Rising Cost of Heat

[blackjack avenger]

Heat should probably have a subjective cost associated with it.

Example:
A player bets .75 Kelly resizing, very risky. The top bets are just over $100 and checks play is called whenever he bets $100+.

If we consider heat risk & drawdown risk then perhaps the player is overbetting.

The player would probably be better off betting less then .75 Kelly resizing and keeping all bets under $100. This would allow for a lower N0; due to less bet resizing, while increasing longevity.

Sum up:
Consider not placing top bets that draw heat unless your betting very conservatively.

 

[tthree]

Heat should probably have a subjective cost associated with it.

Example:
A player bets .75 Kelly resizing, very risky. The top bets are just over $100 and checks play is called whenever he bets $100+.

If we consider heat risk & drawdown risk then perhaps the player is overbetting.

The player would probably be better off betting less then .75 Kelly resizing and keeping all bets under $100. This would allow for a lower N0; due to less bet resizing, while increasing longevity.

Sum up:
Consider not placing top bets that draw heat unless your betting very conservatively.

I agree . The problem most people have is their system is to weak to be worth playing at a spread so small. With your halves and my HIOPT II a nice playable game can be played while flying under the radar. Weaker systems just don't get there without too much wonging or spreading to get a playable advantage at least in my casino market. To make matters worse they don't choose games carefully enough to be at a playable game to begin with. They may be playing horrible pen or crappy rules just because it's there. You don't have to climb Pikes Peak. There are much more profitable games to play. Walk on until you find one.

 

[Sonny]

Decreasing your earnings to avoid heat should not be your first course of action. If it were me, plan A would be to find another way to avoid the checks play calls. Plan B would be to have the pit not notice them or not care about them. Plan C might be to diffuse the heat or misdirect it. Plan D might be to limit exposure (if possible). You get the idea. Dropping my bets from what I want to bet (at that level) would be my last resort.

Keeping your max bet below $100 will most likely make them think that you are not a threat. They might be right.

-Sonny-

 

[blackjack avenger]

reply to sonny

I agree with all you stated.

Let's make the example betting over purple or orange. A level that would be harder to avoid heat. Many casinos at this level one cannot avoid heat.

So we have:
A big risk of drawdown
An increase in heat do to bet size, that checks play may trigger the call as an example.
Only a slight increase in EV because we are only considering top bets.

Considering the above; subjectively, one should not chase small increases in EV by betting into heat unless perhaps already betting conservatively. This is not much different then limiting spread due to heat, but I consider risk of drawdown.

 

[flyingwind]

What is drawdown?

 

[blackjack avenger]

drawdown

Losing a % of your bank. When using an aggressive Kelly resizing fraction, say full Kelly to 1/2 when you have to lower bets on losses the cost to N0 can be high.

 

[tthree]

Decreasing your earnings to avoid heat should not be your first course of action. If it were me, plan A would be to find another way to avoid the checks play calls. Plan B would be to have the pit not notice them or not care about them. Plan C might be to diffuse the heat or misdirect it. Plan D might be to limit exposure (if possible). You get the idea. Dropping my bets from what I want to bet (at that level) would be my last resort.

Keeping your max bet below $100 will most likely make them think that you are not a threat. They might be right.

-Sonny-

I like plan A play multiple spots instead of 1 spot. More money on the table with smaller min 1 spot bet to max 1 spot bet difference. The bonus is a decrease in variance.