Counting Cards + Martingale strategy? Effective?

If you use the Martingale strategy combined with a card counting with a betting correlation of .99(like the halves system), to know a true advantage, and only placing bets in winning blackjack tables, and with a cover of infinite losees in a row. Would it be Profitable?

See this...
I was wondering, in theory, maybe if i play only the first 3 bets: let's say 50$, 100$ 200$ US(I mean, If i loose the third bet go back to the first); it could be more likely wining 8 times (not in a row, but maybe winning the second or third bet) than you loose 3 times in a row after you allready win eight bets. So it would have to be a probability of loosing the 3 bets in row, in every 3 bets runed, in advantageous blackjacks, of minimum 1/9 (in every run of three bets) or higher, if that is the case, i would be winning 50US, am i right??? and if all my team (8members)is wonging, and playing like this it would be 400Us each ``x´´min. that's a lot of money for me xD.

it's posible or closely possible what i'm saying

What it's your opinion? is this a profitable good strategy, i simulated with my cards and in simulation programas a little, and it works great, but would it work too in the long run?

Please help me in this question?

Many thanks n.n'

Any one have an opinio in this?

Did you expect a reply in 2 minutes?

I wouldn't do this, as if I have an advantage, I'd not be stacking of my chips to try and martingale and chase any losses. I'd increase my bet while I had the advantage and take it down when it didn't. What happens if your up to the 5th level, but the deck turns against you?

What if the deck is good for five hands, you win all five but your min-betting all the time?

The Martingale trades a series of small wins for the risk of one big loss. Whether you have the advantage or not.

What happens if your up to the 5th level, but the deck turns against you?

In my Bj team it would be counters in the tables without out placing bets, if a deck turns agaist me i or my team members, would place the next bet in a table that have an advantage.

But in theory, there is a little probability to loose 8 times in a row, beacause i'm in advantage in each hand, and plus playing perfect basic strat, and playing perfect indices, what is the probability to loose 8 times in a row with out winnig yet that money to cover it?

???????? ^^

Quote: SUPERSAYAYAN32190

What happens if your up to the 5th level, but the deck turns against you?

In my Bj team it would be counters in the tables without out placing bets, if a deck turns agaist me i or my team members, would place the next bet in a table that have an advantage.

But in theory, there is a little probability to loose 8 times in a row, beacause i'm in advantage in each hand, and plus playing perfect basic strat, and playing perfect indices, what is the probability to loose 8 times in a row with out winnig yet that money to cover it?

I don't know what the probability is... why not work it out for yourself? Still there IS a probability (I'd guess around 1/1500) that it will happen and you lose a large stake. Plus you have failed to capitalise properly on all the positive hands so far.

If your putting together a large sophisticated team to count and spread across the tables, why use a crappy chase losses system, instead of using something like the Kelly Criteria to maximise your bank roll growth when you have an advantage.

On top that, practically you have to find a place with mid shoe entry, that's not going to notice you repeatedly 'wonging out' and moving onto a new table, or having two or more people to move in when needed. I have no doubt that in theory a BJ counting team could make money. I doubt they'd do it via a Martingale.

Quote: SUPERSAYAYAN32190

In my Bj team it would be counters in the tables without out placing bets, if a deck turns agaist me i or my team members, would place the next bet in a table that have an advantage.

Where are you planning on doing this? This system is maybe the most transparent one I've ever seen. I guess you could try in AC where card counting is more-or-less allowed, but even then you aren't allowed to openly work with other players. You'll be banned within minutes...

Quote: rdw4potus

Where are you planning on doing this? This system is maybe the most transparent one I've ever seen. I guess you could try in AC where card counting is more-or-less allowed, but even then you aren't allowed to openly work with other players. You'll be banned within minutes...

I live in mexico city and in the casinos i frecuent card counting is more or less allowed. And with a good camuflage strategy and good comunication Signals system, my team and i aren't been discover yet. They don't have many camaras, or many people watching you. That's why i do it so transparent as you say ^^

Quote: thecesspit

I don't know what the probability is... why not work it out for yourself? Still there IS a probability (I'd guess around 1/1500) that it will happen and you lose a large stake. Plus you have failed to capitalise properly on all the positive hands so far.

If your putting together a large sophisticated team to count and spread across the tables, why use a crappy chase losses system, instead of using something like the Kelly Criteria to maximise your bank roll growth when you have an advantage.

On top that, practically you have to find a place with mid shoe entry, that's not going to notice you repeatedly 'wonging out' and moving onto a new table, or having two or more people to move in when needed. I have no doubt that in theory a BJ counting team could make money. I doubt they'd do it via a Martingale.

