Ecco tutti i commenti pubblicati sul sito, con le discussioni più recenti elencate per prime.
Per partecipare a una qualsiasi di queste discussioni, potete rispondere nella pagina dell'articolo.
I’m am very glad I found your article. I’ve tried many times to explain this point to players and it’s exactly like arguing religion. Once you bring facts into the debate they shut down (please don’t be offered I don’t mean to insult anyone’s faith). What this all boils down to is if you want to live by hindsight, would offs and could ofs, your going to have a very miserable life.
Ken, I have a set of your cards and have CVBJ and a copy of Wong’s Professional Blackjack and when I compare all three using the same set of rules I get different indexes, (granted only off by one true count here and there) how do I decide which index is best ?
I spent a lot of time on my index numbers, and CVBJ was the tool I used. Indexes are affected by nearly every possible detail of the game, so slightly different assumptions will yield slightly different answers. And then there’s the fact that indexes affect each other. If you use your best current indexes to run a new set of indexes, the numbers may change slightly. I used this kind of iterative approach over and over again to have my indexes converge to what I think were the best values.
The good news is that a difference of a point here or there is very insignificant. But if you wanted perfect indexes, you could use CVBJ making absolutely sure every setting mirrors the games you are playing. Then generate a new strategy from those numbers, and generate the indexes again. And again, and again.
The simple answer of which index is the best is likely the ones on my card, unless your conditions are widely different from my assumptions. I would trust those, or indexes you generate yourself over the aging Wong indexes. A lot has been learned over the years since Wong did his work.
Ken,
I’m having trouble understanding the chart of standard deviation/ expected win. I am not sure if I’m getting this right. So after 3 hours of play, 68% of the time you will be either making $191 or losing $147, and 95% of the time making $360 and losing $316. I am not sure if this means that during the game, your net result can vary from 360 to -316, 95% of the time (ending with a profit of 22.5$) OR that after you finish a game you could either be at +360 or -316. So if you play 150 hands (3 hours with 50 hands each) and that there is a chance you could either be at +360 or -316, then there would not be a point in card counting since the advantage by counting cards is negligible as shown by this chart. Would you please help me understand what I’m missing or getting wrong ?
As the lesson describes, these numbers are the range of expected outcomes. 68% of the time, your result after 3 hours will lie somewhere between a loss of $147 and a win of $191. Let’s look at the 2-standard-deviation 95% range: somewhere between losing $316 and winning $360. In other words, if you played 20 three-hour sessions, then in 19 out of 20 of those sessions you would expect to fall somewhere in that range for that individual session. Even then, one time in the twenty sessions, you could expect to have more extreme luck, either good or bad. For that sessions, you would either lose MORE than $316, or win MORE than $360.
Of course, I must point out that even here, you can’t think in terms of exact outcomes. These are long-term averages. If you actually played 20 sessions, you may have no sessions that fall outside the 95% range, or you could have two or three sessions that do so.
As for the usefulness of counting, yes, the edge is small. In this case, the expected win is $22.50 for the three hour session. If you play a LOT of three-hour sessions with these criteria, your average win will be $22.50. But as the standard deviation numbers show, it won’t be a smooth ride. Sometimes you’ll win $300, sometimes you’ll lose $300. But notice that the ranges are shifted a bit, so that the highest expected wins are slightly bigger than the worst expected losses. Card counting is a long and bumpy ride, and the profits take time to overcome the luck factor.
Ken, Lets say I made a betting schedule for a particular game and rule set that I want to play. During the game the count goes high and stays high, I am losing big bet after big bet, variance is killing me, should I back off my high bets? stay and stick to my betting ramp? or just leave and start over at a new table?
The math doesn’t care whether you’re crushing the game, or getting crushed instead. The next hand to be dealt either has a positive expectation for the player or it doesn’t. So to optimize your long-term results, just keep firing away. But…
In real life, unless you’re pretty accustomed to the variance of the game, this can be tough to do. Psychologically, there are benefits to preventing a crushing loss of a huge chunk of your bankroll. If that describes you, it’s nothing to be ashamed of. If you are getting uncomfortable with the level of your losses, take a break. In these cases it’s really easy to get rattled and stop playing your best game. So even if the count is great, make your own decision whether you should take a break or not.
