Basic Strategy Poor Results

HI. I'm new to Blackjack but I've now played over 1000 hands, with tiny stakes as an experiment, using perfect basic strategy expecting a return of around 99.5% but in reality achieving only 85%. I realize this is a small sample size but I'm wondering if there's something about the game I don't understand?
I've only played live online, RNG online, on a couple of apps and on the Wizard's trainer. All have seen disappointing results and a similar pattern where I fall behind, occasionally swing back towards break even, but generally hover around a 10%+ loss.
What are other people's experiences playing basic strategy? Have you achieved the expected return and over what sample size? Thanks.

Are you playing in a way that the machine corrects your errors? If not, I'd suspect you are making mistakes you aren't aware of.
A thousand hands is not enough to get a good sampling, in any event.
If you are questioning if BS really works, it does but very few beginners can play BJ perfectly.
You have to play on sites that correct you, or you'll just keep making the same mistakes over and over.

If just 1,000 hands were played and you bet $10 per hand (flat bet), your total bet would be $10,000 and you'd wind up with $8,500 or a $1,500 loss. Would that be 425 wins and 575 losses? Yes, losing streaks happen! But you might expect to lose $50 instead of $1,500 due to the HA.

I don't think we should question whether the OP is really playing perfect basic strategy as he claims. Probably not perfect, BUT it really doesn't matter. The cost of a few basic strategy mistakes playing $10 is nothing. It isn't the cost between winning and losing a hand, as many players think. It is the difference in expectation between the optimal play and less optimal play and for $10 wagers that will be pennies or even fractions of a cent. So let's dismiss the idea of these poor results as being due to imperfect basic strategy play.

My read was that the OP was really asking if his online game is legit, fair and honest? I will let you guys with much more online experience than me duke that one out. I am sort of in the Op's camp in that I have never felt to my satisfaction that I am guaranteed this. That is why I don't play a lot of online games.

For 1000 hands your expectation is to be down 5 units +/- 36. If you’re down 150 units, that’s about 4 SDs south of expectations, roughly a 1 in 30,000 chance

Could be extremely bad luck, a rigged game or you’re not actually playing proper basic strategy

Quote: kewlj

I don't think we should question whether the OP is really playing perfect basic strategy as he claims. Probably not perfect, BUT it really doesn't matter. The cost of a few basic strategy mistakes playing $10 is nothing. It isn't the cost between winning and losing a hand, as many players think. It is the difference in expectation between the optimal play and less optimal play and for $10 wagers that will be pennies or even fractions of a cent. So let's dismiss the idea of these poor results as being due to imperfect basic strategy play.

My read was that the OP was really asking if his online game is legit, fair and honest? I will let you guys with much more online experience than me duke that one out. I am sort of in the Op's camp in that I have never felt to my satisfaction that I am guaranteed this. That is why I don't play a lot of online games.
link to original post

Depends on what Online App it is. I can 100% attest with solid proof that FanDuel BlackJack on NetEnt, regulated by the WV Lottery Commission is legit. I have been on the app for 3 years now. I have used 100% basic strategy, I know it in my sleep. I have almost $2,000,000 coin in, and before any promos my net is very, very close to house edge. Throw in the promo money and I am slightly ahead. $2,000,000 coin in, and close to 1,000 days of play is a sample size big enough to produce this evidence, in my opinion. I feel like if it was rigged, I'd be getting destroyed.

Thank you all for your replies. I've been using the basic strategy charts and on the wizard's trainer I've always opted for the recommended play. I'm sure I've made a small number of errors but assume that the reduction in expected return would be small. My understanding is that, even with perfect BS, you will lose more hands than you win and theoretically claw back most of those losses by doubling down when appropriate and benefitting from the 3 to 2 BJ pay out so I was asking if the patterns I've experienced are typical. That is being in the negative by 10% plus a lot of the time but occasionally swinging back towards break even and rarely being in the positive.

Thanks @mwalz9 that's a large sample size so it's reassuring that you've realized the expected return while utilizing basic strategy.

Quote: kewlj

I don't think we should question whether the OP is really playing perfect basic strategy as he claims. Probably not perfect, BUT it really doesn't matter. The cost of a few basic strategy mistakes playing $10 is nothing. It isn't the cost between winning and losing a hand, as many players think. It is the difference in expectation between the optimal play and less optimal play and for $10 wagers that will be pennies or even fractions of a cent. So let's dismiss the idea of these poor results as being due to imperfect basic strategy play.

