The Phantom: The Core Issue: Use of Bankroll

[The Phantom]

The point: How to use BR in actual play for (say)
a $5 multi-session = long-run session player,
assuming perfect counting and derivative TC BS play.

In plain English, and in reality I think,
each "session" is actually a round in a 100-round
prizefight.

Each "session" or "round"
is 20 hours/100 hand per hr/
or 2000 hands per hour.
1-20 spread but to 1-100 spread
when winning during a round (read weekend).

N.B. these 2 quotes from the longish paper
"Why What You Got Ain't What You Expected:
Edge, Volatility, and Risk of Ruin in Gambling
(A Work in Process) by Alan Krigman
viewable at http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/Betsize/winwayz/
tmpweb.htm

On the one hand:

"Risk of ruin, alone, can be a revelation
-- if not a rude awakening -- for
large numbers of recreational gamblers."

On the other hand:

"Expected value, however, is meaningful only as a long-term phenomenon."

Replies sought from the durables.*

[* Adjective informally used as a noun: Able to
perform or compete over a long period, as by
avoiding or overcoming injuries.] **

** Obiter dicta: Someone once said (and it might

have been me?) that the definition of

character was keeping on

after the mood has passed.

* * *



Phantonm to Kiosk:

Many thanks for your lengthy and well-reasoned responses.

Your reply-posts have been most valuable to me.

As to your last paragraph in particular, and as to my personal best-strategy in general:
Wouldn't you agree that as a beginning player, I might just as well hone my skills primarily in AC until
I have a bigger bankroll. Then, facing better games in LAS, it should all come easier.
(19th C. Russian general Suvorov: "Train hard, fight easy."
That being the case, how about this overall spread strategy at $5: 1-20 if losing, 1-100 if $500 ahead
(instead of stopping at any win of $500). [Naturally, I've had $500 weekend wins and weekend $500 losses both;
at which point, at either end, I stop.] My counting itself and BS play now seem good; still working on BS
deriviations on count. I think of this to
(a) reduce risk of ruin and at the same time
& (b) allow for larger overall expectation. Any thoughts on this?

------------------------>

A respondent:

> [Only] 25/50 big bets per session' would generally
> be a really really safe and secure minimal
> ROR<<

------------------------>

Sun Runner to Phantom et al.:

> I have not been keeping up with your's and
> Phantom's conversation, but what you state
> here is not accurate. Of course there are
> several variables, but a total BR of 50 or
> 100 max bets is doable; a session BR much
> smaller.

> If Phantom has a renewable $500 each weekend
> -he's got a BR; the trick is determining how
> big it really is and how to use it.

------------------------------->

Phantom to Sun Runner and to All:

It seems to me you've hit the nail on the head.

What's the difference if the "session" is 1 session of 20 hours of play over a weekend versus
a 2,000 hour session played in segments of 100 weekends. All else being equal, I should think that the ROR might be the same. The issue is simply, as you say, about the BR, "how to use it."

[The Phantom]

This post has been viewed well over 100 times. It seems to me to be at the heart of the matter of theory versus practice. Yet to date there has been not a single response.

Does this mean that no one cares to share?

Have I not stated the issue in an understandable way?

Or might it mean that this message perhaps should have been posted on the Main Menu instead of on the Beginners Menu? If that's the case, could you move it to the Blackjack Main section?

[Parker]

> This post has been viewed well over 100
> times. It seems to me to be at the heart of
> the matter of theory versus practice. Yet to
> date there has been not a single response.

> Does this mean that no one cares to share?

> Have I not stated the issue in an
> understandable way?

To be perfectly honest, I have just re-read your post about a half-dozen times, and no, I am not sure just exactly what you are trying to say. It does not appear that you are asking a question.

Short and to the point is always best. Attention spans in cyberspace are notoriously short. Simply because 100 people clicked on a post does not mean that 100 people read it through to the end.

> Or might it mean that this message perhaps
> should have been posted on the Main Menu
> instead of on the Beginners Menu? If that's
> the case, could you move it to the Blackjack
> Main section?

Moving posts from one forum to another is not something that can easily be done. This is why I get annoyed at people who obviously post to the wrong board (Las Vegas questions on the main page, for example).

It is considered poor form to cross-post. that is, to simultaneously post the same question/comment on multiple forums. However, if you post on one forum and do not receive an adequate resonse, there is nothing wrong with subsequently trying a different forum.