tyler498
tyler498
Joined: Jun 24, 2017
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 57
July 30th, 2017 at 12:16:28 AM permalink
Hi all!

I've recently started counting BJ occasionally ( weekends), not professionally but I still got a comfortable edge thanks to good rules. (Where I play the 10$ min 6deck shoe has an initial edge of -0.36) and it seems like nobody cares about spreads!

The only thing I don't get/disagree with is bankroll requirement, I've read things such as "without a bankroll you would be just gambling", and "you need to increase your bankroll to reduce your ROR because your ROR is too high..."

It seems to me that advising counters to first prepare a large bankroll is a huge waste of resources, and saying a lower bankroll increases your ROR might cause misconceptions. Of course, a 2K$ bankroll will have a much higher ROR than a 20K$ one, but ruin in the first one means only losing 2K and ruin in the second example is losing 20k! you are just as likely to win/lose any given amount of money with any bankroll, provided of course the loss is smaller than your bankroll. (sorry for stating the obvious but I also got misled as I started as well).

Also if you look at this from a return on investment perspective, then about half the time, when a player remains mostly up, his bankroll isn't used, which is inefficient. The optimal way it seems to me to optimize the return on investment is to start with a small bankroll and increase it in case of losses (or stop).

To be honest I have never even thought of what my bankroll is, I guess I stayed well within the SD and never had to ask myself. Am I missing something? is the bankroll a figure in your mind or does it have to be money you are actually able to put in the game? why would having that money bring you any advantage (such as lower risk of losing)?

Lemme know what you all think :)
billryan
billryan
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 78
  • Posts: 2697
July 30th, 2017 at 12:43:20 AM permalink
Guy who taught me to play said start with a $3,000 BR and play $5 games until you double it, spreading 1-4. He said doing that would teach me discipline. With $6,000 play $10 1-4 until you double it. That's as far as I got, because I ever felt comfortable wagering $25-$100 on a hand. I play a $10-$50 game, or less.
I think his way works. Might not be for everybody, but what is?
It's what you do and not what you say If you're not part of the future then get out of the way
RS
RS
Joined: Feb 11, 2014
  • Threads: 51
  • Posts: 5795
July 30th, 2017 at 5:38:37 AM permalink
Quote: tyler498

Hi all!

I've recently started counting BJ occasionally ( weekends), not professionally but I still got a comfortable edge thanks to good rules. (Where I play the 10$ min 6deck shoe has an initial edge of -0.36) and it seems like nobody cares about spreads!

The only thing I don't get/disagree with is bankroll requirement, I've read things such as "without a bankroll you would be just gambling", and "you need to increase your bankroll to reduce your ROR because your ROR is too high..."

It seems to me that advising counters to first prepare a large bankroll is a huge waste of resources, and saying a lower bankroll increases your ROR might cause misconceptions. Of course, a 2K$ bankroll will have a much higher ROR than a 20K$ one, but ruin in the first one means only losing 2K and ruin in the second example is losing 20k! you are just as likely to win/lose any given amount of money with any bankroll, provided of course the loss is smaller than your bankroll. (sorry for stating the obvious but I also got misled as I started as well).

Also if you look at this from a return on investment perspective, then about half the time, when a player remains mostly up, his bankroll isn't used, which is inefficient. The optimal way it seems to me to optimize the return on investment is to start with a small bankroll and increase it in case of losses (or stop).

To be honest I have never even thought of what my bankroll is, I guess I stayed well within the SD and never had to ask myself. Am I missing something? is the bankroll a figure in your mind or does it have to be money you are actually able to put in the game? why would having that money bring you any advantage (such as lower risk of losing)?

Lemme know what you all think :)



Risk Of Ruin is better applied or understood from a professional's point of view. If a professional card counter runs out of bankroll, he's broke and needs to find another way to make money. This is why a professional card counter wants to have a large bankroll so he can endure the large swings that come with card counting blackjack.

On the other hand, for a recreational-type card counter who plays mostly only on the weekends, the needs of a bankroll are much different. If you have a regular job where you have an income that is greater than your expenses, then you can use the extra income as a way to have a replenishable bankroll.

All you really need is enough money for a session bankroll (or more) whenever you go out. If/when it goes below that amount, replenish your roll with your other income. If it never goes below that amount (extremely rare), then you're not wasting any time or resources.

Essentially, you do have that extra money and it can be considered part of your bankroll. Instead of having that money in the bank or in a shoe box in the closet, it's just money that you haven't yet been paid from your job.


I don't want my post to be interpreted the wrong way, so I'll include this:

- Remember, you can get fired from your job at any second. Even though there is money from your job that you will get paid, that only counts if you still have that job. Don't borrow money or play on credit just because you'll get paid next week or whatever.
- Don't play outside of your means. Only use money you actually have that is not necessary for anything else (house/car/insurance payments, rent/food/kids/etc.).
00111100101100001011011100110101101100101011001010010000001101111011100110110001101100001011100100010000001101100011010010110110101100001001000000110111101110011011000110110000101110010
Salthouse
Salthouse
Joined: Jul 30, 2017
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 5
July 30th, 2017 at 5:59:49 AM permalink
The smaller the Bankroll the more aggressive you bet it. Forget all the correct numbers. If the money is replenish-able through your normal work / business life then do not sweat it. If you have a good income and play bj for recreation then I would take the bankroll ( the amount of money you are willing to lose playing blackjack and only blackjack) divide it by 50 units and bet that at a TC of 2 ( shoe game). I would use the old well trusted betting yard stick of : Units bet = True Count -1

Your minimum bet should be as low as possible preferably zero but at worst case no more than the unit divided by 12.
I would not reduce my bet until I lost 30 units. High risk of being broke but maximize potential big win when compared to your BR.

