21gunsalute
Well-Known Member
Maybe bjstud should write books and sell them instead of giving this valuable information out for free. :eyepatch:paddywhack said:
wanna become professional player but
- Thread starter busyb
- Start date
hey bjstud..
I guess from your posts I have to congratulate you on your success..
I cant believe your making it up as... well..what would you gain from lies...
I played BJ 5 days a week last year and made serious money too, having a br of 2500 to 5000 and playing similar too you but i would play 25 table and would try reach 500, it worked most of the time yes there were many loses but even more wins...... then I got greedy and lost control and did not follow through with my strategy and used to make big irrational big bets...
basically i got greedy and it went tits up... but i had some sense to stop going and had a nice amount still left with me... £20000 ish.. and i have not been back for many months, I am occupied with the arrival of my daughter and she has kept me busy and also made me value money more...
but after reading your posts i have now gotta itch to give it another go.. but if you dont mind keep a thread going with your results and I will keenly follow for a short while before i decide to give it another shot...
You are right it is possible but its greed.......thats the ultimate downfall of all players in my eyes, if you have mastered how to tame your greed then your onto a winner..
keep me posted
I guess from your posts I have to congratulate you on your success..
I cant believe your making it up as... well..what would you gain from lies...
I played BJ 5 days a week last year and made serious money too, having a br of 2500 to 5000 and playing similar too you but i would play 25 table and would try reach 500, it worked most of the time yes there were many loses but even more wins...... then I got greedy and lost control and did not follow through with my strategy and used to make big irrational big bets...
basically i got greedy and it went tits up... but i had some sense to stop going and had a nice amount still left with me... £20000 ish.. and i have not been back for many months, I am occupied with the arrival of my daughter and she has kept me busy and also made me value money more...
but after reading your posts i have now gotta itch to give it another go.. but if you dont mind keep a thread going with your results and I will keenly follow for a short while before i decide to give it another shot...
You are right it is possible but its greed.......thats the ultimate downfall of all players in my eyes, if you have mastered how to tame your greed then your onto a winner..
keep me posted
Lonesome Gambler
Well-Known Member
Please do not let his story encourage you to have another go at this. "Greed" is meaningless in gambling, you simply can not overcome a statistical disadvantage with betting strategies that are not based on deck composition. This is not even open to discussion, period (full stop, in your case). You WILL lose in the long run, no matter what anecdotal evidence you've witnessed in the short run; this is not my opinion, it is cold, hard, mathematical fact. I would implore you to think very hard before gambling away money you could be spending on your daughter. Good luck.
Deathclutch
Well-Known Member
So now people want to follow a gambling plan of someone who can't even understand the concept that putting out bets that have a negative expectation will lose money in the long run? Let them do it. Let them blame greed, or tilt, or bad luck. But not math. They don't understand math, they understand short term emperical evidence. Go play, get all the evidence you need.
21gunsalute
Well-Known Member
That might explain it. Surely you jest. :laugh:bjstud said:
Tarzan
Banned
Blank
I often pull up BJINFO lately and draw a total blank. Sometimes it's from reading posts like this one. I read something like the initial post of this thread, my eyebrows raise a bit and I stumble away in disbelief. Casinos complaining about not raking enough in? I just don't get it--- People that are "want to be" professionals or think they have the capability to consistently win but actually don't are the casino's greatest asset.
Think about this for a minute. A recreational player that loses in the longrun and fully realizes this compared to a player that THINKS he can win consistently... which one of these gives you, the casino, more "bang for your buck"? Why the hotshot who THINKS he can win, of course! The recreational player gets his butt kicked and limits his action to what he can afford to lose, whereas the inexperienced, budding, want to be pro that thinks he is ready will use flawed strategies and exercise poor judgement and have the capability to go well beyond all reasonable parameters of loss before he realizes he is doomed.
