Positive Count while losing with Crap Cards (7/10) while others getting good hands.

[ZenKinG]

It is not the kind of thing I keep track of but I am sure I have gone 3 hours without a blackjack even while playing 2 hands. You see extremely rare events constantly in a casino. The games may have been substantially slower than 80 hands/hour. Some ploppies are agonizingly slow players.

I agree with this, I've gone hours without a blackjack.. If I did get blackjacks, it wasn't anywhere near 11 or 12

[DSchles]

So now, even at 60 pairs of hands an hour, for a total of 360 in three hours, you want me to believe that you should have had 17 naturals but, in fact, you had none?

Gimme a break!

Don

[DSchles]

It's your right to agree with it, but it didn't happen! There's a difference between you didn't get your fair share (below average) and you didn't get any.

The probability of getting zero blackjacks in a stretch of 360 hands is rarer than one in 40 million. And please don't tell me that, you've played a lot of blackjack in your day, so you've played a lot of 360-hand stretches. Have you played 40 million of them??

This is a silly discussion.

Don

[Three]

I have hit bonuses that most play a lifetime and never hit multiple times in just over a years time. The odds of that are much longer than what we are speaking of. The longer the odds of an occurrence the less reliable applying frequency to outcome becomes because the variance is huge. You sit 1.2 million blackjack players down and you expect 1 to have such a run out of the gate. It might not happen for a long time but then it might happen very frequently for a short time. What makes an event of long odds significant is predicting it ahead of time. Trying to say it is impossible in retrospect is not a valid use of statistics. Go up to a craps table. Record the next 5 rolls not the total but the results of each die (hop bet). The odds that those 5 rolls would have occurred is at least 1 in 1,889,568 yet each 5 rolls it will have happened 100% of the time for any 5 rolls. Now if you predicted the next 5 rolls in advance the odds are 1 in 1,889,568 not 100%. You are using the same statistical fallacy to decide it couldn't have happened. Unbelievably long odds events happen constantly all over the casino. Predicting them before they happen is what makes them long odds not the fact that exceeding long odds events did happen and in fact must happen eventually. When they do happen it happens to somebody. Pick someone at random and you can say it probably didn't happen to them and assign the probability to the possibility but for the small group that says it did you can bet more than 1 time it is true. Divide the number of times it is true by the number in that group and you have the odds that any person in the group is accurate. Applying the random odds doesn't apply and is a statistical fallacy.

[KoolAid90]

I quickly looked at the replies and the common theme is variance. I am definitely a beginner, but I could not believe the variance was this intense - others getting better cards than I seemingly in a continuous fashion. I could not believe players to the left and right of me were getting that such good cards while I was getting the respective crap cards. Thank you all for the wisdom and kind words. I definitely put the negative loss into the log book, but will also put the word variance on it (but please also note that I will be reviewing my plays to make sure I correct any mistakes to become a better player just to make sure it is variance and not my own mistakes that I could control). I knew Card Counting is far from a guarantee of a win every time, but I wanted to find out if there was anything else on the superficial scale that I could improve on other than playing hands, indices, and bet spreads. Once again, thank you all as I sincerely appreciate all the advice!

You're overthinking this. You are concerning yourself with what the player at first base was dealt, then the second player and the fourth. Other than counting their cards, the cards the other players are dealt are of no particular interest to you. You are dealing with simple variance. I know it seems like the dealer is getting 20's and 21's on every hand, and when you double, you get 2's and 3's, and when you hit a stiff you get a 10, but it all evens out in time. Be patient. There will be days when things are going your way. Remember, you are dealing with a very slight advantage. Anything can happen in the short run.

Thanks Shoofly, ha ha the scenario you were describing was pretty accurate! Thanks for the advice and will definitely be looking for the long. "Anything can happen in the short run" - that is golden. Thanks!

This will happen a lot. Playing at a crowded table you run a higher risk of others getting the good cards that are expected when they do come out. You will also get fewer bets in per opportunity. Late surrender also would have likely saved you quite a bit. Regardless if you don't get any blackjacks that is a big handicap. It is no surprise from just that fact that you weren't in the green. Playing 2 hands can help but if the dealer hits to 21 every time you will just lose more. Don't think you won't have big counts were the dealer won't hit out every time. Or every time you have a made hand the dealer hits out and every time you bust the dealer busts. You play long enough you will see it all. You certainly will take major beatings from time to time. If you are playing good games like S17 or H17 with LS or S17 with LS you are halfway there. Now you just need to figure out when the tables aren't crowded, when and where to get great penetration and if you are BR challenged when the lowest limits are available. Fortunately the lowest limits are usually at uncrowded times which allows you to catch two of the 3 things that you are hoping to find at any rule set. Unless you are backcounting crowds are bad. Deep pen is something to search for but not worth as much if the table is crowded. Often the uncrowded table with slightly worse pen is a better choice. You had the same chance of getting the hands that others got so if the high cards were coming out as expected there is no evidence you were making mistakes even if you didn't get them.

