Four months of playing blackjack

**biggg** · 04-12-2015, 05:22 PM

Lol man. BJ is not like poker. There's no room for that stuff if you play perfectly you win one bet out of 100. You just gave up 30 percent of that in one hand.

**tjr5259** · 04-12-2015, 05:56 PM

So you sat down at a table you were back counting after you missed a couple of hands and then surrendered a 12 v 7 with a RUNNING COUNT of 16?? You won 300 dollars in 10 minutes congratulations, but I'll bet your odds of losing more than 300 before you win again are better than you winning your doubled bet after a loss at a negative count. It doesn't seem like you understand card counting as much as you should. There are a lot of people on here that can answer your questions and you should definitely be asking them.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**Cloudstreets7087** · 04-13-2015, 04:25 AM

I do have a question. From what I e read perfect play combined with perfect counting gives the player about a .5% - 1% edge over the house. Yet, when the count is TC +4 the recommended spread is something like 16:1. That's a 1600% increase in bet size for a 1% advantage. I know this isn't poker but I don't get that. Either a high count is more of a sure thing than advertised or there's something in math I'm completely missing. Can someone explain? Thanks.

**Three** · 04-13-2015, 04:41 AM

Your edge is from betting bigger when you have the advantage and betting small or not at all when the casino has the edge. You get some cain from playing some hands differently as the count changes. You big edge is with a big bet out you will get more BJ's, and doubles and splits by playing different according to the count. You will also get better results from the doubles and splits in situations where you bet larger. Your percentage of hands won doesn't change much with the count but you push more as the count goes up and lose less so the ratio of wins to losses changes.

**Cloudstreets7087** · 04-13-2015, 05:33 AM

I really appreciate the responses. I know you guys must see me as a complete newb without a clue. Card counting is not hard. Adding one subtracting one. Being accurate in a casino environment and not having a look on your face like you're having a stroke is a different thing all together, but I've gotten over all that. By the way I have one piece of advice on counting that maybe you all know anyway. There seems to be so much emphasis on being able to count quickly. Count a deck in under 30 seconds. I started practicing that way and got a to a point where I could do that, but I found counting cards as they are dealt was not the best for me. It seemed too obvious.

So, what I do is wait until all the cards are dealt and then count them one hand at a time as they are being played. It's natural to be looking at the hand that is currently being played. Where it gets tricky is if the dealer has a low up card and everyone has over a 12, but if you're reasonably fast that's not a problem and if the dealer has a low up card they have to take cards and that gives you a chance to catch up. Anyway, for what it's worth...

thanks for the advice. I know my count is accurate. I know I am increasing bet size when I should. Maybe I don't get the statistical nuances yet, but I'll get there. It's working very well for me. I had a long weekend and went 4 times for a profit of $1240.

Last night I went with a friend who has been playing for a long time. I pulled him aside and told him that I count and that you may see me skip hands or maybe even get up from the table. He laughed at me like I practiced voodoo. He started talking to me about third base and how important it is that he sit in that position and that if everyone plays right he can make the whole table win. I looked at him as if he practiced voodoo. It made for a fun evening. His double down plays were entertaining. He busted out after an hour and I was up $540. Single data point I know, but he drives a brand new Porsche Targa. He must be doing something right.

**ohbehave** · 04-14-2015, 08:08 AM

Originally Posted by Cloudstreets7087

I just came from the casino. It's a beautiful day out and I really didn't feel like spending any time in there, but I see it as a part time job now and I figured I better put my time in. This was the first time I actually watched a table and counted before I sat down. Usually I don't catch a shoe right at the beginning and there were seats open. Lucky me. I only bought in for $500. I sat down with a +4 true count. played a couple hands two double downs and I was out of there +300. It was only 15 minutes of play. Not even enough time to smell like cigarette smoke. The count had cooled down as well. I was just thrilled to make over 50% in less than 15 minutes.

You've got some things right, but you have a lot to learn still.

What I don't get in the above example is, first, +4 TCs don't come around very often and they are usually very near the end of the shoe. So did you count down the whole shoe or are you maybe mistaken on what the TC actually was. And why wait until +4, by doing that you missed out on a number of rounds at an advantage.

You still have a lot of voodoo thinking going on in your head.

**BJGenius007** · 04-14-2015, 08:58 AM

Originally Posted by Cloudstreets7087

I do have a question. From what I e read perfect play combined with perfect counting gives the player about a .5% - 1% edge over the house. Yet, when the count is TC +4 the recommended spread is something like 16:1. That's a 1600% increase in bet size for a 1% advantage. I know this isn't poker but I don't get that. Either a high count is more of a sure thing than advertised or there's something in math I'm completely missing. Can someone explain? Thanks.

