Losing streak thread - PART SEVEN

[mickeymouse]

Last week, I won two sessions in a row. During those two sessions I made a grand total of $1040. I thought I was on the way back up. Remebering my ATH was $8260 of profit and before those two sessions I had lost three quarters of it over about 15 sessions in a little over six weeks.

On my next to last session, I ploughed through 8 hours of toil to no avail. I made a grand net loss of $50, close to the theoretical loss from the house edge of basic strategy despite counting (with moderate camouflage and no heat).

On my last session - tonight - I lost $900 on the first shoe. The count was +4 on the first shoe starting halfway through and continued throughout the remainder of the penetration.

The conditions were as follows
- The game was dealt from a shoe of six decks
- The minimum was $10 and the maximum was $400
- The penetration was 90%
- I was playing with one to two other players throughout
- No hole card - BB+1
- Double on 9/10/11 only
- No surrender
- Double after split allowed
- Split after 3 hands and aces may be split once with one additional card only.

My betting spread was as follows
TC-2 or worse $0 (wong out)
TC -1 to +1 $10
TC +2 2 boxes of $25
TC +3 2 boxes of $50
TC +4 2 boxes of $75
TC +5 2 boxes of $90 (maximum)

I did not win a SINGLE HAND when I bet more than the minimum. That's right. Nil, nada, zilch, nicht, nein, none. Stiff-hand-bust stiff-hand-bust stiff-hand-bust every hand. I didn't chase losses or go on tilt. I played as I always played without exception.

I took a break and went to the poker table. I played for two hours and saw two non-blind flops out of 50, such were the cards I was dealt.

Then I went back to the blackjack table and the count went up to +6 halfway through the next shoe. Six hands later $800 more - the remainder of my session bankroll - was lost.

After taking into consideration my recent unfortunate series of results, I have come to the conclusion that there are only a few explanations. Either the casino is intentionally removing cards from their shoe to elevate the house edge (by multiples of times), or more likely, I am just one of the unluckiest people in the country. The former is unlikely, because in the country I reside in, gaming is very heavily regulated and doing so is against the law. The latter is probably what it comes down to. I am simply doomed to the extreme left hand end of the Gaussian curve in whatever I do. Period. This applies to any pursuit involving probability that it comes to. I am just perpetually unluckier than anyone else. It is as if life itself deals me cards from a deck with the aces and pictures removed.

I am convinced that the worm will never turn, I will not recover from this losing streak and it is a simple matter of time before I lose all my profits and head into negative territory. As a result, I have made the decision that I will no longer be playing*. I would like to thank everyone here for their advice during the time that I have played - it was nice joyride while it lasted.

*Qualification: I may, occasionally, drop a couple of hundred dollars on a Friday night after work as a bit of fun, and on those occasions I will still play optimally according to the rules. But I won't be committing time to play the game to build up a bankroll.

[biggg]

Yeah I mean this game may not be for you. And this stuff about being the unluckiest possible is untrue, a decent % of the time you could be losing big for the amount you played. If the pen is 90% that's a nice game otherwise lousy.

Unless you have had a 25k hand downswing you aren't that unlucky and really you have to go higher than that.

[Sharky]

real crappy game...better be 90%+ pen as you know (you ramp at +2) you are still behind at +1....way behind if h17 - which, i can only assume given the other shity rules you mention...betting 5 units when marginally ahead (H17)...if you play a shoe game where you are behind at +1 you are, literally, killing yourself....waste of time imo

GOOD LUCK

[Stealth]

It is certainly within the math (variance), i.e. quite possible, to be up 20K or down 10K over a 100 hours of this game. Playing the game to build a bankroll as opposed to having a bankroll large enough to withstand those swings is a very difficult thing to do.

That situation puts you at the mercy of variance to be successful and that can be a psychological nightmare. To be successful you should focus on playing correctly and building EV and realize variance is a necessary product of the activity.

Or, as you have indicated, stop playing as this game is not everyone's cup of tea.

[Three]

It is certainly within the math (variance), i.e. quite possible, to be up 20K or down 10K over a 100 hours of this game. Playing the game to build a bankroll as opposed to having a bankroll large enough to withstand those swings is a very difficult thing to do.

He is not playing BJ but rather an unnamed variant of the game. Variants have higher swings, require special counts and strategies to attack them, and usually larger BR's. I have not given advice to him because we don't have enough information to give advice since we don't even know what game he is playing due to the fact people are justifiably protecting a great specialized opportunity somewhere. I am wondering if he is using a proper count/playing strategy combo for the game. Variants are traps to those that think it is just like BJ. Also I am wondering if he has the BR to even think about playing given the more severe swings that usually if not always accompany playing a BJ variant.

[Stealth]

He is not playing BJ but rather an unnamed variant of the game.

Yes apparently, read his old thread and he is likely playing Pontoon which requires a different count system and has higher SD. Will ignore unless he gets much more open about what he is doing.

It certainly does not appear that he has a bankroll close to what would be required.

[biggg]

Pontoon / S21 is a punishing high variance game even compared to regular BJ...

[BJGenius007]

Pontoon / S21 is a punishing high variance game even compared to regular BJ...

If the OP is playing BJ variant game named Austrian Pontoon and counting using traditional Hi Lo or other counting system for BJ, he will lose big. The following link leads to basic strategy for this game, even BS is quite different from BJ:

http://lasapuestas.mx/games/pontoon/australian/

[biggg]

I'm sure OP is a fine pontoon player, there's a great book on it, I play it as well for fun and comps mostly. Problem is the edge doesn't scale as sharply with the count so you don't get as many hands with big edges.

[Three]

I'm sure OP is a fine pontoon player, there's a great book on it, I play it as well for fun and comps mostly. Problem is the edge doesn't scale as sharply with the count so you don't get as many hands with big edges.

[Exoter175]

Is it me or does the following seem "not right"?

My betting spread was as follows
TC-2 or worse $0 (wong out)
TC -1 to +1 $10
TC +2 2 boxes of $25
TC +3 2 boxes of $50
TC +4 2 boxes of $75
TC +5 2 boxes of $90 (maximum

Now, depending on the count/system used with this, and the effective 1-18 spread here, that this would be beatable. Looking further into it, if he/she is indeed playing pontoon (Australian BB+1 specifically), it would appear as if the bet spread and ramp is too cautious for a game that would otherwise require slightly more aggressive "ramp up" than standard blackjack games. It would appear as if spreading from 1x10 to 2x25 from +1-+2 is far too aggressive for the game, while the jump from +2-+3 and beyond is far too cautious, and seems to have an otherwise "plateau" effect on the potential income here. Beyond that I don't feel that a 2x scenario is appropriate until much later in the the ramp up, if it is even required based on the conditions and perceived heat.

Something like:
-1-+1 = 1x10
+2 =1x20
+3 =1x40
+4 =2x65
+5+= 2x100

It essentially becomes a 1-20 spread which in all likelihood isn't going to matter nearly as much as spending 1x20 and 1x40 in +2 and +3 counts, vs. 2x25 and 2x50 in +2 and +3 counts, where the advantage and rules aren't nearly as favorable. Seems like a bulk of the money is lost when the advantage is truly neutral and/or ever so slightly in the players favor with the OP's spread.

[Three]

My betting spread was as follows
TC-2 or worse $0 (wong out)
TC -1 to +1 $10
TC +2 2 boxes of $25
TC +3 2 boxes of $50
TC +4 2 boxes of $75
TC +5 2 boxes of $90 (maximum
Now, depending on the count/system used with this, and the effective 1-18 spread here, that this would be beatable. Looking further into it, if he/she is indeed playing pontoon (Australian BB+1 specifically), it would appear as if the bet spread and ramp is too cautious for a game that would otherwise require slightly more aggressive "ramp up" than standard blackjack games. It would appear as if spreading from 1x10 to 2x25 from +1 to +2 is far too aggressive for the game, while the jump from +2 to +3 and beyond is far too cautious, and seems to have an otherwise "plateau" effect on the potential income here. Beyond that I don't feel that a 2x scenario is appropriate until much later in the the ramp up, if it is even required based on the conditions and perceived heat.

Something like:
-1-+1 = 1x10
+2 =1x20
+3 =1x40
+4 =2x65
+5+= 2x100

Well you would have to adjust these IBA's for cost the ENHC rule etc but here is the advantage estimates if he is using a strong ace reckoned level 2 count for Sp21 S17 version.

TC -1: -0.74%
TC 0: -0.32%; 1X10
TC +1: 0.11%; 2x10
TC +2: 0.72%; 2x50
TC +3: 1.27%; 2x100
TC +4: 1.79%; 2x150
TC +5: 2.23%; 2x200

Obviously the rules of pontoon would, if that is the game in question, would have the ramp change to a more conservative ramp but I was thinking his ramp wasn't aggressive enough to make the game worth playing. The cost of the rules may may Ex right about about the +1 to +2 jump being too aggressive but I just don't know the cost. An educated guess on a ramp maxing at 2x100 isn't far off of Ex's suggestion. I favor betting green chips only when appropriate:
-1 <= TC <= +1: 1x10
TC +2: 1x25
TC +3: 2x50
TC +4: 2x75
TC +5: 2x100

You have to get the money out there when you have an advantage. Also plying strategy is very important in this game. To play an ace reckoned count you are pretty weak in playing decisions. Advantage accumulates much faster as indices are exceeded with a strong playing count. It is definitely worth the effort.

[mickeymouse]

Virtually all my money has been lost when the TC was +4 or greater. I have hardly won 15% of hands in the previous 15-20 sessions at the max bet. I have also been playing regular blackjack, and have yet to win a single hand in $1500 of losses at the max bet.

I believe that the venue in question is manipulating the deck to increase the house edge - and in multiples.