It’s also worth noting that I have been backed off a lot more frequently while losing than while winning. I think one of the reasons is that most normal casino players don’t sit there and take a beating. It looks out of place. This is also a legitimate reason for leaving the table even though the count remains good.
Thanks you always have the best real world answers. I appreciate your time. I am getting prepared for my trip to Las Vegas next week and am working on bringing my A game to the table. Thanks to you, my game just keeps getting better and more on track.
Supponiamo che io sia il mazziere e che abbia due giocatori, il giocatore a sinistra ha 18 e rimane e l'altro giocatore a destra ha 21. In qualità di croupier, arrivo a 20. Il dealer può scegliere di rimanere e prendere le fiches puntate dal giocatore di sinistra. Ma pagare il giocatore di destra?
Il banco non può SCEGLIERE di fare qualcosa. Le sue regole sono fisse. Deve colpire finché non ha 17 o un valore superiore, e poi deve stare. Anche se tutti i giocatori al tavolo hanno 18, il mazziere deve stare se finisce con 17.
Una complicazione: La maggior parte dei casinò ora offre giochi con una regola aggiuntiva sui 17 morbidi. Nei giochi "Dealer Hits Soft 17", se il banco ha una mano come (Asso,3,3), si tratta di un 17 "soft" e deve colpire di nuovo. Questo aspetto è trattato in dettaglio nell'articolo precedente.
Nel tuo esempio particolare, il banco deve ovviamente stare in piedi con un totale di 20, e raccoglierà le fiches dal giocatore con 18, e pagherà il giocatore con 21.
Win stop points can make you feel good about your chances, but they don’t actually affect the math of the game. If you are playing a losing game, they’ll save you a lot of money, because they reduce your play time. Conversely, if you are playing a positive-expectation game by accurately counting and betting with the count, a stop-win point (or even a stop-loss point) will cost you money for the same reason. Fewer hours of play equals fewer dollars of expected win.
Whoa here. I understand that varying one’s bet raises a red flag that you are probably a card counter. How does one camouflage bet variations to avoid being caught?
Not true. Your only true statement is embodied in the last sentence regarding splitting of Aces and tens. It does not matter one iota where one sits. Since the cards are not marked one has no way of knowing the value of the next card being dealt. It is true that the dealer has to take a hit with a 6 face up, but one never knows if the next card dealer takes is a bust card or a card that helps the dealers holding.
I’ve played 3rd base for many, many years. Have always used the standard basic strategy that improves one’s chances of winning. Many times I’ve agonized that the player to my right takes a hit and gets the card that would have been a perfect fit for my hand. But that’s just part of the game.
It is a good feeling to be sitting at a table where everyone knows how to play using proper strategy – – – everyone feels comfortable in this knowledge. Even if a newbie who doesn’t know how to play joins the table his presence has no effect on everyone else’s chances of winning; but it is exasperating.
Di solito dico ai giocatori di non preoccuparsi del conteggio nei tornei, perché ci sono tante altre cose su cui ci si può concentrare. Ma è anche bello poter fare le puntate più rischiose quando si sa che il mazzo è ricco di carte coperte e di assi. A dire il vero, probabilmente è meno utile di quanto si pensi. La percentuale di probabilità di vincere una mano in caso di conteggio positivo è solo di poco superiore a quella in caso di conteggio negativo. La differenza è minore di quanto la maggior parte dei giocatori si renda conto. Guardate qui: https://www.blackjackincolor.com/truecount5.htm
Ma se ritenete di poter tenere traccia dei bankroll dei vostri avversari e tenere comunque un conteggio a questo scopo, vi sarà utile. È sicuramente una bella sensazione fare una puntata enorme e beccare un blackjack!
Visita https://www.blackjacktournaments.com/tournaments/ e fare clic su "Modifica impostazioni di ricerca".
Inserire "MS,LA" come stato, per limitare gli annunci solo al Mississippi e alla Louisiana. Impostare le date desiderate e fare clic su Cerca.
I’m am very glad I found your article. I’ve tried many times to explain this point to players and it’s exactly like arguing religion. Once you bring facts into the debate they shut down (please don’t be offered I don’t mean to insult anyone’s faith). What this all boils down to is if you want to live by hindsight, would offs and could ofs, your going to have a very miserable life.