So, what you are saying, is that i can make more money with my team using the kelly criteria and bet spreads, than playing only winnig blackjack, with martingale betting strategy where it would be unlikely to have 8 consecutive looses, and i'm making 1 unit in each hand and loosing almost never(according to you around 1/1500)?? right?

You can sustent that with numbers or a good theory?

Martingale is a crappy system. I highly doubt that you're maximizing your gains while minimizing volatility with that system.

Very bad idea. It has been proven mathematically if you over-bet your bankroll, even with an advantage, your team will go broke. Let's say your team only has enough money to cover 8 losses in a row. I guarantee you someday that will happen. The probability will be close to 1 in 250 that it will happen on any given run of 8 bets, even with a counter's advantage. If you play for any length of time, it will happen, the team goes broke, and you won't be able to count anymore!! If you over-bet, you LOSE the advantage.

If you bring enough money for 8 losses to the casino (and keep more at the bank), this could cut the trip short, and still cost you money in the long run. In the very long run, a series of not being able to cover the trip loss will result in an overall loss to the team, and ultimately lose everybody's money. No more counting, no more advantage.

The optimal bet is the Kelly bet, which bets in proportion to your bankroll, advantage and variance of the game. If you overbet, you may get lucky and win faster, but you have a much higher risk of losing EVERYTHING! I speak from some experience...

Always make the Kelly bet.

I only can't understand what you are saying to me, because of my experience using this system (Playing Martingale just in advantageus blackjacks) and i had alot of winnings and never had loose 8 times in row (yet), the nearest was like the 6th bet, but i only have like 1 month using it in simulator computers and with my cards.

But it would be great, if someone could test it for me, in those programs that simulate 1billion of hands in seconds, or somthing like that, To convice my self of that, you all are saying to me, that it won't work in the long long run and is better use the kelly bet, even if i have the enough money to cover three rounds of 8 losees in a row with out covering it with the already winnings gained using the system.

Could someone do this, to convice me and to convice those who think like me(My team)??? Before i tried to use it in the casino, and if you are right, loose all my money in the long run.

It would be awsome if someone help me here with these..... many thanks n.n

Quote: SUPERSAYAYAN32190

I only can't understand what you are saying to me, because of my experience using this system (Playing Martingale just in advantageus blackjacks) and i had alot of winnings and never had loose 8 times in row (yet), the nearest was like the 6th bet, but i only have like 1 month using it in simulator computers and with my cards.

But it would be great, if someone could test it for me, in those programs that simulate 1billion of hands in seconds, or somthing like that, To convice my self of that, you all are saying to me, that it won't work in the long long run and is better use the kelly bet, even if i have the enough money to cover three rounds of 8 losees in a row with out covering it with the already winnings gained using the system.

Could someone do this, to convice me and to convice those who think like me(My team)??? Before i tried to use it in the casino, and if you are right, loose all my money in the long run.

It would be awsome if someone help me here with these..... many thanks n.n

Losing 8 in a row happends. In a "coin flip" game, you will lose alteast 8 in a row 1 in 256 times. It is better to kelly bet. Playing Martingale will most likely cause you to go broke (or not earn enough if underbetting)even in positive EV game.

But it would be great, if someone could test it for me, in those programs that simulate 1billion of hands in seconds, or somthing like that, To convice my self of that, you all are saying to me, that it won't work in the long long run and is better use the kelly bet, even if i have the enough money to cover three rounds of 8 losees in a row with out covering it with the already winnings gained using the system.

Quote: SUPERSAYAYAN32190

But it would be great, if someone could test it for me, in those programs that simulate 1billion of hands in seconds, or somthing like that, To convice my self of that, you all are saying to me, that it won't work in the long long run and is better use the kelly bet, even if i have the enough money to cover three rounds of 8 losees in a row with out covering it with the already winnings gained using the system.

You want to earn the green, do the hard work yourself.

There's plenty of literature out there that will show why the Kelly criterion works. I have no idea why I should put together a simulation to prove your method will make money, and not get any reward myself. There's plenty of books and material written in this area.

You seem convinced with your home simulation on the Martingale. My 1 in 1500 was with a 60/40 advantage. With BJ winning hands even with a + count are rarely 50% of the game. 1 in 256 shots will happen. If your only betting 1/256th of your bank roll that's under utilising it.

Quote: thecesspit

You want to earn the green, do the hard work yourself.