A lot of people just don't seem to realize just how tight the percentages are and the pinpoint accuracy needed. A lot of people don't realize just how far that roller-coaster ride can GO up and down and the long-term projections and calculations required to have a shot at coming out on top. It's harder than it looks to be successful overall, a long, slow winding road of ups and downs that require more money backing you than most people have to devote to such a venture. At 22, do you have a half million to work with? Can you pay all your bills for the next year or so without bringing in a single dime should it go that way? Take a small business course and you will find that better than 65% of all small businesses fail due to a lack of sufficient start up funds. The "rule of thumb" for (small business ventures of any type) is to have capital to cover at least 6 months of overhead without bringing in a single dime. It's no different with blackjack and if you have a flawed strategy following ridiculous notions of "gambler's fallacy" it just doesn't matter HOW much money you having backing you because a fool and his money are soon parted.
I often pull up BJINFO lately and draw a total blank. Sometimes it's from reading posts like this one. I read something like the initial post of this thread, my eyebrows raise a bit and I stumble away in disbelief. Casinos complaining about not raking enough in? I just don't get it--- People that are "want to be" professionals or think they have the capability to consistently win but actually don't are the casino's greatest asset.
Think about this for a minute. A recreational player that loses in the longrun and fully realizes this compared to a player that THINKS he can win consistently... which one of these gives you, the casino, more "bang for your buck"? Why the hotshot who THINKS he can win, of course! The recreational player gets his butt kicked and limits his action to what he can afford to lose, whereas the inexperienced, budding, want to be pro that thinks he is ready will use flawed strategies and exercise poor judgement and have the capability to go well beyond all reasonable parameters of loss before he realizes he is doomed.
A lot of people just don't seem to realize just how tight the percentages are and the pinpoint accuracy needed. A lot of people don't realize just how far that roller-coaster ride can GO up and down and the long-term projections and calculations required to have a shot at coming out on top. It's harder than it looks to be successful overall, a long, slow winding road of ups and downs that require more money backing you than most people have to devote to such a venture. At 22, do you have a half million to work with? Can you pay all your bills for the next year or so without bringing in a single dime should it go that way? Take a small business course and you will find that better than 65% of all small businesses fail due to a lack of sufficient start up funds. The "rule of thumb" for (small business ventures of any type) is to have capital to cover at least 6 months of overhead without bringing in a single dime. It's no different with blackjack and if you have a flawed strategy following ridiculous notions of "gambler's fallacy" it just doesn't matter HOW much money you having backing you because a fool and his money are soon parted.
Deathclutch
Well-Known Member
I may have phrased it weird. It was meant in a way that they don't care about math or simulations, but hey, I won $200 today! My plan must be foolproof!FLASH1296 said:
Deathclutch
Well-Known Member
Walk in the door with two grand in your pocket and immediately exit. You'll make more money that way.bjstud said:
FLASH1296
Well-Known Member
Unquestionably, the vast majority of humankind is completely innumerate.
I hunch that >98+% of peeps are incapable of grasping a concept as simple as normal distribution.
If this were not the case there would be virtually NO casino patrons.
In place of numeracy the population at large employs superstition, irrational notions, luck, etc. to
imagine that any day can be their "lucky" day; and that they are just a moment away from becoming
joyful millionaires instead of poor hapless drudges.
I hunch that >98+% of peeps are incapable of grasping a concept as simple as normal distribution.
If this were not the case there would be virtually NO casino patrons.
In place of numeracy the population at large employs superstition, irrational notions, luck, etc. to
imagine that any day can be their "lucky" day; and that they are just a moment away from becoming
joyful millionaires instead of poor hapless drudges.
21gunsalute
Well-Known Member
The voodoo gods will get you if stay at the table too long. They're not too quick but quite vengeful.psyduck said:
kewljason
Well-Known Member
Overall, I think this is a really good post. A lot of good advise in there. I do take a bit of exception to the "half million reference". One can make a living with far less initial capital than a half million.Tarzan said:
Hopefully, that was just for effect in trying to emphasize the need for substantial capital. A greater amount than the OP has indicated he has. Also, you mentioned the slow windings of the ups and down of the rollercoaster as the need for such capital, but being properly funded is only one part, as I am sure you know Tarzan. Even properly funded, the difficult part is developing the mentality to handle and deal with these swings, especially for someone with no other source of income as the OP hopes to do. You can only learn this through experience. That being said, I am finding it difficult to take this poster seriously. Hopefully, he is just yanking our chain.
