Poll

3 votes (42.85%)
3 votes (42.85%)
No votes (0%)
No votes (0%)
No votes (0%)
No votes (0%)
1 vote (14.28%)
1 vote (14.28%)
No votes (0%)
2 votes (28.57%)

7 members have voted

Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1338
  • Posts: 22091
July 10th, 2020 at 2:21:41 PM permalink
In my continued look at FREE betting systems, my next one shall be Oscar's Grind. Please click the link for an introduction and the rules, for now.

At this point I'd like to throw it open for general comments on Oscar's Grind, like reason one might use it, user experience, pros & cons, and any comments on my page.

I also put together this simple and temporary video showing an example.


Direct: ttps://youtu.be/4x53TDah4NY

The question for the poll is what do you think of Oscar's Grind?
Last edited by: unnamed administrator on Oct 30, 2020
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
billryan
billryan
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 173
  • Posts: 9634
Thanks for this post from:
Minty
July 10th, 2020 at 3:16:32 PM permalink
I used a modified Oscars Grind for several years on low stakes BJ. Playing mostly at the El Cortez, I'd make a few dollars per hour. What it got me was three free nights a month and a prime rib lunch every day I played. I'd come out every two months, come in on the 27th-28th, and use my offers back to back. I'd play for about six hours a day, mixing O.G. with some card counting. I'd play OG and when the pit was comfortable and not paying attention I'd switch to KISS for one or two shoes of Double Deck.
I also used it on electronic roulette when the main goal was to funnel enough money to get a premium.
Never won big and very rarely would end a session down anything.
Once I moved to Vegas and didn't need free rooms, OG lost its lure and I was lucky to met Axel and a bunch of former posters here who were kind enough to show me a few of their moves.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1338
  • Posts: 22091
July 14th, 2020 at 8:41:13 AM permalink
It's nice to be off suspension (I never noticed you were gone, Wiz). While I was in WoV jail, I finished up my page on Oscar's Grind and shot a video, which I need to edit.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
billryan
billryan
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 173
  • Posts: 9634
July 14th, 2020 at 9:00:55 AM permalink
In my modified version, after a few bets I would no longer look to win a unit, only to break even. Once I was even for the series, I'd start a new one. I called a series an inning, and would play 7-9 innings per session. Playing for the tie instead of trying to win each series was much more manageable. My goal wasn't really to win, it was to get in enough hours each day to get a food comp and get free room mailings.
Oscar wouldn't help you win big, but it can improve your chances of your money lasting longer which generally will improve your comps.
I'd alternate Oscar with card counting a few shoes( Double deck) when the pit was satisfied I wasn't a threat.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1338
  • Posts: 22091
July 14th, 2020 at 10:40:34 AM permalink
Quote: billryan

My goal wasn't really to win, it was to get in enough hours each day to get a food comp and get free room mailings.



That is a good goal. In that case, I would recommend starting with a few big bets after buying in and when the supervisor is watching. Also, take lots of breaks. Otherwise, bet small. Granted, sometimes the supervisor comes along mid-hand, so its not perfect.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1338
  • Posts: 22091
July 14th, 2020 at 1:11:34 PM permalink
Here is version 1.0 of my Oscar's Grind video. It in in "private" mode, so I can still redo it. That said, I welcome all comments. I know the audio sounds like I'm talking through a long piece of pipe. I do not know why or a way to correct for that.


Direct: ttps://youtu.be/4x53TDah4NY
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
billryan
billryan
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 173
  • Posts: 9634
July 14th, 2020 at 1:33:46 PM permalink
Staying hydrated means more bathroom trips. I was a smoker who made a point of not bothering my fellow players so I'd get up for my two smokes an hour. I figured I missed about a quarter of the hands dealt.
Since this is about Oscars Grind, maybe you can clear something up for me.
I believe it was Arnold Snyder who first threw water on this method, pointing out that eventually one would hit a long losing streak, or even a choppy game and you'd wipe out your theoretical $5000 bankroll.

As I mentioned, playing to break even in a long series will get you back to your initial bet more often. I think in this game, sessions actually do play a factor. If I had a $5,000 bankroll, I'd divide it into ten " sessions" of $500. Only one session BR is ever at risk.
Say my initial bet was $5 and I'm down 400, betting eight units. I win so I raise my bet to nine units. I lose three hands in a row so I've reached my session limit of $500. I'm done and will start again tomorrow. Normally that wouldn't change a thing as life is all one big session.
However, in this case my bet has been lowered from nine units back to my initial one unit bet.
To my math impaired way of thinking, this lowers my chances of losing my entire $5,000 BR by about 90%.
Had I kept going in my original session, I'd be down $500 and betting $40 a hand.
By starting over in a new session, I'm still down $500, but am betting $5. The $500 I lost would be replaced by winning sessions.
As long as I don't lose $500 more than once in ten sessions, it is a slightly winning game. I can't imagine having ten straight $500 losing sessions. I'd think my chance to double my $5000 before losing it all are pretty high.
I strongly suspect my thoughts on some this are incorrect, but if they are can you explain why?
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1338
  • Posts: 22091
July 14th, 2020 at 2:00:09 PM permalink
Bill, what is your winning goal per session?
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
billryan
billryan
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 173
  • Posts: 9634
July 14th, 2020 at 2:13:35 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

Bill, what is your winning goal per session?



To be clear, what you call a session I call a game, and each sequence is an inning. An inning ends when you are up one unit.

My aspirational goal was ten units. In reality, I'd usually get bored after 7-9 innings and quit after I won the last inning.

After some tinkering, I decided to put the extra winnings from a double, split and blackjack in a side bank, almost as a side bet so that each inning resulted in winning one unit.
FleaStiff
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 265
  • Posts: 14466
July 15th, 2020 at 4:28:07 AM permalink
Quote: billryan

To be clear, what you call a session I call a game, and each sequence is an inning. An inning ends when you are up one unit.

Confusing to me. I would never refer to a new come-out roll as a start of an inning and would not use the amount of my bet for any such determination. I have observed even system bettors to be quite erratic. For instance at baccarat, I am often addressed as Mister Banker, but am on Player and Tie quite often.

It is clear that computer simulations are always 100% loyal to a system, but real world bettors seem to be less committed. Drinks, music, distractions and worry tend to erode any "system player's" label.

A session is a stint at the table, nothing more. I favor the concept of USING winnings as either tips or bet increases, rather than "chasing losses" by dipping into the bankroll on losses.

The bet increase will bring you money IF it wins, but the tip will bring you a positive return of SOME sort, because, even if the bet loses, crew members will perk up and pay attention and other players will be 'shamed' into tipping.

I fully realize that any comparison or discussion of systems should focus on "pure" systems, not erratic ones. Results can always be erratic but system adherence should be purely by the book, however gamblers are always real world gamblers and real world gamblers rarely follow systems religiously even if they think they do.




.
Last edited by: FleaStiff on Jul 15, 2020

  • Jump to: