did after that. Normally the dealer will win more hands than the player even in positive counts, and this was no exception. The advantage is that the player will win naturals, double downs and splits, and the dealer will bust more than normal if he gets a bustable hand. He'll still win more hands on average. I already had my fill of splits and double downs, althoug hmore could possibly be coming. Anyway, locking in my profit could have cost me a little more profit, but it has no effect on future play, since the cards have no memory of past performance.

 

[Kasi]

Theories are fine, but I'm more interested in where the rubber meets the road, that is, what have you found that works best for you?

I'm not mad at you but I just lost my post twice in thaty Bermuda triangle of re-submissin, I guess I failed to copy to memory twice. Which really just piss*s me off.

Anyway, the long and short of it was, what the hel* are you thinking about? I said it much nicer before lol.

R u really asking for some kind of blessing betting 2 hands of $200 at +4 and, after winning a few for $2K, how great it is to change to a $100 bet in +11? What would you have done if you had lost a few $200 hands? Bet a few $2K hands to make it up. Maybe only bet them in any + count? Maybe wait for a huge + count to bet them?

Officially I hate it.

Unofficially, I love it. Did it for years, but without CC'ing. I call that "Pure Voodoo" since every hand played was -EV. Do it even now, in real life, while even counting the silly cards, but I just call it "Impure Voodoo" even though I do pretty much the same thing except when I do it, I actually know the count is +. Other wise persons may call it fuzzy betting.

When I look in the mirror, I see you. Same method, different $unit. I don't call it what I do some kind of AP cr*p just because I occasionally choose to overbet my roll in a +count, and, if i win, cut back. I know I'm doing it when I do it, the ultimate roll I am betting to I am willing to lose is meaningless to me. I made that decision before I played.

Justify this betting pattern from some sort of AP point of view. Otherwise, just join me and froggy who have the honesty to call basically the same thing some sort of negative term somewhere between Voodoo and Fuzzy.

How come he and I get all the cr*p and this stuff you propose needs an opinion lmao?

Next time, just bet $10, better yet $1, instead of $100 in the +11 count and lock in even more profits. That's even smarter.

Yep, time for bed lmao.

 

[Buzzer]

What's the use?

For another thing, I know that even in plus counts, the odds are that the dealer will win more hands than the player.

If the above statement is true, what good is card counting? Raising bets would not increase EV, just hasten the doom.

 

[Mimosine]

If the above statement is true, what good is card counting? Raising bets would not increase EV, just hasten the doom.

the above statement is true, though aslan forgot to mention the power of 3:2 payouts, and more chances for successful double downs and splits in high counts. *tsk tsk*

 

[21forme]

the above statement is true, though aslan forgot to mention the power of 3:2 payouts, and more chances for successful double downs and splits in high counts. *tsk tsk*

Bingo.

Aslan, practice voodoo if it makes you feel better. However, the biggest mistake a counter can make is walking away from a positive count.

 

[creeping panther]

Aslan, Sage

Aslan,

The point is you still were using a 1 to 4 spread on 2 hands, you did not back down entirely, and psychologically this is what you felt you needed after several wins.

If this made you comfortable so be it.

Last weekend on DD I had a +17 at the near end of a fine slipper and I mauled it with a blood lust, no backing down, but I also had the LS option. My prey rolled over on its back with its soft belly exposed, what else could I do:devil:

Sage, WiseWon, very nice post. Did you get my message about contacting me?

CP

 

[aslan]

I'm not mad at you but I just lost my post twice in thaty Bermuda triangle of re-submissin, I guess I failed to copy to memory twice. Which really just piss*s me off.

Anyway, the long and short of it was, what the hel* are you thinking about? I said it much nicer before lol.

R u really asking for some kind of blessing betting 2 hands of $200 at +4 and, after winning a few for $2K, how great it is to change to a $100 bet in +11? What would you have done if you had lost a few $200 hands? Bet a few $2K hands to make it up. Maybe only bet them in any + count? Maybe wait for a huge + count to bet them?