KimLee
Well-Known Member
I say go for it! You already have a successful role model who posts as BJStud. Indeed, his language and betting levels resemble yours. He grew his bankroll from $5K to $100K on only ten months!busyb said:
You can make even more money by playing multiple sessions per day. Some days you will win $200 in only 4 hands. At that point you should have a drink at the bar. Then go the the bathroom mirror, slap yourself, and shout "I'm the baddest gambler alive!" Then start a fresh session. Some sessions will be longer, but you should have no problem doing 7 sessions per day. After allowing 25% for losses, that still exceeds $1K per day.
You can bet $50 because that is 1% of a $5K bankroll. But you can bet 1% of bankroll as it grows. After one week of $1K per day, your $5k bankroll will double. You can continue to double it every week for 7 weeks until your unit is $5K on a $500K bankroll. In less than three month you will be a millionaire!
So don't listen to the jealous naysayers. You can emulate and surpass BJStud. You are 22 years old. Your family will only hold you back from your dreams. I wish you great success. Please post back here in three months explaining how your life has changed.
creeping panther
Banned
Kim
:toast: :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:
CP
KimLee said:
:toast: :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:
CP
sagefr0g
Well-Known Member
i don't care for the OP's stated approach.
bjstud's approach (even if he is pulling our leg) is more interesting. but of course flawed in the long run as he's playing a negative expectation game with no way of making for some positive expectation unless he starts using real advantage techniques.
i ran some way too small sims (so take this with a grain of salt) on the approach of just trying to make one unit, sort of thing. it's an interesting concept because experientiallly we all know it's not too darned hard to make at least one unit in a given session.
well, problem is what my sims showed, was that ( i guess just like any progression) yeah, you'll win at least one unit circa 90% or more of the time, but that small 10% or even smaller percent of the times will really, really kill you big time, talking large loss's here.
what ever, you guessed it ladies and gentlemen, when you add up all those sessions, you come out a loser at just about the amount of loss you'd expect for the given game and number of hands played.
one interesting aspect of the sims showed that for the most part if the approach was going to do you in, it would do so after about fifty hands or so and if you was going to succeed in making the unit you would usually do so before fifty hands or so.
so bjstud's approach is going after four units instead of just one.
really if bjstud had cvcx he could run some sims for flat betting and see what his odds would be for making those four units and his risk of ruin over a given amount of time played sort of thing.
bjstud walking away for the day after winning four units has some element of wonging out to it, albeit he's doing so blindly. like for instance just like only trying to make one unit and quitting has a high success rate, probably that's true for going after four units as well. so for your typical six deck game, you can expect to be playing under disadvantageous conditions about 70% of the time, while having a relatively high success rate of getting those four units. so he'd be in effect wonging out of a fair amount of disadvantageous play (with out even knowing it). perhaps this is better than if he kept playing and playing. when he starts to play anew, or another session or another day, he can at least know at the start of a shoe that he's playing at the best expectation he can know, albeit a negative expectation. that's the problem, this negative expectation, along with the fact that in the long run one just has to have a bet spread tailored to advantage and disadvantage in order to beat that negative expectation.
the other aspect of bjstud's approach that has some merit is it's similarity to a 'hail mary' approach. the point being since the approach has a relatively high short term success rate the money possibly earned could be viewed as equated to a successful 'hail mary' approach that had some initial really scary risk of ruin associated with it. but assuming success and hopefully the use of genuine advantage techniques in the future, that money could give one a real leg up.
