7craps
7craps
Joined: Jan 23, 2010
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 1977
September 13th, 2019 at 8:10:00 PM permalink
Quote: JORDAN1

Thanks for all the insights and the lengthy work on that simulator you made to evaluate my "system." Funny thing, a couple of clicks into running the sim, my bankroll turned from $5000 to $13000. The overall loss was over $30,000 for a million rolls, but if I was playing my "system" and ran $5000 to $13000, there would be no way I would continue playing all the way back to zero dollars or even a loss. If $13,000 was hit, I would stop when I got it back down to $10,000.

stop for how long?
Quote: JORDAN1

I know, I know, and oh yeah, I know... Sessions are good for nothing.

and you
still only get one lifetime session
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
MichaelBluejay
MichaelBluejay
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 800
Thanks for this post from:
7craps
September 13th, 2019 at 8:11:46 PM permalink
Quote: JORDAN1

Funny thing, a couple of clicks into running the sim, my bankroll turned from $5000 to $13000. The overall loss was over $30,000 for a million rolls, but if I was playing my "system" and ran $5000 to $13000, there would be no way I would continue playing all the way back to zero dollars or even a loss. If $13,000 was hit, I would stop when I got it back down to $10,000.

Yes, systems don't lose every session, but for that matter neither does flat-betting. When I have time, I'll add a feature to the sim to have it test thousands of 1-hour sessions so the reader can see that the overall result is a loss, even if some of the sessions are winners.

Yes, I agree that if you get a big win, you should set a loss limit and stop playing! Some folks on this forum pooh-pooh the idea of quitting while you're ahead, saying it doesn't work, but it can't be disputed that if you get ahead and quit, you can't lose the money that you're not gambling. Quitting while you're ahead doesn't mean that you have a long-term advantage over the house, but you certainly benefit from stopping your play and not giving it back to the casino.

Quote: JORDAN1

Another fun thought. The casino wins with their house edge over a bunch of bets over a long period of time. What if... You ONLY gamble 5 times in your life? Each time you go gambling you take $5000. You play games that offer as close to a 50/50 bet as possible. You bet it all at one time.

Yes, by minimizing the number of bets, you reduce your exposure to the house edge. I have an article about a similar idea, my Halfies System. It doesn't overcome the house edge (nothing does), but it gives you a way better shot at doubling your bankroll in the short term than flat-betting does.

Quote: JORDAN1

Will anyone try this? No, but this is probably the best way to gamble in one's life. Better than Martindales and Fibonacci systems, anyway.

Yes, and better than flat-betting, if the purpose is to double a bankroll or better. But if the goal is to get a lot of play time, obviously it doesn't fare so well.
7craps
7craps
Joined: Jan 23, 2010
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 1977
September 13th, 2019 at 8:27:02 PM permalink
Quote: MichaelBluejay

Yes, systems don't lose every session, but for that matter neither does flat-betting. When I have time, I'll add a feature to the sim to have it test thousands of 1-hour sessions so the reader can see that the overall result is a loss, even if some of the sessions are winners.

this goes against the majority of gaming writers that only state the (-)ev of any session played.

It is pounded into the brain over and over you always lose x% of all your bets made.
negative numbers add up to a negative number.

Once a person finds out that is not true for every session (not one lifetime session), the concept of sessions becomes way more important to them as they have proved to themselves that one CAN WIN in any one session, and it could be the end of their lifetime session.

The reason so many gaming writers use ev and not
risk of ruin is
the math is way more difficult for the later and most can't go there even if they wanted to.

Alan Krigman comes to mind as one who expressed session win probabilities
all others just quote -ev and you lose
done
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
MichaelBluejay
MichaelBluejay
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 800
Thanks for this post from:
7craps
September 13th, 2019 at 8:35:03 PM permalink
Quote: 7craps

this goes against the majority of gaming writers that only state the (-)ev of any session played....The reason so many gaming writers use ev and not
risk of ruin is
the math is way more difficult for the later and most can't go there even if they wanted to. Alan Krigman comes to mind as one who expressed session win probabilities
all others just quote -ev and you lose
done

Well, as I like to say, I'm not most gambling writers. :) Someday I'll devote a whole article to the various ways I buck conventional wisdom, and even where I disagree with the Wizard.