Officially I hate it.

Unofficially, I love it. Did it for years, but without CC'ing. I call that "Pure Voodoo" since every hand played was -EV. Do it even now, in real life, while even counting the silly cards, but I just call it "Impure Voodoo" even though I do pretty much the same thing except when I do it, I actually know the count is +. Other wise persons may call it fuzzy betting.

When I look in the mirror, I see you. Same method, different $unit. I don't call it what I do some kind of AP cr*p just because I occasionally choose to overbet my roll in a +count, and, if i win, cut back. I know I'm doing it when I do it, the ultimate roll I am betting to I am willing to lose is meaningless to me. I made that decision before I played.

Justify this betting pattern from some sort of AP point of view. Otherwise, just join me and froggy who have the honesty to call basically the same thing some sort of negative term somewhere between Voodoo and Fuzzy.

How come he and I get all the cr*p and this stuff you propose needs an opinion lmao?

Next time, just bet $10, better yet $1, instead of $100 in the +11 count and lock in even more profits. That's even smarter.

Yep, time for bed lmao.

LMAO Well, I wouldn't try to raise my bet in a plus count cuz I know where that leads. But lowering my bet in a positive count leads to a sure conservation of winnings as opposed a good chance of winning. After two days, I just wanted to leave winner. Besides, my wife knew what I took out of the bank and I needed to impress on her that this is a relatively safe venture that I was embarking on. hahahaha Now you know the truth of it. Aslan is afraid his wife will put the kabash on his gambling career, and she--no woman--understands the 'long run.' But did you fathom the idea that by doing so, I am still in the running for the long run advantage, Betting conservatively in this instance says nothing about future winnings. I am convinced in my own mind that if I had been sufficiently ahead, I would have bet the max bet throughout--no pitty patty bet lowering strategy. hahaha Anyway there is something to be said for not getting greedy, although it doesn't come under the purview of card counting. lol Hey! I'm happy even if I didn't please every pro AP in the world. Just remember--Every day is the first day of your card counting career. And every day, the long run odds for winning as an AP are exactly the same. There is no enhancing of future events by present play. It's always and invariably the same.

 

[aslan]

Bingo.

Aslan, practice voodoo if it makes you feel better. However, the biggest mistake a counter can make is walking away from a positive count.

But did I walk away by lowering my bet, or just decrease my forward speed? I know what you mean, but psychologically I couldn't do anything else. A sure win was better than a great possible win at that point. What can I say. Had I been further ahead, I wouldn't have waffled.

 

[aslan]

the above statement is true, though aslan forgot to mention the power of 3:2 payouts, and more chances for successful double downs and splits in high counts. *tsk tsk*

I did mention it. I do recognize that it was voodoo thinking, but a sure win seemed more desirable then a potential win at that point even if the odds were slightly in my favor. Dues anyone get the notion of a session win over a long run win? I did not take myself out of the long run by surrendering to a session win that I felt I needed. But yes, it was a surrender. I'm only human.

 

[sagefr0g]

..
Sage, WiseWon, very nice post. Did you get my message about contacting me?

CP

yes i did stealthy one.
i'm callin you today on my way to this joint i plan on workin over. i'll be in a much better mood on my way there than i was yesterday after the froggin stock market took a 600 point dump
was just in too bad a mood to ring you yesterday.
if i wait to call after i hit the joint i may be in too bad a mood again.:laugh: :cry:

 

[Sonny]

Therefore, I am not hurting my chances of winning in the future in any way, because the odds are always the same from every point forward.

That’s true. You are not changing your probability of winning in the future, only reducing the size of your wins. You will win slightly more often but your average win will be smaller. If you are more concerned with walking away a winner than maximizing your profits, go for it. As long as you have an acceptable win rate and RoR there is nothing wrong with playing conservatively.

I have another practice as well. I will only lose so much on any given trip...it does mean that I am metering out the amount of pain that I will allow myself to feel at any given time.

