I never get a good count!
There's a mathematical formula applied to the count which can give you the advantage in every round but it's not too much of a science as an art to how much you wanna bet with the higher probability of winning. In single deck the count gets to +1 pretty quickly but the edge is pretty minimal.
If you're talking about making a huge bet on big counts and losing, you have to factor in the "long run". Sure doubling 11 vs dealer 6 and catching an ace sucks (happens all the time for me) but over a trial of many simulations you'll come out ahead doubling. Also keep in consideration the dealer is more likely to catch a ten upcard as well as a blackjack as you do. With that being said you can get low cards on a high count, but most likely end up with 20.
Ask me about losing 5-6 big hands in a row when I ramped up my bet. Anything is possible.
OK, first of all, you are playing single deck blackjack. Does blackjack pay 3-2 or 6-5? Makes a huge difference. Many, especially low limit single deck blackjack games now pay 6-5 instead of 3-2, which is a much larger house edge to overcome.
Also, what count are you using? Rules also come into play, but let's not consider that right now.
If you are playing 'true' blackjack, where blackjack plays 3-2 and assuming you are using hi-lo count, the game should turn positive somewhere arount a true count of +1, depending on exact rules. I would start to raise my bet by +2 and bet my top wager by +4.
But you need to understand, any of these plus counts don't guarantee anything. As a matter of fact, you will still lose more hands than you win at all these plus counts. The only difference is, you will win a few more double down bets and the big difference, you will receive just slightly more blackjacks. Basically that slight increase in blackjacks at the 3-2 payoff is what flips the game to the slightest advantage for the player, but only in the long run. In the short run, anything can still happen. You can still lose most of your big bets for many many hands, days, weeks at a time.
What about taking insurance?Quote: kewljYou rarely get good count and rarely win when you do??......tell me about it! Welcome to the club. Lol
OK, first of all, you are playing single deck blackjack. Does blackjack pay 3-2 or 6-5? Makes a huge difference. Many, especially low limit single deck blackjack games now pay 6-5 instead of 3-2, which is a much larger house edge to overcome.
Also, what count are you using? Rules also come into play, but let's not consider that right now.
If you are playing 'true' blackjack, where blackjack plays 3-2 and assuming you are using hi-lo count, the game should turn positive somewhere arount a true count of +1, depending on exact rules. I would start to raise my bet by +2 and bet my top wager by +4.
But you need to understand, any of these plus counts don't guarantee anything. As a matter of fact, you will still lose more hands than you win at all these plus counts. The only difference is, you will win a few more double down bets and the big difference, you will receive just slightly more blackjacks. Basically that slight increase in blackjacks at the 3-2 payoff is what flips the game to the slightest advantage for the player, but only in the long run. In the short run, anything can still happen. You can still lose most of your big bets for many many hands, days, weeks at a time.
Quote: AxelWolfWhat about taking insurance?
+3 or more. it looks natural since you're spreading big on that count anyway and want to protect your hand.
Quote: BuzzardGee, you don't automatically win when you have a 2% edge. OH MY. 51 white marbles and 49 black marbles in a jar. And you seem to always pick a black one. OH MY !
You know it's funny, Buzz. This is my first full year of having a BJ play partner. Last year we were partners as far as non-BJ play (bonus chasing), but not blackjack. But we resided together and he witnessed my year first hand. And wouldn't you know, last year was the only year, since I moved to Vegas that my results were a nice, smooth, steady climb upwards. Absent were the huge swings, up and down, long periods of losing and long stagnant, flat periods that can be so frustrating. He just witnessed that very rare smooth ride up and thought this was the norm.
When I took him on under my wing and as a partner, I really tried to impress that last year was very Atypical. So this year my results started in the toilet. 15 straight weeks of losing, and 32 grand in the hole before things turned. Then five incredible weeks where I could do no wrong. Seems like I won every max bet, every double down, racking up a six figure win over 5 weeks, which wiped out my 30 grand loss and left me +80 grand-ish. And now 4 months later, I am exactly the same +80 grand-ish. 4 months of stagnation. (Although I did take some time off). I'm not complaining mind you. My year is still above expectation, but you take away that small 5 week window and you are left with two 3-4 month periods, one a big loss, the other flat. I think he now understands having an advantage, only means you win in the very long term. In the short term, it is still very much a crap shoot. In the short term, you seem to keep drawing those black marbles. :-)
You have to remember that the odds of a game rarely play out as the sign on the wall or math says it will. Just like in a 99.5% payback video poker machine, it's pretty rare to play 100 bucks coin in and walk out with $99.50, so it is with blackjack.