The big mistake you have to watch is being afraid to make the big bets when called for and not over betting your BR. The other mistake is not knowing how to properly manage risk to your BR. At least as important as being able to count is understanding what risk you are taking and limiting it to what is wise given your BR. If you haven't much of a BR, if you don't wait until your BR is bigger to play, you will have no choice but to play at very high risk of losing everything. Most counters that fail, and they are many, fail not because they couldn't count but because they didn't understand how to manage the risk in the game.

Thanks Tthree! I really appreciate the several inputs of advice. Especially the notion of uncrowded tables versus crowded tables and the role of rules can make uncrowded tables more lucrative. Unfortunately I was not able to do surrender.

What really hit home for me was your comments regarding risk. " Most counters that fail, and they are many, fail not because they couldn't count but because they didn't understand how to manage the risk in the game." That was some really sound advice. I studied gambler's ruin and the risk of ruin to help gain insight to the respective properties. Once again, thanks for the advice.

V a r i a n c e .

You're also a good exanple of someone who plays before they're actually ready and that understands the AP game thoroughly. I was a victim of that as well when I first started and this is the exact reason why casinos love the whole introduction of card counting to the blackjack world, because they know many new counters don't have the knowledge to understand why they're losing or the effort and perseverance to grind it out and take money from the casino.

Simply many new players think "Oh, well I can count, now its over for the casino, this is going to be easy money." And then when they finally lose or a small losing streak they give up and think counting doesn't work and start asking questions as if they're supposed to be winning every trip. From your post it's clear you think counting will allow you to win more hands than lose, which is totally incorrect. You will lose more hands than you will win and the way you will make money is from getting more blackjacks, winning more double downs, winning more split opportunities, winning more insurance bets, and the *dealer busting more*(*controversial from recent sims on here*)

So to sum it up, what happened to you is perfectly normal, and I suggest you study up a little more because it seems you don't quite understand what counting truly is about.

Good luck

Thanks for the advice ZenKinG!
I definitely admit that I have lots to learn before I become proficient for the AP game.
["From your post it's clear you think counting will allow you to win more hands than lose, which is totally incorrect."] --- I really do not think this is me. I knew I would lose more hands than I would win, but I thought card counting would decrease the times I lost hands - not win more hands than lose.

I just want to make the claim that I understand I am not guaranteed to win, but I was just shook up for getting crap hands that frequently for that night relative to the other players and was seeking out if there was something else other than playing hands, betting, and indices that I could improve on. It was demoralizing that people around me were getting good cards as compared to me seemingly continually. (Bryce Carlson, in his book, "Blackjack for Blood" illustrated this concept in a chapter about two friends he met - I wouldn't doubt you read it too).

["the way you will make money is from getting more blackjacks, winning more double downs, winning more split opportunities, winning more insurance bets, and the *dealer busting more*(*controversial from recent sims on here*)] --- I did not know that before today, I thought by counting cards most of the positive trips would come from how you vary bets in correlation to the counts. Thanks for the info regarding how important double downs, insurance, and splits are in the game play!

Thanks for the advice, I'm definitely studying up more and try to further understand the mysteries of card counting. Seriously, card counting is such a fascinating concept to me.

You will lose when counting cards. This is a cold, hard, immutable fact about blackjack that often gets overlooked amidst the endless index revision, table scouting, and practice.

However you will also win. You will still lose more often than you win, but if everything is done correctly you will net more in the long run. In the short run seeing nights like yours is common. Losing for 3, 4, 5 10 hours at a stretch is something you have to get used to. If it bothers you then you will want to pick a different hobby. At some point you will lose a lot and you will lose for a long time. For weeks or months on end you will lose and you'll question everything you know and everything you do. If you don't have the wherewithal to stick it out then get out now.

Check out some of KJs posts from a year ago. He is a successful card counter who makes a living off of it. Last year he dropped 6 figures in the first quarter of the year. He stuck it out and rebounded and posted a profit, but I don't think a lot of people would have really been able to do what he did. Read through this forum, practice, read a few books, practice, and then practice some more.

Hey Genini1! Thanks for the help. The continual crap cards definitely bothered me, but I am definitely going to chalk it up and stick it out. Thanks for the referral to KJs posts, I will check it out.