But there is a flip side. The pain from your individual sessions will be smaller, but that pain is likely to last longer as well. If you didn’t use a stop-loss limit you would get through those rough patches sooner. Also, playing fewer hours gives you a lower chance of making a profit in the end. You won today, but you are less likely to have that money when you finally quit. Again, the decision is up to you. Some people prefer a slow, manageable pain and others prefer a quick, sharp pain. How do you prefer to remove your band-aids?

The wonderful thing about blackjack is that you have complete control over your strategies so you can customize them any way you want. Everyone plays the game a little differently because we all have different goals and expectations. The "correct" decision is always based on personal goals. The term "optimal" is used a lot in BJ literature, but it is just as important to know what goal you are optimizing for.

-Sonny-

 

[sagefr0g]

...Hey! I'm happy even if I didn't please every pro AP in the world. ....

PO'ing AP's is even more fun than PO'ing ploppies.
just don't forget which side your bread is butterd on. :joker:

 

[aslan]

That’s true. You are not changing your probability of winning in the future, only reducing the size of your wins. You will win slightly more often but your average win will be smaller. If you are more concerned with walking away a winner than maximizing your profits, go for it. As long as you have an acceptable win rate and RoR there is nothing wrong with playing conservatively.



But there is a flip side. The pain from your individual sessions will be smaller, but that pain is likely to last longer as well. If you didn’t use a stop-loss limit you would get through those rough patches sooner. Also, playing fewer hours gives you a lower chance of making a profit in the end. You won today, but you are less likely to have that money when you finally quit. Again, the decision is up to you. Some people prefer a slow, manageable pain and others prefer a quick, sharp pain. How do you prefer to remove your band-aids?

The wonderful thing about blackjack is that you have complete control over your strategies so you can customize them any way you want. Everyone plays the game a little differently because we all have different goals and expectations. The "correct" decision is always based on personal goals. The term "optimal" is used a lot in BJ literature, but it is just as important to know what goal you are optimizing for.

-Sonny-

At last, a breath of fresh air. Thank you for weighing in. Not that I don't appreciate all the advice given by others. I know all that you instructed me but I needed to hear it from someone else. It is so very true that we can customize our course to fit our particular needs and circumstances. Don't think for one moment that it was easy to not play it strictly by the book, but then was not the time. Hopefully in the future I will be so far ahead br-wise that I will find it easy to accept the "true path." If there is such a thing. I knew all along that I was risking giving up extra long term bennies for some smaller short term bennies. As it turned out, I would have lost more, but that is 20/20 hindsight. Totally lucky. If I continue such behavior I will indeed give up more long run profits. Something I don't intend to do.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

But did I walk away by lowering my bet, or just decrease my forward speed? I know what you mean, but psychologically I couldn't do anything else. A sure win was better than a great possible win at that point. What can I say. Had I been further ahead, I wouldn't have waffled.

It's your choice. Only you know what you are capable of psychologically, and if a big win or big loss puts you off your game you are better off "doing what you have to do" than playing for maximum EV. Maybe that $2000 represents something different to you than to me. For some, a 100% chance of being able to pay off $2000 worth of credit card bills is worth more than a 52% chance of walking away with even more. I can't challenge that because it's your money and not mine. Honestly, I've been tempted to do exactly what you did when starting out but I white-knuckled it to the end of the shoe. Walk away at the shuffle, take a drink, take a piss, talk up a chick at the bar, then think about the money.

Now that said, your high and super-high counts are part of this huge probability function and you need to see them and play them to make up for all those crappy hands you play at the beginning of a shoe. Or to pay you for the time you spend waiting and watching for the count to go up so you can sit down. They are part of your paycheck. Which is why I would never do it. See, I remember the huge losses and how they make me feel, and now is my chance to do unto them as they have done unto me, and a big count is what I need to make the ****ers pay. If anything, in that big-win situation now I am going to raise my bet slightly, because I now have a larger bankroll and can afford it.