Wrong Card Showing, Right Card Showing

Hello all!

Quick disclaimer: I am a non-counting, hunch playing, crazy ass gambler. I play by basic strategy about 98% of the time, but occasionally will make an off the book play, almost always in the more aggressive direction. This is one such story, and I'm interested in the seasoned counting perspective.

(I said that I am a non-counter but I definitely try to track the flow of cards in a general sense regarding big and little cards. So basically I'm just a shitty counter spreading bets wildly, lol.)

The other night, playing $100 double deck, H-17, surrender allowed game, one on one with the dealer. About four hand into the shoe, I spread to two hands of $500. The dealer had a 10-showing. My first hand was 8-2. Impulsively, I doubled down. I was fully aware that this was not the correct play, just playing a feeling.

The second hand was 7-3. Yup, in for a penny, in for a pound. Double down again. We now have $2000 on the table. Cards are dealt facedown, which I prefer. No sense stressing until we see what we are up against.

The dealer hole card was a 5, he now has 15 drawing a card. Looking good, right? This is really the scenario we hope for with big bets. Two tens doubled against a hard fifteen, dealer drawing.

He pulls a five, and has 20. Now I'm in hell. First hand reveal, I also got a five, 15, and lose. $1000 down. Second hand reveal, and the third consecutive five is revealed. Aaaagghh! 15 again, and both hands go down in flames. $2000 down.

So I was swiftly punished for my transgression! I no longer lament such decisions, as it's all part of the fun of gambling to me. I never ask dealers to show me the next card to see what might have happened, as many players do. The decision was made, and it's not coming back, and I will always live with the consequences.

Later on, it occurred to me that had the dealer been showing the five up with the ten down, I would have played the hand exactly the same, and would have had the Blackjack Gods "seal of approval": double tens against five. And the result would have been the same. Lose $2000.

This is the largest bet that I have lost. The second largest bet that I have lost was an example of playing the hand "right", and losing. $1000 out, 10 against dealer 6-showing. Double for less, only b/c I was going all in. Dealer has a five under, and pulls a picture to arrive at 21. Goodbye, $1600, book approved play.

OK, long story with no real point, any wisdom appreciated. FWIW, I then went on a $2800 dollar run, and finished up for the session, so all's well that ends well.

Welcome, Rip. Love it! In for a penny, in for a pound. No lectures. I'm guessing that your bankroll is a little short for that kind of betting. As far as tracking the high and low cards, that can get away from you at times.

Non counters and wild bettors are some of my best friends. You're welcome at my table anytime.

Quote: RipCovington

I never ask dealers to show me the next card to see what might have happened, as many players do. The decision was made, and it's not coming back, and I will always live with the consequences.

Congratulations on not trying to play the game in the rear-view mirror.

You pays your money, you takes your chances.

I see a lot of people double 10 vs 10. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

Ha ha! Thanks, 1BB. Who knows? Maybe we have already shared a table at some point? :)

Yes, that was betting jack-assery, for sure. It's crazy, b/c what rewards, also punishes. This is why the gambling learning curve is confusing, if not non-existent. It was more jack-assery that brought me back up. I was fortunate enough to win three more $1,000 hands, (had also won one previously), for a total of four W's, so the big bet win-loss was 4-2.

The way I see it, and this will probably get me clobbered in here, is that the only advantages, aside from rules ala splits, doubles, BJ's, etc, that we have as players are: 1. Counting. 2. Basic strategy. 3. Bet spreading. and 3. Ability to leave the table.

So when I see these flow charts over millions of hands always funneling towards the inevitable house advantage, they always presuppose flat betting. To me betting variance is the big equalizer. It usually comes down to a few big bets to make or break a session. Even the most technically proficient counter using a 1-8 spread will undergo long losing streaks, I believe you folks call it "variance".

What we really have is randomness, and our brains don't like randomness. We are hard-wired to look for patterns. We don't know what to do when there isn't a go-to pattern to ride by!