Ken, I have a set of your cards and have CVBJ and a copy of Wong’s Professional Blackjack and when I compare all three using the same set of rules I get different indexes, (granted only off by one true count here and there) how do I decide which index is best ?
I spent a lot of time on my index numbers, and CVBJ was the tool I used. Indexes are affected by nearly every possible detail of the game, so slightly different assumptions will yield slightly different answers. And then there’s the fact that indexes affect each other. If you use your best current indexes to run a new set of indexes, the numbers may change slightly. I used this kind of iterative approach over and over again to have my indexes converge to what I think were the best values.
The good news is that a difference of a point here or there is very insignificant. But if you wanted perfect indexes, you could use CVBJ making absolutely sure every setting mirrors the games you are playing. Then generate a new strategy from those numbers, and generate the indexes again. And again, and again.
The simple answer of which index is the best is likely the ones on my card, unless your conditions are widely different from my assumptions. I would trust those, or indexes you generate yourself over the aging Wong indexes. A lot has been learned over the years since Wong did his work.
Thanks, great answer, I am now very comfortable to continuing memorizing and using the indexes from you cards.
Ken,
I’m having trouble understanding the chart of standard deviation/ expected win. I am not sure if I’m getting this right. So after 3 hours of play, 68% of the time you will be either making $191 or losing $147, and 95% of the time making $360 and losing $316. I am not sure if this means that during the game, your net result can vary from 360 to -316, 95% of the time (ending with a profit of 22.5$) OR that after you finish a game you could either be at +360 or -316. So if you play 150 hands (3 hours with 50 hands each) and that there is a chance you could either be at +360 or -316, then there would not be a point in card counting since the advantage by counting cards is negligible as shown by this chart. Would you please help me understand what I’m missing or getting wrong ?
-Regards.
As the lesson describes, these numbers are the range of expected outcomes. 68% of the time, your result after 3 hours will lie somewhere between a loss of $147 and a win of $191. Let’s look at the 2-standard-deviation 95% range: somewhere between losing $316 and winning $360. In other words, if you played 20 three-hour sessions, then in 19 out of 20 of those sessions you would expect to fall somewhere in that range for that individual session. Even then, one time in the twenty sessions, you could expect to have more extreme luck, either good or bad. For that sessions, you would either lose MORE than $316, or win MORE than $360.
Of course, I must point out that even here, you can’t think in terms of exact outcomes. These are long-term averages. If you actually played 20 sessions, you may have no sessions that fall outside the 95% range, or you could have two or three sessions that do so.
As for the usefulness of counting, yes, the edge is small. In this case, the expected win is $22.50 for the three hour session. If you play a LOT of three-hour sessions with these criteria, your average win will be $22.50. But as the standard deviation numbers show, it won’t be a smooth ride. Sometimes you’ll win $300, sometimes you’ll lose $300. But notice that the ranges are shifted a bit, so that the highest expected wins are slightly bigger than the worst expected losses. Card counting is a long and bumpy ride, and the profits take time to overcome the luck factor.
Ken, Lets say I made a betting schedule for a particular game and rule set that I want to play. During the game the count goes high and stays high, I am losing big bet after big bet, variance is killing me, should I back off my high bets? stay and stick to my betting ramp? or just leave and start over at a new table?
The math doesn’t care whether you’re crushing the game, or getting crushed instead. The next hand to be dealt either has a positive expectation for the player or it doesn’t. So to optimize your long-term results, just keep firing away. But…
In real life, unless you’re pretty accustomed to the variance of the game, this can be tough to do. Psychologically, there are benefits to preventing a crushing loss of a huge chunk of your bankroll. If that describes you, it’s nothing to be ashamed of. If you are getting uncomfortable with the level of your losses, take a break. In these cases it’s really easy to get rattled and stop playing your best game. So even if the count is great, make your own decision whether you should take a break or not.
It’s also worth noting that I have been backed off a lot more frequently while losing than while winning. I think one of the reasons is that most normal casino players don’t sit there and take a beating. It looks out of place. This is also a legitimate reason for leaving the table even though the count remains good.