There's plenty of literature out there that will show why the Kelly criterion works. I have no idea why I should put together a simulation to prove your method will make money, and not get any reward myself. There's plenty of books and material written in this area.

You seem convinced with your home simulation on the Martingale. My 1 in 1500 was with a 60/40 advantage. With BJ winning hands even with a + count are rarely 50% of the game. 1 in 256 shots will happen. If your only betting 1/256th of your bank roll that's under utilising it.

And if it really works?, you don't think even a little that it could give you some green?

i'm sure that you aren't 100% sure it won't work , or partially, maybe it does.

Don't you think, aren't you some curios?
See this...
I was wondering, in theory, maybe if i play only the first 3 bets: let's say 50$, 100$ 200$ US; it could be more likely wining 8 times (not in a row, but maybe winning the second or third bet) than loosing 3 times in a row so it would have to be a probability of loosing the 3 bets in very advantageous blackjack, of minimum 1/9 that happens that(loose 3 times in a row), or higher, if that is the case, i would be winning 50 US, am i right??? and if all my team (8members)is wonging, and playing like this it would be 400Us each ``x´´min. that's a lot of money for me xD.

it's posible or closely possible what i'm saying my friend?

It's possible you will win, but if you want to approach this game with discipline, you must Kelly bet.

What will you do if you lose 3 bets in a row? Even with an advantage, it will happen around 1 in 9 or 1 in 10 times. If you still have a positive count, will you pull out more money? What if you have no more money because you bet too big on the 3rd hand? One of the biggest mistakes a counter can make is to not have enough money to bet on a positive count. You work so hard and then watch other people get your Aces!?

No. If you use the Martingale, you will win for a little while, and then one day it will wipe you and your counting friends out so fast, you will not know what happened.

*thread steal coming*

I've always wondered how to kelly bet a live game. Say the game is in a positive state, and I have a 52.7% chance of success with a payout of 1:1. My Kelly bet should be 5.4% of my bankroll (((1*52.7)-47.3)/1). Say my bankroll is $600. Am I really supposed to make a $32.40 bet? I guess I could bet $32.50 easily enough, but wouldn't I a) draw the ire of the dealer to a ridiculous degree and b) draw unwanted attention to the fact that I knew I was likely to win? Are there rounding conventions to use with Kelly betting?

Quote: rdw4potus

*thread steal coming*

I've always wondered how to kelly bet a live game.

I've wondered this previously in another thread; and I still kinda wonder it.

There are entire chapters of books written on this subject. For one, your bankroll will normally consist of all the money you have ready to gamble, not just what's in your pocket. Counting advantages usually last only a few hands, so it's unlikely you'll run out of money if you have brought a reasonable portion of your bankroll.

Second, always round off your bets! Ridiculous bets DO draw attention, especially if you like you are carefully figuring out how to bet it. Round to the nearest $5, if in doubt... round down. Also, when changing your bet, try to make it look like you are gambling, such as chasing a loss or pressing a win, and not make it look like you are carefully thinking about how much to bet.

Third, I count my bankroll before I go to the casino, then in a spreadsheet calculate the optimal Kelly bets for various advantages i would have counting. I round them off to the nearest $5, and now when I'm in the casino I know how much to bet in each situation.

Fourth, and most importantly, if you run bad in one session, but still want to keep gambling, bring your bets down! Your bankroll got smaller, your Kelly bet goes down. Otherwise, you can run out of money pretty fast...

SO if play only the first 3 bets: let's say 50$, 100$ 200$ US(I mean, If i loose the third bet go back to the first); it would be more likely wining 8 times (not in a row, but maybe winning the second or third bet) than you loose 3 times in a row. So it would have to be a probability of loosing the 3 bets in row, in every 3 bets runed, of minimum 1/9 (in every run of three bets) or higher(1/10), if that is the case, i would be winning 50US, am i right??? and if all my team (8members)is wonging, and playing like this it would be 400Us each ``x´´min. that's a lot of money for me.

Sooo, it's posible or closely possible what i'm saying ?

SO if play only the first 3 bets: let's say 50$, 100$ 200$ US(I mean, If i loose the third bet go back to the first); it would be more likely wining 8 times (not in a row, but maybe winning the second or third bet) than you loose 3 times in a row. So it would have to be a probability of loosing the 3 bets in row, in every 3 bets runed, of minimum 1/9 (in every run of three bets) or higher(1/10), if that is the case, i would be winning 50US, am i right??? and if all my team (8members)is wonging, and playing like this it would be 400Us each ``x´´min. that's a lot of money for me.

Sooo, it's posible or closely possible what i'm saying ?