pm: One more clarification..

[pm]

Don, when you said

> ... chances are also that, if
> you've lost, say, 25% of your bankroll, you
> may decide to continue to play for your
> original stakes rather than downsize by 25%,
> preferring instead to wait until further
> losses may deplete your bankroll to, say,
> half of its original size.

does that just mean that if you start your bet level at half-kelly (or less), you can safely continue that bet level until 50% depletion?

[Don Schlesinger]

> does that just mean that if you start your
> bet level at half-kelly (or less), you can
> safely continue that bet level until 50%
> depletion?

One has nothing to do with the other. My original comment pertained to a full-Kelly player. To me, if you are a solo player and already start with half-Kelly, I feel you ought to accept the rather small ROR associated with such a bet scheme (about 1.83%, without resizing), and see it through to its logical conclusion -- namely that you either go broke or win all the money in the world!

Don

P.S. You probably ought to spend less time worrying about all of this and more time going out and playing. :-)

[pm]

Don, I'm actually being so anal because I'm going to be playing with a few other people, and we're going to end up putting together a pretty decent bankroll, so I'm trying to make sure that we don't start out with our fundamentals all screwed up.

I was thinking to start at half-kelly, distribute small session banks amongst BPs until enough sessions bring us to 50% depletion (or double the BR), and then resize. You indicated in the other thread that this was incorrect, so let me stop beating around the bush and just ask you what I've been meaning to this whole time: if you played on a team, what kind of bet schedule would you use? What kelly fraction would you start with, what points would you resize at (if at all), how would you do your session banks for your BPs?

Thanks for any info!

[Don Schlesinger]

> Don, I'm actually being so anal because I'm
> going to be playing with a few other people,
> and we're going to end up putting together a
> pretty decent bankroll, so I'm trying to
> make sure that we don't start out with our
> fundamentals all screwed up.

OK, I understand. What you need to know is that there isn't one "right" answer to questions such as these. People play to all different levels of Kelly, or not Kelly at all. People resize often or when they lose half, or not at all. There are various approaches.

> I was thinking to start at half-kelly,
> distribute small session banks amongst BPs
> until enough sessions bring us to 50%
> depletion (or double the BR), and then
> resize. You indicated in the other thread
> that this was incorrect,

No, I didn't say it was incorrect; I said that my remarks pertained to full Kelly and that you might not want to treat half Kelly in the same manner. That is, since it's half Kelly to begin with, you might not want to resize if you lose half the bank, preferring, instead, to take the full 1.83% ROR of never resizing.

> so let me stop
> beating around the bush and just ask you
> what I've been meaning to this whole time:
> if you played on a team,

Which I did for a couple of years.

> what kind of bet
> schedule would you use? What kelly fraction
> would you start with, what points would you
> resize at (if at all), how would you do your
> session banks for your BPs?

If you have BJA3 (or BJA1 or BJA2, for that matter), you'll find an entire chapter with my team handbook and detailed discussions of all the above. It would help greatly if you read it all first and then asked further questions. In addition, Rick Blaine has a superb handbook for team players, entitled, "Blackjack Blueprint: How to Operate a Blackjack Team," which, I believe, you may purchase from RGE, if it isn't already out of print.

Don

[pm]

I see. I had actually already read that chapter, but it helped that I was looking specifically for session units and total units this time around.

So how many people did you have playing simultaneously with their 30 unit banks?

[Don Schlesinger]

> So how many people did you have playing
> simultaneously with their 30 unit banks?

Six.

Don

[pm]

Don, another thing I've been wondering about. How difficult is it to wong at high stakes, as opposed to playing-all? The scenario I keep imagining is a pit boss seeing a high stakes wonger and immediately suspecting a BP/Spotters combo. (Not that I'm anywhere near the level for it to be an issue, but hopefully it will be, at some point.)