My read was that the OP was really asking if his online game is legit, fair and honest? I will let you guys with much more online experience than me duke that one out. I am sort of in the Op's camp in that I have never felt to my satisfaction that I am guaranteed this. That is why I don't play a lot of online games.
link to original post

He said he played on several sites, including the Wizards. I don't think there is any question that site is legit. 99% of the time when new players get worse results than expected, it is their play that is sub-optimal, not the sites.

Quote: billryan

He said he played on several sites, including the Wizards. I don't think there is any question that site is legit. 99% of the time when new players get worse results than expected, it is their play that is sub-optimal, not the sites.

Billryan, it is going to take one heck of a lot of mistakes to go from a player disadvantage of 0.5% to 15%.

I mean what are the most common basic strategy mistakes? Standing 16 vs 10 instead of hitting. Standing 12 vs 2 and 3 instead of hitting. Standing soft 18 vs 9 or 10 instead of hitting. Maybe standing soft 18 vs 5 or 6 instead of doubling.

If you were to make these plays incorrectly each and every time, plus throw in a few more even, the house advantage is still less that 1%. He is talking about a house advantage of 15% over his 1000 hands. A few (or even many) basic strategy mistakes just is not going to account for that.

Probably it is just bad variance over a small sample size, but as somebody pointed out, that is 4 standard deviations. That is pretty high. I personally thought it might be lower than that like in the 3 standard deviations area, but I trust the 4 standard deviations number.

You are either talking really bad variance over a small sample size, or something isn't legit. If a guy says he is playing good basic strategy, a few mistakes, would account for nothing.

Bad swings happen. I was telling OnceDear yesterday that I have utilized 100% basic strategy ( I could do it in my sleep with no mistakes) and have lost up to 11 hands in a row. Basic strategy doesn't guarantee wins or losses, it just gives you the best chance.

There are times I've stayed on 16 against a 6 and the guy beside me hits his 10 and gets a 5, sure I'd love to have that 5, but hitting a 16 against a 6 will lose more times than win. You can also double down on a 10 and draw a 2. Crap happens.

I've seen the opposite where newbs at a table double a 12. Then draw a 9. Terrible basic strategy, but sometimes the luck happens.

If you play a game, and play it right long enough, you will be pretty dang close to the house edge.

If you enjoy the game, can afford to lose the house edge as entertainment expense, and can find promos good enough to tilt the -EV a little more your way, I say do it.

This is the non-card counters guide to gambling and blackjack and is about as close to the truth as you will find. No smoke and mirrors. Real life stuff.

Quote: kewlj

Quote: billryan

He said he played on several sites, including the Wizards. I don't think there is any question that site is legit. 99% of the time when new players get worse results than expected, it is their play that is sub-optimal, not the sites.

Billryan, it is going to take one heck of a lot of mistakes to go from a player disadvantage of 0.5% to 15%.

I mean what are the most common basic strategy mistakes? Standing 16 vs 10 instead of hitting. Standing 12 vs 2 and 3 instead of hitting. Standing soft 18 vs 9 or 10 instead of hitting. Maybe standing soft 18 vs 5 or 6 instead of doubling.

If you were to make these plays incorrectly each and every time, plus throw in a few more even, the house advantage is still less that 1%. He is talking about a house advantage of 15% over his 1000 hands. A few (or even many) basic strategy mistakes just is not going to account for that.

Probably it is just bad variance over a small sample size, but as somebody pointed out, that is 4 standard deviations. That is pretty high. I personally thought it might be lower than that like in the 3 standard deviations area, but I trust the 4 standard deviations number.

You are either talking really bad variance over a small sample size, or something isn't legit. If a guy says he is playing good basic strategy, a few mistakes, would account for nothing.
link to original post

I'd say it's 100% bad variance or a shady site. If it's not regulated I'd be cautious.

I'm also curious if he is flat betting, chasing losses, etc... If you are all out martingaling, your variance from EV can turn greatly negative quickly especially on a small sample size of hands.

Quote: mwalz9

I'm also curious if he is flat betting, chasing losses, etc... If you are all out martingaling, your variance from EV can turn greatly negative quickly especially on a small sample size of hands.
link to original post

You know what? Good question about flat betting. He didn't actually say flat betting, but I assumed and yes I know about "assuming".

Here is the thing about flat betting and using a spread. If a player is using a spread, his total results are pretty much going to be reflective of what occurs when his bigger bets are out. And if you are placing those larger bets by advantage as in card counting the total number of larger or max bets is going to be small in comparison to total rounds played. It is what happens at those large or max bets that will determine or VERY strongly influence your total results. So because there larger bets occur so infrequently maybe 1 out of every 10, 12 hands, it takes a card counter 40, 50, 60 thousand rounds to have accumulated enough large bet rounds or max bet round to begin to be significant. That is why absent a large number of trials results are deemed almost insignificant in card counting.

Now a player flat betting, doesn't need those 40, 50, 60 thousand trials to be significant. 1000 is getting there. 1000 is still small enough that results can be very skewed, 2, 3 even 4 (as posted here) standard deviations from expectation. I would like to see more trials, 3000, 4000 for flat betting, but 1000 is starting to see to get to the point that you can see something and what we are seeing is a 15% loss rate is just not right.

I'm flat betting and certainly not chasing losses, engaging in matingaling or any other suspect system. I've always played BS and never consciously baulked at hitting on 16 against a 10 etc. I will likely have made a few small errors along the way though as I previously said. I kept a strict record while betting with real money over the first few hundred hands and my return was just over 85% but then I switched to 'play' money only to stop losses and just kept a rough mental note so perhaps it's somewhat better than 85% by now but I've been discouraged by seeing similar patterns for example after 150 hands (tiny sample I know) @ 1$ each on the Wizard's trainer I'm $30 down using only the recommended play.

Quote: Jack2022

but I've been discouraged by seeing similar patterns for example after 150 hands (tiny sample I know) @ 1$ each on the Wizard's trainer I'm $30 down using only the recommended play.

I just played 100 rounds on Wizard's trainer. Down $7. That is 7% but better than your 20%. lol

But these really are too small a sample size to mean much.

I know this isn't going to help you. YOU have to convince yourself, but I want to share an experience of real live play from just last year.

I count cards and have for 18 years. Casinos were closed here in Vegas from March through June. I was up 12k (Feb & March) when they closed. Upon reopening with everyone required to wear masks, I went to one of the sweatier casinos that I don't normally play too much and played their really good double deck game (trying to take advantage of the mask situation). I lost 30k in about 2 weeks at that one location, playing a good, fairly deeply dealt, double deck game that I should have been crushing. I was SURE I was being cheated.

I stopped playing that location for a little while, but slowly came back to it, playing once a week or so. Low and behold I began to win a bit. And then a bit more. I didn't recoup ALL my losses from those two weeks, but I did recoup a pretty good portion, maybe 2/3's. Still finished in the red at that location for the year, but I had won enough back that I knew I wasn't being cheated. I just had a really horrible run. And like I said at the start. I have been doing this for a living for 18 years. These runs happen. And they can play tricks on your mind and convince you that something is wrong when it really isn't.

Now my example is about card counting and that is higher varinace because of the different size bets, but it is the same with flat betting. You can hit these streak, IN BOTH directions, that seem almost impossible. That is blackjack. :/

Quote: kewlj

Now a player flat betting, doesn't need those 40, 50, 60 thousand trials to be significant. 1000 is getting there. 1000 is still small enough that results can be very skewed, 2, 3 even 4 (as posted here) standard deviations from expectation.

Assuming you're not playing a trivially small number of rounds, the chances of being 2, 3 even 4 standard deviations from expectation does not change, no matter how many more rounds you play.

I'm always skeptical when anyone says they play "perfect basic strategy".

I'll bet you, you can give me 100 hands in an 8 deck game, hitting soft 17, double after split allowed and I make 0 mistakes.

It's really not that hard to learn.

Quote: mwalz9

I'll bet you, you can give me 100 hands in an 8 deck game, hitting soft 17, double after split allowed and I make 0 mistakes.

It's really not that hard to learn.
link to original post

And the only mistakes an educated player is likely to make are on "close calls" - decisions in which the ΔEV between options is not very large and situations that do not occur very frequently. When to Split 22 or 33 or when to double on certain soft hands.

Quote: mwalz9

I'll bet you, you can give me 100 hands in an 8 deck game, hitting soft 17, double after split allowed and I make 0 mistakes.

It's really not that hard to learn.
link to original post

Ehhh, how about 1000 or more hands? Like it's definitely a learn able skill but not everyone picks it up quickly.

Quote: ChallengedMilly

Quote: mwalz9

I'll bet you, you can give me 100 hands in an 8 deck game, hitting soft 17, double after split allowed and I make 0 mistakes.

It's really not that hard to learn.
link to original post

Ehhh, how about 1000 or more hands? Like it's definitely a learn able skill but not everyone picks it up quickly.
link to original post

You can deal me as many hands as you wish. Playing those rules mentioned above, I WILL NOT MAKE A MISTAKE!

I could write the basic strategy chart on a blank piece of paper if you'd wish.

Most of it is common sense, so basically I had to learn less than 20 scenarios.

Quote: Jack2022

HI. I'm new to Blackjack but I've now played over 1000 hands, with tiny stakes as an experiment, using perfect basic strategy expecting a return of around 99.5% but in reality achieving only 85%. I realize this is a small sample size but I'm wondering if there's something about the game I don't understand?
I've only played live online, RNG online, on a couple of apps and on the Wizard's trainer. All have seen disappointing results and a similar pattern where I fall behind, occasionally swing back towards break even, but generally hover around a 10%+ loss.
What are other people's experiences playing basic strategy? Have you achieved the expected return and over what sample size? Thanks.
link to original post

Have the rules been the same on each site you've used--and if not--did you calculate -.05% to be your average EV? Since your expected results can vary wildly depending on the rules, this is something important to consider.

You can run simulations using Excel (or use software like Qfit's CVData), to calculate your expected EV over time. Since statistics don't lie (unless you're Samuel Clemens), if your columns aren't matching it either means you haven't accounted for variance or there is user error.

Of course if you're playing with real money at an offshore casino, then another possibility is you're being cheated. They might have tweaked the game in such a way to give the house an even bigger advantage the players aren't aware of (I personally don't trust online casinos because it would be difficult to police this sort of thing).

Quote: mwalz9

Quote: ChallengedMilly

Quote: mwalz9

I'll bet you, you can give me 100 hands in an 8 deck game, hitting soft 17, double after split allowed and I make 0 mistakes.

It's really not that hard to learn.
link to original post

Ehhh, how about 1000 or more hands? Like it's definitely a learn able skill but not everyone picks it up quickly.
link to original post

You can deal me as many hands as you wish. Playing those rules mentioned above, I WILL NOT MAKE A MISTAKE!

I could write the basic strategy chart on a blank piece of paper if you'd wish.

Most of it is common sense, so basically I had to learn less than 20 scenarios.
link to original post

I'm afraid not all of us can be Rainman--and not all of the Basic Strategy plays are intuitive (like when to split 4's or when to double with an A2 etc.) Took me the longest time to remember a few of those.

If you are not 100% sure of basic strategy, you are allowed to bring a strategy card to the table with you. Just be sure it is a good card. I've seen plenty of cheap plastic cards for sale with bad information on them.
I was looking at some casino reports from Atlantic City and the average hold on table games is about 15% so your result is fairly typical.
Don't worry about everyone claiming learning BS is so simple. Twenty-plus years of playing has shown me very few people play BS 100% of the time.

Quote: billryan

If you are not 100% sure of basic strategy, you are allowed to bring a strategy card to the table with you. Just be sure it is a good card. I've seen plenty of cheap plastic cards for sale with bad information on them.
I was looking at some casino reports from Atlantic City and the average hold on table games is about 15% so your result is fairly typical.
Don't worry about everyone claiming learning BS is so simple. Twenty-plus years of playing has shown me very few people play BS 100% of the time.
link to original post

My dad is a gambler (he actually taught me how to play blackjack in the 1980s). He knows basic strategy backwards and forwards and with his eyes closed and after 5 whiskey's--and yet he'll deviate from BS not because he counts cards (he doesn't), but because he gets "hunches". He has "lucky" rings he wears, lucky shirts, and all kinds of other hocus pocus he uses to "help" him at the tables. He has lost hundreds of thousands of dollars over his "career" and by any definition of the term he has a gambling problem.

This is the difference between a gambler and an advantage player. Gamblers won't follow basic strategy if their lucky rabbit's foot tells them to stay instead of hitting. They are a superstitious lot, and casinos love them because they'll lose their life savings, the kid's college tuition--and they'll take out a second mortgage on the house if they're on a "hot streak". The Advantage Player, on the other hand, is dispassionate. Their religion is Math and they always follow what the numbers suggest will give them the biggest edge in any particular situation (and if they don't, it's because they have some other angle they are working and have done a risk/reward assessment). Gamblers usually lose more money than AP's--and good AP's generate positive EV (and sometimes a lot of it). Of course the trade off is gamblers usually have more fun in the casino, whereas the AP looks at it as a job.

Quote: billryan

(snip)
I was looking at some casino reports from Atlantic City and the average hold on table games is about 15% so your result is fairly typical.
(snip)
link to original post

That may be correct, but I thought hold was related to buy in (see scenarios below).

Scenario 1:
Buy In: $100
Result: player lost $60
In the above scenario, the hold was 60% for this player, since the casino won 60% of the players' total buy in.

Scenario 2:
Buy In: $1000
Result: player won $1500
In the above scenario, the hold was -150% for this player, since the casino lost 150% of the players' total buy in.