Thanks you always have the best real world answers. I appreciate your time. I am getting prepared for my trip to Las Vegas next week and am working on bringing my A game to the table. Thanks to you, my game just keeps getting better and more on track.
L'ultima mano, di pari importo, è la prima a puntare; forzateli con tutti (salvo 5) solo in caso di puntata assicurativa.
Supponiamo che io sia il mazziere e che abbia due giocatori, il giocatore a sinistra ha 18 e rimane e l'altro giocatore a destra ha 21. In qualità di croupier, arrivo a 20. Il dealer può scegliere di rimanere e prendere le fiches puntate dal giocatore di sinistra. Ma pagare il giocatore di destra?
Il banco non può SCEGLIERE di fare qualcosa. Le sue regole sono fisse. Deve colpire finché non ha 17 o un valore superiore, e poi deve stare. Anche se tutti i giocatori al tavolo hanno 18, il mazziere deve stare se finisce con 17.
Una complicazione: La maggior parte dei casinò ora offre giochi con una regola aggiuntiva sui 17 morbidi. Nei giochi "Dealer Hits Soft 17", se il banco ha una mano come (Asso,3,3), si tratta di un 17 "soft" e deve colpire di nuovo. Questo aspetto è trattato in dettaglio nell'articolo precedente.
Nel tuo esempio particolare, il banco deve ovviamente stare in piedi con un totale di 20, e raccoglierà le fiches dal giocatore con 18, e pagherà il giocatore con 21.
WIN WALK 30 AND OUT WORKS WELL….PICK A GET OUTPOINT…FOLLOW THE SAME GAME..SAME RULES..WHEN YO SAY WIN WALK DO IT
Win stop points can make you feel good about your chances, but they don’t actually affect the math of the game. If you are playing a losing game, they’ll save you a lot of money, because they reduce your play time. Conversely, if you are playing a positive-expectation game by accurately counting and betting with the count, a stop-win point (or even a stop-loss point) will cost you money for the same reason. Fewer hours of play equals fewer dollars of expected win.
Whoa here. I understand that varying one’s bet raises a red flag that you are probably a card counter. How does one camouflage bet variations to avoid being caught?
Not true. Your only true statement is embodied in the last sentence regarding splitting of Aces and tens. It does not matter one iota where one sits. Since the cards are not marked one has no way of knowing the value of the next card being dealt. It is true that the dealer has to take a hit with a 6 face up, but one never knows if the next card dealer takes is a bust card or a card that helps the dealers holding.
I’ve played 3rd base for many, many years. Have always used the standard basic strategy that improves one’s chances of winning. Many times I’ve agonized that the player to my right takes a hit and gets the card that would have been a perfect fit for my hand. But that’s just part of the game.
It is a good feeling to be sitting at a table where everyone knows how to play using proper strategy – – – everyone feels comfortable in this knowledge. Even if a newbie who doesn’t know how to play joins the table his presence has no effect on everyone else’s chances of winning; but it is exasperating.
Di solito dico ai giocatori di non preoccuparsi del conteggio nei tornei, perché ci sono tante altre cose su cui ci si può concentrare. Ma è anche bello poter fare le puntate più rischiose quando si sa che il mazzo è ricco di carte coperte e di assi. A dire il vero, probabilmente è meno utile di quanto si pensi. La percentuale di probabilità di vincere una mano in caso di conteggio positivo è solo di poco superiore a quella in caso di conteggio negativo. La differenza è minore di quanto la maggior parte dei giocatori si renda conto. Guardate qui:
https://www.blackjackincolor.com/truecount5.htm
Ma se ritenete di poter tenere traccia dei bankroll dei vostri avversari e tenere comunque un conteggio a questo scopo, vi sarà utile. È sicuramente una bella sensazione fare una puntata enorme e beccare un blackjack!
Il conteggio delle carte ha qualche effetto sul nostro gioco, perché il mio ha avuto un grande successo con la strategia di conteggio di Ken.
Visita https://www.blackjacktournaments.com/tournaments/ e fare clic su "Modifica impostazioni di ricerca".
Inserire "MS,LA" come stato, per limitare gli annunci solo al Mississippi e alla Louisiana. Impostare le date desiderate e fare clic su Cerca.
Dove posso trovare un elenco di tornei di blackjack sulla costa del golfo?