When TC is +4, players have the advantage of 1.5%. To make high TC happen less, the casinos gradually increase the size of the decks from only one in 1960's to six or eight right now. As the size of the shoe grows, players have no choice but increase their spread according to mathematics because high TC happens less often. That is why big bankroll is necessary. Even so, bankroll of 100 max bets has 5% of Risk of Ruin and bankroll of 200 max bets has 0.7% of Risk of Ruin. That means, even you have $40,000 bankroll and play $25 to $400 spread on 6/8 deck game, you have 5% of the chance to lose all your money. But that is for one individual. For all AP playing the same way, the average money they get from casinos will be positive and equals to 0.8% x $4000 = $32 per hour.

**stopgambling** · 04-14-2015, 09:13 AM

You have a lot of ploppy and voodoo thinking for an engineer , who should have a analytical mind. All those $150 in 15 mins. have little meaning. You will hit those $3000 lost in 15mins to balance you out . This game is an expectation war,not a quick " i won $150 in 15mins or $700 in 30 mins. battle." Forget about a spread of 1-16 ,no need to spread if counters are allowed to back count/just waiting and play their hand anytime they want . We need to ramp up to look like gamblers. Your max bet is your REAL bet, cause we only bet with advantage.

**mushin** · 04-14-2015, 09:33 AM

Originally Posted by BJGenius007

When TC is +4, players have the advantage of 1.5%. To make high TC happen less, the casinos gradually increase the size of the decks from only one in 1960's to six or eight right now. As the size of the shoe grows, players have no choice but increase their spread according to mathematics because high TC happens less often. That is why big bankroll is necessary. Even so, bankroll of 100 max bets has 5% of Risk of Ruin and bankroll of 200 max bets has 0.7% of Risk of Ruin. That means, even you have $40,000 bankroll and play $25 to $400 spread on 6/8 deck game, you have 5% of the chance to lose all your money. But that is for one individual. For all AP playing the same way, the average money they get from casinos will be positive and equals to 0.8% x $4000 = $32 per hour.

Very well stated and informative. Would it be wrong to assume however that provided a sufficient bankroll and proper adjustments when you when or loose the actual chances of going fully belly up is actually far less than that 5%? Of course this would be in an instance where you are not playing you entire bankroll in single session.

I read in a book about the concept of being on bankroll offense and bankroll defense and it really stuck with me as I thought that perhaps when you actually play in a session you could possibly adopt the idea of being on the offense and pushing you bets further when you are up and keeping them at a lesser amount than your max bet when you are down. With the goal being to control large fluctuations when you are at a point where you can not absorb loosing too many max bets in a row.. for that session.

**Cloudstreets7087** · 04-14-2015, 11:43 AM

I think it's fair to say that everyone has a certain amount of self preservation going on in the back of their minds when applying newly learned concepts of card counting. To not approach with caution seems foolish. Stack management in poker and blackjack are very different. I am still battling that and I am still learning. So comments about being a "ploppy" (whatever the heck that is) are not really constructive or encouraging if that is what this forum is for.

A lot of numbers get thrown around ie. .7%, 5%, +4, 200 max bets, etc. As counters, I'm thinking very few of you have ever actually verified the math or maybe even know the complex statistics to come up with them in search of a great fortune. So, we all to a great extent are taking these numbers on faith. I honestly don't feel like verifying these formulas. So, I approach with caution even though we should believe everything we read on the internet, right?

I also don't have $50,000 of disposable income to throw at blackjack (100 max bets). I would venture to guess that neither did you guys when you first started. If I had 50K of disposable income, I probably wouldn't even be that interested in going to smelly casinos, but that's just me. So, as stated above there is a sense of self preservation. When the count gets good, it takes a lot of confidence in what you are doing to throw a sizable chunk of your stack in that little circle in front of you. If someone showed me a list of calculations of how I am not going to die when I jump off a bridge with a bungie cord attached to my ankles, I probably still wouldn't jump. Doesn't make me a shitty engineer or a non-analytical thinker. I just don't feel like dying or in the case of blackjack, I don't feel like taking a big bite out of my bankroll.

I completely understand that the advantage we gain through counting is by betting correctly, but still I have to get over the fear as I'm sure many of you did the first time the count got good and it was time to fire out a big bet.

**mushin** · 04-14-2015, 11:51 AM

Just an FYI the numbers have been published and verified so I don't feel that I have to go out and verify them my self. I think it would be safe to say that I implement the strategies that others have come up with based on the theories that have been backed by math. I guess this is pretty much the same as me trusting the math that led to a design of a thrill ride.

**BJGenius007** · 04-14-2015, 12:06 PM

Originally Posted by Cloudstreets7087

I also don't have $50,000 of disposable income to throw at blackjack (100 max bets).

That is what the casinos are bet on when they replace one deck two deck game with six deck eight deck shoe game. The bankroll requirement for counting and spreading at multideck game is so huge for average gambler, the casinos hope they have discouraged most people from doing it.