Questioning old theories
- Thread starter Dopple
- Start date
sagefr0g
Well-Known Member
unfortunately it a'int necessarily so. there is this minor bug in the ointment called negative fluctuation that can occur even if you are playing at an advantage. there is nothing to say that the confluence of such sad events couldn't occur frequently enough and enough times to totally wipe out your bankroll. but can quiting at some point and restarting at another help? again unfortunately not really since we have no way to know when such a roque wave of negative fluctuation might hit. seems even an advantage holds a gamble.Dopple said:
Okay that brings me to my next question.
If you ever track your win/loss record you will find that if you have a good run of cards maybe 10 2 hours sessions all winning then from your history you can usually predict that a downturn is likely.
Why not play at home for fun when that downturn is likely to come, get it out of your math karma and then go back to play at the casino.
Random events do not know if you are playing for money or not.
If you ever track your win/loss record you will find that if you have a good run of cards maybe 10 2 hours sessions all winning then from your history you can usually predict that a downturn is likely.
Why not play at home for fun when that downturn is likely to come, get it out of your math karma and then go back to play at the casino.
Random events do not know if you are playing for money or not.
sagefr0g
Well-Known Member
lol, omg i love this question! i've wondered the same thing.....Dopple said:
but actually you can't really usually predict that a downturn is likely from your history.
and unfortunately your math karma on home games (or casino play for that matter) wont mean that you can expect good things or vice a versa to happen next time you play. reason being is that each shoe is an independent event. there is however a normal frequency distribution for true counts over the long haul but the order in which they present is forever a mystery until they actually present.
Sonny
Well-Known Member
Random events also do not know if you have been winning or losing. When you sit down at a table, the cards don’t know whether you’ve won your last session or not. They don’t know if they are “supposed” to make you win or lose. They are in the shoe and all they can do is come out in order. There is no magical force that follows you around trying to adjust your wins and losses. The results of every session are independent of your previous sessions. There is no reason to be afraid of winning “too many” sessions.Dopple said:
-Sonny-
Quite right. Also I think your extreme positive or negative flux sessions don't so much balance each other, but just become less statistically significant as they fade into the past, and more and more sessions follow. The long term is when you have so many sessions that none significantly influences your average one way or the other, and you approach your average edge.Sonny said:
That said, yes there is always a risk and a good rule might be "quit when you can't afford the neg swings" (ie: are playing with the kids college money) more so that "quit while you're ahead". But then isn't playing with money you shouldn't pretty much what defines a compulsive gambler?
zengrifter
Banned
That sounds powerful!! zgDopple said:
AnIrishmannot2brite
Well-Known Member
Well there is one negative factor that can set in after as string of wins or losses: Burnout.
It's nerve wracking at both ends of variance from negative to positive.
When things go astonishingly well there's the feeling of invincibility and the player starts doubling or tripling his units when he should be sticking to his game plan.
Same thing occurs when negative variance shows it's ugly head. The player takes marginally positive counts and inflates his bet size to recoup losses.
The casinos know this. It's the mind of the compulsive gambler. Hard to completely eliminate it in total even from the experienced AP. And that's what separates the men from boys: The ability to walk away from a table while up or down because he knows his emotional cage is too rattled to make the precise and automatic decisions.
It's nerve wracking at both ends of variance from negative to positive.
When things go astonishingly well there's the feeling of invincibility and the player starts doubling or tripling his units when he should be sticking to his game plan.
Same thing occurs when negative variance shows it's ugly head. The player takes marginally positive counts and inflates his bet size to recoup losses.
The casinos know this. It's the mind of the compulsive gambler. Hard to completely eliminate it in total even from the experienced AP. And that's what separates the men from boys: The ability to walk away from a table while up or down because he knows his emotional cage is too rattled to make the precise and automatic decisions.
EmeraldCityBJ
Well-Known Member
Reasons to end a session
There are a number of reasons to end a session, but fear of losing after a good run of cards is not one of them.
Here is a list of valid reasons to end your session:
1) You're getting too tired to play effectively.
2) You're getting hungry and losing focus as a result.
3) You've been playing a long time and don't want to give the casino too much information about your play at one session. Shorter sessions work best at casinos where longevity is important.
4) Conditions are deteriorating (heat, worse penetration, another AP entered your game and won't leave, too many ploppies slowing down the game, etc.), and there are better opportunities to make money elsewhere.
5) You've won enough to reach the single session win threshhold for the casino such that they might start to expect cheating or advantage play. Some casinos are not very sophisticated when it comes to identifying advantage play and will start to get paranoid of any player who is particularly lucky in a short period of time.
There are a number of reasons to end a session, but fear of losing after a good run of cards is not one of them.
Here is a list of valid reasons to end your session:
1) You're getting too tired to play effectively.
2) You're getting hungry and losing focus as a result.
3) You've been playing a long time and don't want to give the casino too much information about your play at one session. Shorter sessions work best at casinos where longevity is important.
4) Conditions are deteriorating (heat, worse penetration, another AP entered your game and won't leave, too many ploppies slowing down the game, etc.), and there are better opportunities to make money elsewhere.
5) You've won enough to reach the single session win threshhold for the casino such that they might start to expect cheating or advantage play. Some casinos are not very sophisticated when it comes to identifying advantage play and will start to get paranoid of any player who is particularly lucky in a short period of time.
ihate17
Well-Known Member
True signs of a non advantage counter
You must look like an emotional gambler to the pit while playing similar to a prgrammed computer.
ihate17
It is also one of several big reasons why most people who actually master a counting system still land up being losers lifetime. Human emotions!AnIrishmannot2brite said:
You must look like an emotional gambler to the pit while playing similar to a prgrammed computer.
ihate17
aslan
Well-Known Member
Very astute observation....even for you, Irish. :laugh:AnIrishmannot2brite said:
Having been there, done that...I must confirm what you say. I'd like to get a little more practice with the positive variance, however.
While I don't support increasing wagers to recoup losses, walking away is not what separates the men from the boys, but hanging in there following your game plan and staying detached and in control. Ideally, I only walk away when something not related to counting is the reason (dinner time, bedtime, engagement, bathroom break, no more bankroll), but if emotions get out of control, I agree--it's better to walk than to do something stupid. BTW, where do you play? East coast, West coast? Town?AnIrishmannot2brite
Well-Known Member
Damn right. I noticed this early on. Especially before having basic strategy down (boy was i lucky not to lose everything back then).ihate17 said:
Even six weeks ago I caught myself making dumb moves in marginally high T/C's. And paid a price for it although quickly recouped.
Takes a sense of humility and perspective to play this game well, i don't have the bankroll or quite the speed of some of the more experienced players. My guess is that my indice knowledge is at least adequate. Can't quote them verbatim but seem to know what to do on an intuitive level well enough.
However I'm getting older now and not so likely to fall prey to the foolishness of the younger players.
I speculate THAT was the reason for some of the early MIT team losses. These college students were brighter than bright but they were still kids. Kids don't respect money. It's just numbers to them. Worse still they were playing on someone else's investment.
Or to quote the mythical character J.B. Books played by John Wayne in "The Shootist" who responds to the young man played by Ron Howard after each shot revolver rounds at a target. The kid says, "Gee Mr. Books my groups were nearly as close as yours".
To which the aging gunfighter said:
"That's because no one was shooting back"...