Like Krigman, I do indeed post session win probabilities, and plan to post more for various systems when I have time. I also explain how just because a system *ever* wins in the short term, the overall result of all short sessions is a loss.
lilredrooster
lilredrooster
Joined: May 8, 2015
  • Threads: 150
  • Posts: 2646
Thanks for this post from:
MichaelBluejay
September 14th, 2019 at 10:24:03 AM permalink
Quote: MichaelBluejay


Halfies System. It doesn't overcome the house edge (nothing does), but it gives you a way better shot at doubling your bankroll in the short term than flat-betting does.



I read your blog about your halfies system in which you state this:

"you place your entire bankroll (the amount you bring to gamble) on a single low-edge, even-money bet, such as a a baccarat hand, a pass line bet on craps, or a 𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐛𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐣𝐚𝐜𝐤 "



your advice re using blackjack for this strategy is not good

blackjack is only a low house edge bet if you are willing to double and split when called for in basic strategy
since you are putting your entire bankroll on the bet you are not able to do that
by not having doubling or splitting available you have increased the house edge significantly in the game of blackjack


also - to say that a bet on a blackjack table is a low house edge bet is misleading - it's only a low house edge bet if you have the considerable knowledge of basic strategy in the game
"but I don't care too much for money..........money can't buy me love".............. the Beatles
MichaelBluejay
MichaelBluejay
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 800
September 14th, 2019 at 10:47:20 AM permalink
Quote: lilredrooster

I read your blog about your halfies system in which you state this:

"you place your entire bankroll (the amount you bring to gamble) on a single low-edge, even-money bet, such as a a baccarat hand, a pass line bet on craps, or a 𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐛𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐣𝐚𝐜𝐤 "

Whoops, you're absolutely right, I just removed the reference to blackjack, thanks for catching it. I don't know why I would have mentioned blackjack, except I wrote that article nearly 20 years ago and I was more prone to those kinds of errors then.

By the way, my website is not a blog.
7craps
7craps
Joined: Jan 23, 2010
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 1977
September 14th, 2019 at 12:11:34 PM permalink
Quote: MichaelBluejay

I also explain how just because a system *ever* wins in the short term, the overall result of all short sessions is a loss.

this is still not correct as the conditions are not stated.

Here is a very small table of Marty probabilities.
Condition: Doubling the starting stake or stop when Marty breaks (lose Max bet)

on average, it takes a little more than 2 trials per unit stake.
for a 13 step Marty, one could be looking at over 16,000 rounds played.
lots of small sessions could add up to this. many think 16k is the long run.
stepMax unit Betrequired stake (units; 2^step-1)double prob (craps pass line - no odds)double prob (00 Roulette - evens)
22341.00%37.79%
34737.61%33.18%
481535.84%30.19%
5163134.75%27.86%
6326333.96%25.83%
76412733.31%23.96%
812825532.73%22.18%
925651132.18%20.47%
10512102331.65%18.83%
111,024204731.14%17.24%
122,048409530.62%15.71%
134,096819130.11%14.26%

the math for this is simple but not included to keep things even simpler

25% to 35% success rate to double a starting bankroll, for many, is worth the time and effort and bankroll and comps and entertainment value.
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
MichaelBluejay
MichaelBluejay
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 800
September 14th, 2019 at 12:20:19 PM permalink
Quote: 7craps

this is still not correct as the conditions are not stated.

I'm going to have to disagree. I don't think it's necessary to state any conditions (other than "normal"). Run 100k short sessions, sum all the wins and losses, and the result will be an overall loss. Sure, if you have a $10M bankroll and you quit each session as soon as you're up $5, then the sum of all short sessions will be an overall winner, but I'm assuming that we're not using ridiculous variables that nobody is thinking of when they wonder whether systems win in the short term.

  • Jump to: