you counters be nice and join the conversation

[hardin county boy]

as a guy with an advanced science degree, of course i respect counters and, in my 2000 hours of recreational play, have had enough home counting practice followed by effort at the tables to glimpse the joys and sorrows of counting.


though i fully believe counting is advantaged play and that all else faces a house edge, i believe i detect in many counters a most unscientific bias. i would like to engage those of you who so quickly dismiss efforts to overcome the house advantage with anything but counting, as well as you counters who do NOT dismiss such so glibly, with phrases such as "voodoo" or some such term. hence, my respectfully posting in this category. the only respect i ask in return is that comments be substance-based instead of a dictatorial wave of your all-knowing hand being considered good enough.



those of you who count successfully, have a good math brain and can be fair-minded, i look to perhaps learn something from. those who arrogantly believe their own "counting-only" proclamation=gospel, let me start by asking if you would be comfortable with the following arrangement: you and i will meet to flip coins and i will employ perfect, basic, coin-flipping strategy and every 100 flips i will give you .5% of the total money wagered for showing up. i get to decide what size coins we flip, for how long, when we stop and when we start back.



the math is obvious, you will have an edge. the REALITY is, your generosity in allowing me the when, how long, how much and when do we do it again, gives me a reasonable prospect of owning everything you have--to suggest your edge will INEVITABLY lead to my "long term" destruction is, i suggest, patent nonsense.

depending on how i choose to use the tools you have given me, i see prospects for my losing all i have, getting all you have or something in between and if i construct my efforts with an emphasis on not losing, i see a high probability of success for THAT with lower prospects of losing or winning big----a very long career at counting, similarly, still only offers probabilities of winning with the possibility of lifetime loss.



let me pause here for comments.

[Norm]

i would like to engage those of you who so quickly dismiss efforts to overcome the house advantage with anything but counting, as well as you counters who do NOT dismiss such so glibly, with phrases such as "voodoo" or some such term.

You don't seem to have read much of these discussions. Almost no one here would "dismiss efforts to overcome the house advantage with anything but counting". However, we do dismiss voodoo. It's just that that isn't the definition of voodoo.

[hardin county boy]

You don't seem to have read much of these discussions. Almost no one here would "dismiss efforts to overcome the house advantage with anything but counting". However, we do dismiss voodoo. It's just that that isn't the definition of voodoo.

i AM new and have only been reading couple days but see a lot of "dismissing" of those who might use a variation in bet size any number of ways, "luck" into getting ahead and then working to stay there and go home a winner---a lot of suggestion that this is not a valid, serious way to approach the game.

[Norm]

Ahh, that's voodoo. Period. And, you are in the correct sub-forum.

[hardin county boy]

Ahh, that's voodoo. Period. And, you are in the correct sub-forum.

so, once again, no need for you to substantiate what you say---unilaterally dismiss the fact casino allows you to alter bet size, come and go as you please--assert that these are in no way exploitable- say, "period" and that provides your words the biblical authority needed. you ignore the scientific prospect that such approaches offer variations in winning and losing VERY similar to the variations experienced in counting and counters and non-counters both must choose whether to end a session winner or loser. many anecdotes in these posts talk of good 7 months work down the tubes by rigidly continuing to bet high unit in good counts only to kill a half-year's good work in an afternoon when a different, also scientific, approach might have been more profitable.

[mofungoo]

so, once again, no need for you to substantiate what you say---unilaterally dismiss the fact casino allows you to alter bet size, come and go as you please--assert that these are in no way exploitable- say, "period" and that provides your words the biblical authority needed. you ignore the scientific prospect that such approaches offer variations in winning and losing VERY similar to the variations experienced in counting and counters and non-counters both must choose whether to end a session winner or loser. many anecdotes in these posts talk of good 7 months work down the tubes by rigidly continuing to bet high unit in good counts only to kill a half-year's good work in an afternoon when a different, also scientific, approach might have been more profitable.

Counting is not the only way to get an edge over the casino. The other ways involve "information" and using that information in conjunction with a proper strategy. Betting progressions and leaving when ahead cannot reverse a house edge. Since you have an advanced degree perhaps a reading of Epstein's Theory of Gambling and Statistical Logic will clear things up for you.