The problem with 1 and 2 deck games is that it's rare to go through 1 1/2" of the shoe and win every hand. For one deck is is only 5/8" thick and 2 decks are only 1 3/8" thick. Yet, so many times have I lost every hand in those short distances.
And yet so many so called Advantage Players consistently over-bet their bankroll. Then seem shocked when it bites them in the ass.
Never complain when you are ahead of the curve.
I think all these simulations that are run share the same flaw.
They run the 1B hands all at once.
I for one can't seem to sit at the table for more than an hour at a time or maybe 150 hands.
I'd like to see a simulation of 1B hands where the cut off is a random number between 125 and 200 hands. The simulation keeps running without outcomes being recorded for a random number of hands. After the simulated player's "rest" period, the player sits back down and another 125-200 hands are recorded. This should continue for 1B hands being recorded. I say you will find the odds are different. Just keep in mind that as a player, there is not enough time in a life to sit through 1B consecutive hands of blackjack, and this is the flaw. I know that when I leave the casino, hands are still being played, but not "recorded" by me, the player.
I guess it's my way of simulating luck. And only hands that are seen by the player are recorded.
Quote: wrobersonNo to go off topic....
I think all these simulations that are run share the same flaw.
They run the 1B hands all at once.
I for one can't seem to sit at the table for more than an hour at a time or maybe 150 hands.
I'd like to see a simulation of 1B hands where the cut off is a random number between 125 and 200 hands. The simulation keeps running without outcomes being recorded for a random number of hands. After the simulated player's "rest" period, the player sits back down and another 125-200 hands are recorded. This should continue for 1B hands being recorded. I say you will find the odds are different. Just keep in mind that as a player, there is not enough time in a life to sit through 1B consecutive hands of blackjack, and this is the flaw. I know that when I leave the casino, hands are still being played, but not "recorded" by me, the player.
I guess it's my way of simulating luck. And only hands that are seen by the player are recorded.
What's this now??? You think that breaking up a large simulation into smaller segments is going to change the result of the totality of the simulation? Let me save you some time... It won't! This is precisely why credible simulations are done with such a large sample size, to remove and get past any issues with small sample size.
It's funny, in real life play, many of us try to get a cross the point that there are no sessions involved. All play is one long session. It just happens to have breaks in it. You seem to want to go the other way. Strange.
Quote: BuzzardGee, you don't automatically win when you have a 2% edge. OH MY. 51 white marbles and 49 black marbles in a jar. And you seem to always pick a black one. OH MY !
Buzz that is a GREAT analogy, for ALL things related to advantage gambling
Do these simulations shuffle the cards after every 5-6 hands in a single deck game?
Do these simulations open brand new decks of cards after every shift?
Do they account for bathrooms breaks? Dinner?
Once a week play?
What variables can be included that don't follow math's red line but are very much part of the game?
Can you measure 4 different players or is it a one on one heads up run?
I'll give them space and time, but I doubt it can have 2 cards stick together.
I don't think these simulations have all the variables.
Quote: wrobersonYou'll never find me playing a single deck game and I'm now leaning towards not playing 2 deck games. I'm not having any fun at home dealing them. I want more 10's and Aces in the game. Why settle for 20 or 40 when I can easily get 120. 6 decks is where I have most of my training and where I've won most my money, and I'm going to have to keep follow that trend. I can also play at nearly the same HE as well.
I like the shoe games because the shuffle time on the 1 and 2 deck games takes up too much time. Also I like the cut card to determine the shuffles so good counts can last longer. It seems like every time I get a decent count in a single/double deck game it becomes time to shuffle the cards. In some cases, I think that the dealers count and shuffle early if the count gets too good.
Seriously DJ? You thought I was asking why how or when? I was asking why he didn't include it.Quote: djatc+3 or more. it looks natural since you're spreading big on that count anyway and want to protect your hand.