Remember this is a high risk strategy but it has high rewards.
BlackjackGuy123
BlackjackGuy123
Joined: Jul 27, 2017
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 48
July 30th, 2017 at 8:32:31 AM permalink
Betting more than full kelly is counter productive for the purpose of bankroll growth and not recommended. It is true that a larger bankroll should be bet more cautiously than a smaller bankroll. Bankroll can be defined either as your net-worth or some amount of wealth that you are willing to devote to blackjack. Proper bankroll management is critical and there is really no intelligent way to size your bets without a good understanding of what your bankroll is. With a 2k bankroll it is difficult to win at a rate that is worth your time even with a good game.
ZenKinG
ZenKinG
Joined: May 3, 2016
  • Threads: 26
  • Posts: 622
July 30th, 2017 at 8:51:06 AM permalink
In my opinion risk of ruin is the single most dangerous metric for a new to be counter. The reason i say that is very simple. Many counters focus on the exact number too much amd dont realize exactly what it means and how to extrapolate the data from it. Risk of ruin means losing ALL of your money. What counters dont realize is that your risk of ruin might be 1% or 5%, but what they dont realize is that they might have a 30% or 50% chance to lose 1/3 or more of their bankroll and then what? Many dont understand, you now have to resize your bets or you will be headed potentially for ruin. And what happens when you resize? Youre now making much less.

The second most dangerous metric is NOT understanding N0(N-zero). This is the single most important metric in my opinion that any aspiring counter should know and understand. This metric tells you exactly the chance of you overcoming one standard deviation after a certain amount of rounds played given a fixed betting ramp. If lets say you have a N0 of 17k, you now know you need to play 17,000 rounds of blackjack to have a 68% chance of not being BEHIND and you can now adjust your living expenses and risk accordingly.

Instead of just falling in love with your risk of ruin percentage, knowing how to incorporate both of the things i just mentioned give you a much clearer picture of how to prepare a bankroll accordingly. One of the big culprits is the books that are published. They dont want to mention any of that because that doesnt sell. Yes, granted, most of these books came out before N0 was created, but they still never talk about how tough counting really is. They will use inflated numbers such as 100 rounds per hour just to boost the hourly dollar figure that one can earn to inspire new counters on just how great counting is and so they can SELL their book better. No one wants to read abour how much of a grind it is. No author is gonna sit there and say you have a 50% chance of losing 1/3 of your bankroll and now you will make much less per hour due to resizing. That simply doesnt sell.
Wong Halves Full Indices ------------ LoneWoLF
BlackjackGuy123
BlackjackGuy123
Joined: Jul 27, 2017
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 48
July 30th, 2017 at 9:13:09 AM permalink
" What counters dont realize is that your risk of ruin might be 1% or 5%, but what they dont realize is that they might have a 30% or 50% chance to lose 1/3 or more of their bankroll and then what? Many dont understand, you now have to resize your bets "

The flip side of this is that if you have a plan to resize your bets, as you should, then your effective ROR is much smaller than the simulator says.
billryan
billryan
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 78
  • Posts: 2697
Thanks for this post from:
RS
July 30th, 2017 at 9:15:11 AM permalink
I've yet to meet an author of a blackjack book who seemed concerned about selling his book. There is little money in these books.
It's what you do and not what you say If you're not part of the future then get out of the way
Salthouse
Salthouse
Joined: Jul 30, 2017
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 5
July 30th, 2017 at 1:48:06 PM permalink
One could argue bankroll management is only critical if losing it in totality is a life changing moment. Most of the time this never happens. People quit playing until they are able to add to their remaining monies. The idea of winning back their losses by betting 25% of the wager that lost it is all to frightening. There is the theoretical simulated world of blackjack and there is the real blackjack world of unending toil.
ZenKinG
ZenKinG
Joined: May 3, 2016
  • Threads: 26
  • Posts: 622
July 30th, 2017 at 1:51:22 PM permalink
Quote: Salthouse

One could argue bankroll management is only critical if losing it in totality is a life changing moment. Most of the time this never happens. People quit playing until they are able to add to their remaining monies. The idea of winning back their losses by betting 25% of the wager that lost it is all to frightening. There is the theoretical simulated world of blackjack and there is the real blackjack world of unending toil.



Wrong. If you can't accept it, you're just 'gambling'. Resizing is all part of the game for a professional. If you think something is 'frightening' you've already left 'professional' and went back into 'recreational' territory. You also resize when your bankroll grows. That will compensate for the time you resized down in a downswing. One should always be resizing up and down for maximum growth unless you're facing severe heat, where then upping your max bet is not recommended.
Wong Halves Full Indices ------------ LoneWoLF

  • Jump to: