Four months of playing blackjack

[Bodarc]

Tthree, that all depends on your outlook on a movie. I can not enjoy any action movie starring guys like Arnold Schwarzenegger or Sylvester Stallone because the first time they pull out a bow and arrow and wipe out 32 guys with machine guns or take a 22 and completely blow up and destroy an armored car, it is just more than I can take.

If you can watch "21" just for the story and not worry about picking it apart because of accuracy, then you'll probably enjoy it. Otherwise it most likely isn't for you.

[Orangechip2]

I don't understand why your "retiring" from poker unless your losing more than your winning. I can understand your thought process in those regards if your a loser at poker. For someone who doesn't like being in the casino why are you even playing blackjack? I'm sure blackjack will become a grind for you just like playing poker. It seems like it's already become a grind for you with all of the practice you say your putting into learning the game. Again, why are you learning the game if you hate being in a casino?

The movie "21" didn't inspire me to learn how to count cards. Every time I watch it I just notice the mistakes in the movie and the things that I would not do. Basic strategy can be learned over a kitchen table or on those high speed electronic tracking devices you use. Anyone should be able to learn it in a few hours if they actually put in the effort to learn it in the first place. I don't understand why you would go into a casino to practice basic strategy and not apply the card counting aspect of your strategy if you say you knew how to count, but did not. To me that represents a wasted effort in order to improve your game. What a way to waste valuable time with your money riding on the line. I'm not going to candy coat a response for you and tell you what you want to hear and give you an at-a-boy pat on the back.

+1

[Cloudstreets7087]

Im not looking for or need a pat on the back. I'm just sharing my experience so far.

I didnt go to the casino to practice basic strategy. I went to validate to myself that it works live and that I could remember what to do with distractions. A sim and the casino are two different playing environments.

I validated counting the same way. I learned and practiced until proficient on a sim and then I rolled it into my game. That's just the way I do things. I'm an engineer. Sorry I'm conservative.

[Cloudstreets7087]

Drunk - thanks for the comment. From what I have read basic strategy was designed to reduce the house edge to @.5. That's about 50/50 slightly in favor of the house. The closer the count is to zero, the more important basic strategy becomes in order to minimize house edge. If the count goes negative for more than a hand or two, I generally leave the table or skip a few hands. If the count goes positive basic strategy begins to hurt your gained advantage.

So, if the count is low, my chances are about 50/50 with basic strategy. So it's like flipping a coin and it comes up heads and I double my bet that the next toss will be tails. Sometimes I hit and sometimes I don't, but it's based on approximately even odds. It does have a minor side effect of potentially disguising counting, but I do it more so because min betting all the time makes it difficult to keep my chip stack healthy for when high counts come along. This is my own personal experience.

[Cloudstreets7087]

You're right. I don't mean completely abandon basic strategy. I was thinking that basic strategy is based on a .5% house edge. If the edge swings to the player as in a high count that means perfect basic strategy can hurt you in some situations.

[Three]

So it's like flipping a coin and it comes up heads and I double my bet that the next toss will be tails

Your current flip results have nothing to do with past results. Having 100 heads in a row will still have a 50% chance of getting a tail on the next flip. BJ has a very weak correlation that your next hand will have the same result as your previous hand. This effect is almost nonexistent but it is there. If the deck composition is a lot of high cards on the last round there is a slight difference in the chance you will loss and push (the chances you will win doesn't change much) than if the deck composition is a lot of low cards. The next hand will have a fairly similar deck composition to the previous hand most of the time.

This is where I usually provide a link to Norm's "Blackjack In Color" graph of win/loss/push frequencies as the TC changes but his recent security updates are not compatible with my computer. The browser updates to get access require a different OS. I guess it is time to update my computer but it is not a good time for me personally to do so.

[Cloudstreets7087]

I know a flip of heads does not increase my chances of tails on the next flip. The odds "reset" every time. But it's still 50/50. So a double bet triggered by a loss hits with some frequency. The loss is just a trigger. I could just as easily bet double using some other trigger. When the count is high it's a different story of course.

[Three]

Playing BS and betting with no count info to base your bet on (random bet changes) will result in a expected lose of your average bet times the House Edge. Raising your bet causes a larger expected lose because it raises your average bet. If you know the count raising it when you know the House Edge is higher than with no information the affect is even greater toward raising expected losses in the long run. When the count is such that you have no advantage raising your bet will increase expected loss and any successes you have will eventually see balancing losses to make the results come in at expectation.

[Orangechip2]

Almost 50/50 but not actually 50/50. The not actually is very powerful. Playing basic strategy without counting you have a one-half of one percent disadvantage.

I will add: If you are playing 100% BS then it's close to what he referenced above. If you aren't making the correct BS moves then it moves closer to 2-3% HE.

[ZeeBabar]

Just cannot see myself doubling my bet after a loss when the count is neutral or negative. In rare cases when I feel I am under scrutiny, I might do it but otherwise, no way. I doubt any experienced AP does it either. At my local casino, where I am accepted as a regular and local, I might split to two hands at a neutral or -1 count if the table is being watched, after a loss of the previous hand, a "change the card flow" comment included.

[Cloudstreets7087]

I like the idea of playing two hands after a loss with a low or neutral count. I think I will try that. Makes more sense than bet doubling.

I went end to the casino this morning with the intention of a $250 buy in. Lots of tables to choos from. About 3 players average per table. Took a little bit of window shopping before I saw a table that was worth counting. At most they had played two hands already. Two players at the table. Watched for three hands, the count was swinging very nicely positive. I sat down. One guy asked if I could wait another hand and I said sure. Bonus hand for counting. Count was now in the range for ramping up.

Bought in for 250
first bet - 50 (10-10), win - dealer 17
next bet - 50 (9-2) double down to 21, win - dealer 19
next bet -150 (2-10) surrender to dealers 7 up card - dealer 17
next bet -125 (J-J), win - dealer bust

count cooled down. Left the table up 300 cashed out and left the casino.

I don't know about you guys but I want to make money at the casino. I'm definitely not there for the ambiance or the over priced food. I forget the exact numbers but I think with a million hands played with perfect strategy and perfect counting you should expect to make like 6 bucks an hour or something. Those million hands include upswings and downswings. My goal isn't to hit that 6 bucks an hour. Sorry. I don't want to stay at the casino long enough to throw enough data points at the equation to make that little money. I over doubled my money in this visit. I'm outta there.

I studied. I practiced and continue to do so. Now I want to see what I can do.

[Three]

I like the idea of playing two hands after a loss with a low or neutral count. I think I will try that. Makes more sense than bet doubling.

Why are you even considering putting more money out in a negative count regardless of your previous result?

next bet -150 (2-10) surrender to dealers 7 up card - dealer 17

This was a bad play. There are things called scavenger plays were smart players pick up the EV bad players leave on the table. Often it is taking the rest of a plus EV double or taking 1 hand or a shared result for bit on a split. One such play is to buy stupid surrenders from people that surrender when they shouldn't. A scavenger would have gladly paid you 50% of your bet to take over your hand. Without knowledge of the count the player would take over your hand for half the bet and expect to lose 21.26% of the bet.

No Knowledge of the count EV: -21.26%
TC +1 EV about: -22.38%
TC +2 EV about: -23.58%
TC +3 EV about: -24.85%
TC +4 EV about: -26.20%
TC +6 EV about: -27.99%
TC +7 EV about: -29.29%
TC +9 EV about: -29.66%
TC +11 EV about: -31.85%
TC +17 EV about: -38.52%

Surrender -50%

It was a very bad decision to surrender.

[Cloudstreets7087]

I was just protecting my stack. That $150 bet represented 30% of it. I'll admit that I don't know all the EV numbers by heart but a +16 running count at the time made me more than nervous hitting on my 12. A surrender turned it into a 15% loss rather than a 30% loss. The guy to my left drew a king so I felt pretty good about it. Maybe that king just encourages a bad play but counting is supposed to let you know the deck is 10 card rich, right? So it was a decision based on real information.