Starting Up

[RS]

I was gonna say the same thing as the Dude, except I'd imagine a max bet of $40 instead of $60. Either way, you aren't making any serious money, but you'll still have a slight advantage over the house....which, if I remember correctly, is just what you want.

[zerg]

Sounds reasonable to me. I think with new people, there is too much talk about going pro and ROR. Nothing wrong with a little gambling, especially if you have an edge. With $1000 that you are comfortable losing, I would Bet $5 at less than true 1. $10 at true 1, $20 @2 $30 @3, $40@4, $50 @5 $60 @6, etc. Should be able to play for awhile with 20 max bets, but you could bust rather quickly. Don't expect anything, anything can happen. If you win it doesn't mean you are good, If you lose it doesn't mean you are bad. Just do you best to evaluate your play honestly. How sure are you the count is right? How is your division and deck estimation? Were there any hands you aren't sure you played correctly? Have fun, keep improving.

[muckz]

If you're still reading replies, I would look at this a little differently from what I've read here. You stated that you are doing this for fun and just want to play with an edge over the house. In that case ROR is not that important. For those of us who are making a living doing this it is the most important thing of all. I ran a sim for 8 decks H17 DAS. You didn't mention DAS but if you are playing 8 decks and can't double after split you might want to find another casino. 80% penetration is great.

If this is for fun, you won't have much fun watching tables for a TC=+3. Instead, just sit down at the beginning of the shoe or watch the first round to see if it is at all positive. As long as it's above zero, sit down. I hope they have $5 tables. If all you can find is $10, you can still try it. Here is how I would bet. $5 or table min TC<1, $10 when TC=1, $40 when TC=2, $60 when TC>3. Most people on here will say that is way to aggressive and you will likely lose the $1000. I'm assuming you are ok losing it. With this betting schedule you will average $5 per hour. If you play for 4 hours it would take a negative 3 standard deviation loss (happens less than 1% of the time) to wipe out your BR. You will accomplish your goal of playing at an advantage to the house and you have a 23% chance of making $500 in 4 hours. The most likely result is you'll make about 25 bucks and if you get rated earn a free dinner. If playing Blackjack and getting free dinner plus your gas money sounds like fun, give it a try. If you lose, you'll probably lose less than half of your BR.

I was gonna say the same thing as the Dude, except I'd imagine a max bet of $40 instead of $60. Either way, you aren't making any serious money, but you'll still have a slight advantage over the house....which, if I remember correctly, is just what you want.

Visual demonstration using cvcx.

MuckzAttachment 1486Attachment 1486

[Jabberwocky]

Do not play BJ with that bankroll of $1K.

[Jabberwocky]

My bankroll is is only $30K but I refuse to use any portion of it to play blackjack. It's just too risky.

[Dude]

My bankroll is is only $30K but I refuse to use any portion of it to play blackjack. It's just too risky.

LMAO

And Waren Buffet's is $1 billion and he agrees with you. So he plays the stock market instead. Maybe you are on the wrong forum. Maybe you can find one for government bonds or is that still too risk?

[Three]

Visual demonstration using cvcx.

Gotta love the CE, the hourly you would allow someone to pay you so you wouldn't play the game. You would be better off paying someone $6.82 than playing the game. I never saw a negative CE before. Me thinks some bad advice is being distributed. It sounds like you can save the $6.82/hour you are better off paying than playing that spread at that game and just don't play and keep your money (both the money you are better off paying rather than playing and your BR). LOL.

[Dude]

Gotta love the CE, the hourly you would allow someone to pay you so you wouldn't play the game. You would be better off paying someone $6.82 than playing the game. I never saw a negative CE before. Me thinks some bad advice is being distributed. It sounds like you can save the $6.82/hour you are better off paying than playing that spread at that game and just don't play and keep your money (both the money you are better off paying rather than playing and your BR). LOL.