bjstud's approach (even if he is pulling our leg) is more interesting. but of course flawed in the long run as he's playing a negative expectation game with no way of making for some positive expectation unless he starts using real advantage techniques.
i ran some way too small sims (so take this with a grain of salt) on the approach of just trying to make one unit, sort of thing. it's an interesting concept because experientiallly we all know it's not too darned hard to make at least one unit in a given session.
well, problem is what my sims showed, was that ( i guess just like any progression) yeah, you'll win at least one unit circa 90% or more of the time, but that small 10% or even smaller percent of the times will really, really kill you big time, talking large loss's here.
what ever, you guessed it ladies and gentlemen, when you add up all those sessions, you come out a loser at just about the amount of loss you'd expect for the given game and number of hands played.
one interesting aspect of the sims showed that for the most part if the approach was going to do you in, it would do so after about fifty hands or so and if you was going to succeed in making the unit you would usually do so before fifty hands or so.
so bjstud's approach is going after four units instead of just one.
really if bjstud had cvcx he could run some sims for flat betting and see what his odds would be for making those four units and his risk of ruin over a given amount of time played sort of thing.
bjstud walking away for the day after winning four units has some element of wonging out to it, albeit he's doing so blindly. like for instance just like only trying to make one unit and quitting has a high success rate, probably that's true for going after four units as well. so for your typical six deck game, you can expect to be playing under disadvantageous conditions about 70% of the time, while having a relatively high success rate of getting those four units. so he'd be in effect wonging out of a fair amount of disadvantageous play (with out even knowing it). perhaps this is better than if he kept playing and playing. when he starts to play anew, or another session or another day, he can at least know at the start of a shoe that he's playing at the best expectation he can know, albeit a negative expectation. that's the problem, this negative expectation, along with the fact that in the long run one just has to have a bet spread tailored to advantage and disadvantage in order to beat that negative expectation.
the other aspect of bjstud's approach that has some merit is it's similarity to a 'hail mary' approach. the point being since the approach has a relatively high short term success rate the money possibly earned could be viewed as equated to a successful 'hail mary' approach that had some initial really scary risk of ruin associated with it. but assuming success and hopefully the use of genuine advantage techniques in the future, that money could give one a real leg up.
tip toeing on the edge boys
How many hands can a man by himself or herself possibly play in a day...Obviously more hands at low limits than high limits?
And with a 1% edge.... i know i cant live on that small of a an edge... Thats why i question ...........How much money can you possible get across the table , day in and day out?
My only experience is with video bj. I do know the variance of that game at a 1000 hands an hour with a 1% edge....I have played with a half percent edge. and didnt like it.
I think my average bet a the vbj was around ten bucks... I can remember the fluxuation getting me many times for 3 to 6 grand... This was when i was just starting out many moons ago...Not a very big bankroll either.
I wonder it KJ will ever hit one of those " OH F##K" moments? With his bankroll and his betting averages, can he possible hit a 40 grand variance downward??????
Just my 2 cents worth of questions
Machinist
How many hands can a man by himself or herself possibly play in a day...Obviously more hands at low limits than high limits?
And with a 1% edge.... i know i cant live on that small of a an edge... Thats why i question ...........How much money can you possible get across the table , day in and day out?
My only experience is with video bj. I do know the variance of that game at a 1000 hands an hour with a 1% edge....I have played with a half percent edge. and didnt like it.
I think my average bet a the vbj was around ten bucks... I can remember the fluxuation getting me many times for 3 to 6 grand... This was when i was just starting out many moons ago...Not a very big bankroll either.
I wonder it KJ will ever hit one of those " OH F##K" moments? With his bankroll and his betting averages, can he possible hit a 40 grand variance downward??????
Just my 2 cents worth of questions
Machinist
kewljason
Well-Known Member
As for Machinist comment of a 40 grand downward variance "oh F##K" moment. I guess my BR could handle such, being twice that amount. (would definately have to downsize unit) Could my psyche handle such. That I don't know and hope not to find out. Appreciate the positive thoughts though. :laugh: