21gunsalute
Well-Known Member
Well yes, there's not much sense in counting cards if you're going to flat bet. The idea is to adjust your bets to match your advantage or disadvantage. That doesn't really make it a progression though. I may still be flat betting the same amount for several hands in a row and my increases and decreases may be rather sharp and sudden. The point is that I'm basing my next bet on the cards remaining in the deck which is the only reliable method to base a bet on, unless you can gain an advantage through hole carding and/or shuffle tracking.picasso said:Notwithstanding the insurance bet, if you only flat bet and count the cards, there is no money to be made. So counting alone doesn’t make money; your bet spread (i.e. your progression) must be coordinated to the count. So it seems fair to say that progression’s alone, counting alone, or simply flat betting is insufficient to win, but if I had to choose between flat betting and progressive betting, I’d choose the latter anytime. I’ll die kicking!
What does a progression better base his bets on? Nothing but sheer luck! The cards don't know how much you're wagering on a particular hand and the chips in the betting circle don't know what cards will be forthcoming or will be likely to come up in the next round. There is no reliable formula for anticipating a win on the next hand based on the number of hands you've won or lost in a row. You may get lucky and have a stretch where your big bets just happen to coincide with the hands you've won, but it is nothing but pure luck and your luck will no doubt turn the other way sooner or later.
As an example I recently went heads up with the dealer at a $10 table. In the first 14 hands of the shoe I won 0 hands lost 11 and pushed 3. I still ended up making money that shoe. Why? Because I was making minimal bets during the early part of the shoe since the count was low or negative and won my bigger bets later in the shoe when it went positive. Had I played Martingale I would have been down $20,470 before I won a hand! Had I used Elkobar's system ($10.$15.$20.$25, and stay on $25 until I lose) I wouldn't have been betting enough later in the shoe to compensate for the earlier losses. In fact, since I still lost a significant number of hands later in the shoe it's very possible I would have lost even more money using such a progression.
Please explain to me how you think a progression could possibly work since they're all based on a predetermined formula (with no scientific or mathematical basis), but the cards don't fall according to any predetermined formula but rather fall randomly.