[hardin county boy]

Counting is not the only way to get an edge over the casino. The other ways involve "information" and using that information in conjunction with a proper strategy. Betting progressions and leaving when ahead cannot reverse a house edge. Since you have an advanced degree perhaps a reading of Epstein's Theory of Gambling and Statistical Logic will clear things up for you.

warren buffet walked into a casino and flat bet 25$ all day and couldnt get ahead and go home winners. warren declared himself to be a scientist and came back the next day and flat bet 50$ , had a little "variation", found himself up for the trip and went home winners. he did this every week for years and sometimes he stayed 3 days, betting 75$ the third day, and STILL never caught that 12 hour day of enough "doubled up" winning to go home a winner so he said, "just like those science-based counters, every now and then, gotta book that bigger-than i like loss and move on--lady variance."

warren went back home and hired epstein to audit his weekly trips and, no surprise to epstein, warren the science guy had bagged considerably more in winnings than losses. those of you with more math talent than i have tell me the odds of 3, 12-hour sessions of flat bet blackjack, basic strategy, no player advantage (just assume .5% casino edge) in which one of the 3 sessions would not produce the MOMENT the players variance/luck would need to find him up either SOME decent amount on day one or more than just HALF the AVERAGE number of his previous days losses. (25,50,75-- 3 daily "progressions" affordable to mr buffet and many of us )--on days 2 or 3, all he's gotta have is one "doubled up" unit win more than the prior 2 days AVERAGE loss and he declares victory and goes home.

what mr buffet understands that some of you guys dont seem to is that his willingness to vary bet size and length of time in the casino for any given trip TO CHASE DOWN LOSSES is MORE powerful TO INSURE A WIN than the true advantage of card-counting. (the larger bet size variation of counting, in more favorable situations, no doubt, makes for BIGGER potential profits). also, some of his day one wins will be large enough that they WILL add up to exceed his occasional 3 day loss.

[Norm]

warren went back home and hired epstein to audit his weekly trips and, no surprise to epstein, warren the science guy had bagged considerably more in winnings than losses.

I am one of the three people in the acknowledgements page in the last edition of Epstein's book: Gambling and Statistical Logic. There is no way that Epstein would claim this was anything other than useless empirical evidence.

[First Normal Form]

I am one of the three people in the acknowledgements page in the last edition of Epstein's book: Gambling and Statistical Logic.

APwn'd!
If advantage play weren't such an esoteric topic, we'd have a fleet of internet youngsters right now creating captioned GIFs and celebrating this Top Five "ownages" in all of internet history.

#epsteined

[Mr. White]

APwn'd!

Wildly amusing, FnF

[Norm]

-unilaterally dismiss the fact casino allows you to alter bet size, come and go as you please--assert that these are in no way exploitable- say, "period" and that provides your words the biblical authority needed.

You are not going to last long here. As I said, and you have admitted, you haven't read much. You are just posting absurd assumptions without any evidence. I have spent decades, literally, posting about such voodoo. To refuse to read, and then claim that I refuse to write and claim Biblical authority is seriously bad form. The I'Net word for this is "trolling".

I strongly suggest that you read more and post less.

[hardin county boy]

[QUOTE=Norm;108422] As I said, and you have admitted, you haven't read much. You are just posting absurd assumptions without any evidence. I have spent decades, literally, posting about such voodoo. To refuse to read, and then claim that I refuse to write and claim Biblical authority is seriously bad form. The I'Net word for this is "trolling".

norm, my apologies. i understand who you are and i respect your expertise, experience and understanding of the math. i am LOVING the forum and have barely scratched the surface and WILL take your advice, read more and try to post less. to clarify, i have read 40-60 books on blackjack, many of them on counting, did a respectable job of home practice and counting in the casinos and i meant neither disrespect nor "trolling". there is a frustration with a concept i will work on articulating better and floating your way some day as i meant what i said, that i think the orthodox insistence that only advantage players (primarily counters) have good prospects of lifetime winnings is simplistic and false----i am aware saying this may inflame some but it is not intended to---my thanks to you and also, i think rollingstoned gave a patient, thoughtful response that i appreciate.

is there anywhere on the site that is something between counter-orthodoxy and nutty voodoo?--somewhere that smart, experienced people can have the conversation without being hooted down by an army of counters? it would have seemed a willingness to post in the rather humble spot of "disadvantaged play" would not bring accusations of trolling or not thinking or not reading but it could be that after i posted an initial, thoughtful post, your immediate accusations and recitation of orthodoxy without conversation threw me off my game--i will try to be more restrained in the future---i wonder if more guys like me having a forum for discussion would broaden the base of the forum? thanks again.

[Norm]

is there anywhere on the site that is something between counter-orthodoxy and nutty voodoo?

I repeat that you have not read this site. Card counting is a small part of AP. You continue to declare a dichotomy that has never existed. BUT, what you are spouting is utter nonsense (id est, nutty voodoo). And, utter nonsense will be treated as utter nonsense. We all have a right to be wrong. We do not have a right to say stupid things and not have people point out the stupidity.