He stated that this progression also works for blackjack. He then goes on to propose a stronger system:Quote: James Grosjean, Beyond Counting page 159
Start your sequence with a bet of 1 unit. Then, decrease your bet by 1 unit after each win, loss or push. It will come as no surprise to experts in this field that table limits are anathema to this progression.
Grosjean credits Ken Fuchs with originating this progression.Quote:
... initialize the sequence with a bet of 0 units ... this system has the highest expectation and lowest variance of any progression ever devised.
I was reading Beyond Counting today and stumbled upon this gem:He stated that this progression also works for blackjack. He then goes on to propose a stronger system:Grosjean credits Ken Fuchs with originating this progression.
You don't even have to get out of your car to play it.
Stay in the parking lot..
I was actually thinking about Grosjean the other day. I did learn something interesting from him: If you get arrested and booked as a John Doe, you can't get bail, even if you come forward with your real info after booking. I tend to trust him on that because it happened to him (I forget if it was the Caesars hole-carding bust or the Imperial Palace wandered-onto-the-gaming-floor bust).
Huh. Start with a bet of one unit, lower to a bet of zero units regardless of resolution. But he doesn't say to do it once, he says to reduce by one unit with each resolved bet. So after the zero unit bet you bet -1 units, which means, what, the casino writes a check to you in the betting circle? Marker for a single, table-minimum chip? The problem with this is, if the house lets you do it, sooner or later you'll start owing them comps.
This is exactly why he made his statement about table limits.