Prepare yourself. This is only the beginning. You gotta be able to stomach more than that to be in this game...MUCH more than that. I say it like that, only because I too have had to learn the bitterness of losing my ass when the shoe is "gold".

Hang in there. Get your hours in. Numbers will work out. Now, if you think you have a perfect game but in fact you don't, that's a different story.

Hey hitA7! Will follow through! I am glad to know others have felt the golden sting as well. I know my game is not perfect, but I am definitely working on it!

Not in the same way as BJs and doubles. As a group splits are a small loser but lose less than not splitting. Splits are also less frequent so they don't impact your results as much.

Thanks for the reply ohbehave, I will add that to my knowledge.

Just one comment. Assuming, with others at the table, that you got about 80 hands per hour, you played about 240 hands in Casino A over three hours. You should have received about 11 or 12 blackjacks. It isn't even remotely possible that you received none. The probability is about one in 1.2 million. So, there are a couple of possibilities: 1) you have selective memory and chose to say you got no blackjacks when, in fact, you got very few, or b) you're simply misrepresenting the truth. I'm ruling out a third possibility that you were cheated, because, well, others got naturals, and it's just about impossible to deal from a shoe such that just one person at the table never gets a blackjack!

Don

Hey DSchles, its probably a little bit of all three as I have been guilty of all three before for other circumstances: I may have just been so engrossed into the game that I may have failed realizing other events which I think may be the most likely. Misrepresenting the truth knowingly or intentionally would not be in my best interests simply because of my desire to become a better counter - although I would entertain the possibility that I unknowingly misrepresented the truth due to the selective memory. Consequently, to the best of my recollection, I did not get a blackjack. I may also have extended the time, the cards may have been dealt slower, I did take some breaks to clear my head, etc. Consequently, for simplicity let us assume that what I am saying is the scenario for dramatic effect =).

Kool aid,

The tough truth is that straight counting is a tough road, and there are far better ways to make money. Now if you are going to play as an AP you need to find fine games, LS is very essential, as well as S-17, and other things.[IMG]file:///C:\Users\CHUCKA~1\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\ 01\clip_image002.gif[/IMG]..tables not crowded.....you need to be as a world class athlete, in fine shape mentally and physically..........................you also need to develop STing skillz as well as side counts in 2 and 4 deck games, and you need to be as a BJ machine. Sounds daunting, and it is. If you live in V-Gas, you have a great running start with a wide variety of games to hit and move on......HCing,,, big money there, you can always move in that direction,,but alot of travel and network required. It is not easy, and most drop out and or fade away, no shame in that, it is really rather inevitable.

O

Hey Ouchez! Thanks for the tips! Yeah I was creeping people out by staring at the sign describing the rules (the people at first base by the signs were thinking I was checking them out but in reality I was reading the rules!! Ha ha ). If I may inquire as to what STing skills are (slug tracking)? I definitely need to develop side counting skills for sure. What is HCing (holecarding)? I am definitely showing my green here for not know what they mean or stand for.

[Three]

I knew I would lose more hands than I would win, but I thought card counting would decrease the times I lost hands - not win more hands than lose.

In high counts your win rate doesn't change much (% hands won to hands played win lose or draw is almost unchanged). The % of hands you push goes up a lot and the % of hands you lose goes down. You rarely reach a point where you are more likely to win than lose.

[KoolAid90]

In high counts your win rate doesn't change much (% hands won to hands played win lose or draw is almost unchanged). The % of hands you push goes up a lot and the % of hands you lose goes down. You rarely reach a point where you are more likely to win than lose.

Oh okay let me get this straight. In the past I thought with a higher or more positive count, the advantage shifts to the player while a lower or closer to negative count pushes the advantage to the dealer because of the less chance they will bust. However all this merely translates into pushing more?

or are you talking about the act of card counting (not including indices and betting) does not necessarily translate into more correct hands like basic strategy?

I'm confused, can you please elaborate?

[Three]

You win rate only rises by about 1% (43% to almost 44% or more). The push rate, primarily because of the increase of 20 v 20 pushes, goes up dramatically (from 8% to 11%+). The lose rate goes down by maybe 4% (from 49.5% to 46% or less).

Here is one of Norm's great visual aids.

http://www.blackjackincolor.com/truecount5.htm

[ohbehave]

The player advantage in positive counts comes not from a winning hand percentage greater than 50% but from higher payouts on key winning hands. It comes primarily from more BJs which pay higher. It also comes from more successful double downs where the amount won is twice the usual bet, and to a lesser degree from more hands totaling 20.

[KoolAid90]

You win rate only rises by about 1% (43% to almost 44% or more). The push rate, primarily because of the increase of 20 v 20 pushes, goes up dramatically (from 8% to 11%+). The lose rate goes down by maybe 4% (from 49.5% to 46% or less).

Here is one of Norm's great visual aids.

http://www.blackjackincolor.com/truecount5.htm

Ohhh! I feel like I am getting conflicting info here. Please help me as my Calculus drained brain is having a hard time without food or water (Anyone wanna hit the local casino and get a buffet?).



Since I began this journey, I thought this stanza was the basis:

["In the game of blackjack your probability of winning a hand is dependent upon the mix of the cards remaining in the deck. If the mix of cards remaining in the deck contains high value cards, it is a positive and is favorable for the player. When the deck contains a large number of tens and aces it increases the players chances of drawing a pat hand (17 or higher) or getting a natural blackjack. It also increases the chances that the dealer will bust. This is why card counters raise the size of their bets when the deck is rich with high cards. They may also deviate from basic strategy depending on the count.
If the cards remaining in the deck are low value cards, it is negative and it favors the dealer. Card counters usually lower their bets when the count is negative. When the deck is rich in low cards it less likely that the dealer will make a pat hand and it is also makes it less likely that the dealer will busts when he has to draw."]

So I embedded this principle and thought, if the count is higher, I have a greater chance to win hands therefore I will bet more. If the count is low, I bet minimum because the dealer has the advantage and I will lose more hands. Therefore I beat the game by varying bets accordingly.


------

Is the page that you referred me to now saying that this is simply not true? That a higher count does not necessarily mean that I will win a few more hands with large bets? If so, my blackjack world got turned upside down and shaken to the core foundations. Tthree can you confirm of what I may just be realizing to be true?

Does this mean the stanza should have said something like:
1) a deck rich with high cards does not necessarily mean that a dealer is more likely to bust and players are increasing their chances to make good hands.
2) a deck rich in low cards does not necessarily mean a dealer well not bust as much and so players are more of at a disadvantage.
3) a player raises his bet in accordance to a higher count not by supposed increases in winning hands, but rather by hoping they will get a blackjack or double down opportunity?

[KoolAid90]

The player advantage in positive counts comes not from a winning hand percentage greater than 50% but from higher payouts on key winning hands. It comes primarily from more BJs which pay higher. It also comes from more successful double downs where the amount won is twice the usual bet, and to a lesser degree from more hands totaling 20.

Hey Ohbehave, so the positive count does not mean I am more likely to win hands, it just means that I should bet more on an increasingly positive count?

Meaning the following stanza is void:

["In the game of blackjack your probability of winning a hand is dependent upon the mix of the cards remaining in the deck. If the mix of cards remaining in the deck contains high value cards, it is a positive and is favorable for the player. When the deck contains a large number of tens and aces it increases the players chances of drawing a pat hand (17 or higher) or getting a natural blackjack. It also increases the chances that the dealer will bust. This is why card counters raise the size of their bets when the deck is rich with high cards. They may also deviate from basic strategy depending on the count.
If the cards remaining in the deck are low value cards, it is negative and it favors the dealer. Card counters usually lower their bets when the count is negative. When the deck is rich in low cards it less likely that the dealer will make a pat hand and it is also makes it less likely that the dealer will busts when he has to draw."]

Does this mean it should have said something like:
1) a deck rich with high cards does not necessarily mean that a dealer is more likely to bust and players are increasing their chances to make good hands.
2) a deck rich in low cards does not necessarily mean a dealer well not bust as much and so players are more of at a disadvantage.
3) a player raises his bet in accordance to a higher count not by supposed increases in winning hands, but rather by hoping they will get a blackjack or double down opportunity?

My blackjack world just got flipped, flopped, and flippity flopped around!!!

[ohbehave]

Yeah you just got rocked. Pat hands 17-19 are overall losers in any count (19 is close it might be slightly a winner). Dealer busts only slightly more. You don't have to raise your bets in positive counts to win. If you ONLY play positive counts with a flat bet that is also a winning game. Low counts are bad because the player will stand on more hands 12-16 because dealer will have a low upcard more often only to draw to a pat hand and win.

[ohbehave]

One more thing. The winning hand % does increase in positive counts. But because the house edge is under 1% it doesn't take much of a change in winrate for the player to get the advantage. That 1% change in winning hand % that Tthree mentioned then becomes a small player edge increasing slightly the higher the count (the player will rarely have an edge higher than about 3%). Then part of the players overall edge also comes from increased betsize in plus counts.