If we are talking about making a living you are 100% accurate. You would be a fool to start a blackjack career or any business venture for that matter with a 1k BR. However, it has been done. Many successful people in all areas have looked back and said thank goodness I was too stupid to realize how unlikely success was. But I don't think we're talking about making a living. We're talking about gambling for fun and this strategy beats flat betting by about $5 an hour. The CE is negative because as a long term strategy its insane.

[Bodarc]

1plus1equals3

How much can you or would you be willing to add to your bankroll per month to offset any losses and how many hours would you estimate you'd play in a month?

[ZenMaster_Flash]

I started out 22 years ago with about $50,000.
I very rapidly transformed that into $300,000
Heat was cool, and surveillance was low tech.
I had some big "downswings" now and then.
My cash bankroll is $500,000+ now; and in the
intervening years I bought a house for $245,000
and several spiffy sports cars ~ all for cash.
I was lucky, but I did work hard for the money.
I guess that I have made an average of about
$52,000 a year. Significantly less than I was
making as a full-time medical professional.
It is difficult living frugally but that is a requisite
attitude for those living on insecure earnings.
I might earn $20,000 or $100,000 in any given year.
I found it crucial to my happiness to live debt-free.

The important crossroads for me was the realization
that all Level One Counts are inadequate to the task.
The task being the securing of a middle-class income.

[seriousplayer]

The important crossroads for me was the realization
that all Level One Counts are inadequate to the task.
The task being the securing of a middle-class income.

I am sick,tried, and done have the conversation that all level one counts are not good enough to get the money. It seem like this conversation is endless. I used a level one count and will continue to use a level one count. If for the rest of your life you are strictly counting cards and not use any other advance advantage play techniques (like shuffle tracking) than use a level 2 count. If one is thinking about switching to a more advance advantage play techniques than stick with a level one count.

[KJ]

The important crossroads for me was the realization
that all Level One Counts are inadequate to the task.
The task being the securing of a middle-class income.

It was a nice post, a useful post, until you got to the last section, where you injected a negative comment, with the specific intent of fueling the ongoing debate.

This year, I refrained from posting specific results as I had done in the past, on either of the sites that I frequent, as it really serves no purpose. But, I had my best year blackjack-wise in 2013. My first 6 figure year strictly from blackjack results. Combined with my previous 3 years BJ results, and I have averaged over 80 grand per year since I relocated to Vegas 4 years ago and began playing my current levels. And that includes a year 2011, where I missed a full quarter of the year with a medical situation. And done 100% using a level one count, Hi-lo. I post these generalized results not as a comparison to anyone, as I am sure I play considerable more rounds than most players.

Now, 4 years is not a great amount of data. Not a large sample size, by any means. I suppose I could go in the toilet the next couple years (I hope not). But there are other credible members of this site and the other site that have experienced similar results. It does 'Irk' me that you continually dismiss us all as irrelevant, because it does not fit into your pre-conceived narrative. It's flat out insulting.

You are coming close to the line, where you just look foolish for refusing to accept reality, when the data is staring you in the face. In my first few years in the community, there was a fellow, who I am not going to mention by name, that continually made the claim that hi-lo did not work. That hi-lo was a fraud actually perpetrated by the casino industry. He reiterated his claim time and time again, in the face of mountains of mathematical evidence to the contrary. Frankly he looked like a fool. Flash, you are now dangerously close to this territory. And I know you are way smarter than this.

If you want to use a level two count...power to you. If you want to credit using a level 2 count for your success, well I guess that is up to you. But the fact is that in today's environment, with the mediocre games that most of us play, "what count you use is one of the least important decisions you make". That happens to be a quote from bigplayer. But I will add my own ending. Hi-lo works just fine!

[1plus1equals3]

To answer some questions,

I would call $1000 my "experimental" BR or maybe my first trip bankroll. I want to get comfortable with counting before I start a real BR. I had planned on a $5000 BR, even though I have come to the realization that this is also very low (but it wouldn't bother me greatly if I lost it).

The game I play is 8 deck, 3-2 BJ, 80% pen, DAS, double anything, (forgive me if I am forgetting anything)

Thanks again for all the response (positive and negative support alike)