Props to the Wizard for the hand by hand calculator, b/c I see how really, really close some of these plays are. I gave up a bit of edge over millions of hands, to go for the gold. I had two tens against a fifteen. That's why you play.

Plus I'll probably never get backed off with plays like that. They know I'm a jackass! LOL.

@Dieter, Thanks, I can't live like that, looking backwards.

I almost never make that play, (really!)

"You pays your money, you takes your chances." That's it exactly.

Quote: RipCovington

So when I see these flow charts over millions of hands always funneling towards the inevitable house advantage, they always presuppose flat betting.

No, they don't.

Martingale or D'Alembert will get you there, too - often times faster.

If you want to change the overall house edge, by consistently betting more when the advantage shifts to your favor, that's different.

Gotcha, Dieter.. I was thinking about one of the charts that I saw on one of the forum pages, or maybe a Wizard appendix, can't recall.

Anyway, it illustrated after a lifetime of hands, some enormous number, how the standard deviation was shrunk down to a tiny amount, and how nearly every player would be behind the curve. But it was based on flat betting.

I must admit something perplexes me. Reading gambling chronicles, and counters regaling how they end up down thousands of dollars even counting perfectly, how they have faith that the system will even it out. Isn't this another form of gambler's fallacy?

I mean, each time you sit down fresh at the table, the cards don't know that you have been counting perfectly for several trips, and are in the midst of a crushing losing streak. Each shoe is finite, yes, with its own little advantage or disadvantage packed into a little window of play, and once shuffled will have zero bearing on what happens in the future.

(Head explodes.)

Quote: RipCovington

Anyway, it illustrated after a lifetime of hands, some enormous number, how the standard deviation was shrunk down to a tiny amount, and how nearly every player would be behind the curve. But it was based on flat betting.

Yes. The more you play, the closer the results approximate the expected house (or player) edge of the game.

Quote: RipCovington

I must admit something perplexes me. Reading gambling chronicles, and counters regaling how they end up down thousands of dollars even counting perfectly, how they have faith that the system will even it out. Isn't this another form of gambler's fallacy?

Yes. No. Or vice versa.

All players - even counters and casinos - expect to win some and lose some.

By adjusting bet size to correlate with the fluctuating advantage ("moving money with the count"), a counter is shifting their edge in the game. More rounds = results better approximating their edge, so long as they're doing it right and the results are fair. If they're making mistakes in determining the advantage, if they're making mistakes in play strategy, if they're making mistakes in bet sizing, or if they're getting cheated, that falls apart.

Welcome Rip......you are my kind of player, but have a much bigger bankroll :-)!

You'll have the chance to interact with some very smart AP's on this Forum.......I am not even close to being one of them, but never the less, welcome aboard!

You didn't make the proper play.

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

In the long run, it doesn't.

@Paradigm: Thank you for the welcome! As to bankroll, I usually take about 3-grand, and I usually start playing 25 a hand. If I can find a 5-dollar table that doesn't have too many players, I will sometimes go that route.

There are so many things that I read that don't seem to match my experiences. Like Wizard has one answer in his Q-A about what the odds are of losing 7-8 hands in a row, and they are absurd, like it would rarely go down like that. And yet, I seem to have losing streaks like that almost every session! (And not just b/c I'm doing stupid shit like doubling 10-against 10, mmkay....again, rare shot for the endzone..)

What are the odds of losing 17-hands in a row? Happened to me, 17-$100 bets in a row. Crazy.

What are the odds of winning 17-hands in a row? Happened to me, starting at $5, and pressing $5 each hand, I ran it up to $900. Lost the 18th hand at $90-bet.

I guess the main thing is that I just don't panic too much if I drop a big bet. Because I have simply had too many all night sessions of "disciplined" $10 bet sessions, being slowly ground up into powder, and being bored and frustrated out of my mind.

If I wanted that type of gambling experience, I'd just sit at a slot machine and zone out, waiting patiently to die.