Oscar and his voodoo

[potstuck]

I'm new to the forum and am looking for some help, and I'll be honest, I don't want to count cards. I want to go to the casino and not have to worry about heat and cover and everything else that comes with counting. I just want to have fun... so I play Oscar's grind and have done quite well with it over the years, sometimes big wins, and sometimes big losses. I have been working on some variations to it and I am deep in the rabbit hole and looks like I need simulation help if someone is willing to oblige. I will certainly set up a number of circumstances and or questions if any one can help, and here is the first one:

1. When in recovery with the grind there is a point that I call the 'tipping point' in which the amount of betting units down (x), has a better chance of recovery or not. Example: we are betting $1 units and are at the $10 recovery bet and are 100 units down, meaning we are exactly 10 betting units down right now, so are we likely to recover or less likely to recover from this point?

I understand that we can recover (or not) from any point of our betting unit, but there is a number that is more likely then less likely, this is our tipping point, and it should read like at 10x betting units down we have a 52% chance of recovery (more likely) and 48% chance of not recovering (less likely).

Would need a bongo sample size on this, and not sure how to program to be able to tell, any help would be fantastic - Thx

[ZenMaster_Flash]

This is a "non-question".

Oscar's Grind is equine feces.

A losing strategy, like ALL progressions.

Its sole blessing (of sorts) is that it

often takes awhile to go broke.

[seriousplayer]

I'm new to the forum and am looking for some help, and I'll be honest, I don't want to count cards. I want to go to the casino and not have to worry about heat and cover and everything else that comes with counting. I just want to have fun... so I play Oscar's grind and have done quite well with it over the years, sometimes big wins, and sometimes big losses. I have been working on some variations to it and I am deep in the rabbit hole and looks like I need simulation help if someone is willing to oblige. I will certainly set up a number of circumstances and or questions if any one can help, and here is the first one:

1. When in recovery with the grind there is a point that I call the 'tipping point' in which the amount of betting units down (x), has a better chance of recovery or not. Example: we are betting $1 units and are at the $10 recovery bet and are 100 units down, meaning we are exactly 10 betting units down right now, so are we likely to recover or less likely to recover from this point?

I understand that we can recover (or not) from any point of our betting unit, but there is a number that is more likely then less likely, this is our tipping point, and it should read like at 10x betting units down we have a 52% chance of recovery (more likely) and 48% chance of not recovering (less likely).

Would need a bongo sample size on this, and not sure how to program to be able to tell, any help would be fantastic - Thx

No betting system (including Oscar Grind) will ever overcome the house edge in the long run. It seem like that is what you trying to achieve. This is MISSION IMPOSSIBLE!!

[potstuck]

Didn't really ask if I can overcome the house edge from either of you, or are these just your standard replies? My question is a math problem using simulations... Let me know if there is anyone who can help or if I need to explain the problem further. Thanks

[Gronbog]

The simulation will show that you are never more likely to recover than to continue losing.

[MJGolf]

Where is T-Three when you need him? LOL

OK, don't know if this is right one but our moderator has run a LOT of simulations that may save you some time. Here is one that shoots down progression systems:

https://blackjackincolor.com/useless5.htm

Hope I picked the right one.

[potstuck]

The simulation will show that you are never more likely to recover than to continue losing.

You are absolutely wrong about that, you either don't understand the question or don't know what you are talking about. I'll break it down in another post so every one is clear

[potstuck]

Where is T-Three when you need him? LOL

OK, don't know if this is right one but our moderator has run a LOT of simulations that may save you some time. Here is one that shoots down progression systems:

https://blackjackincolor.com/useless5.htm

Hope I picked the right one.

Those aren't the type of simulations I was looking for, you just handed me a long term/ vs short term chart on hands for Martingale, where in my OP did I ask for that?

[potstuck]

Ok, well I appreciate the feedback, unfortunately it has been all unrelated to my original question, so let me start to break this down so some of you can comprehend the math of what I am looking for. Also save your opinions on wether the oscar is doable or not or if it can beat the house edge, I'm just looking for math analysis here which is essentially a probability question. Basically my simulator is to simple in terms of diving into the variations that I am looking for, THAT is what I am asking for help about.

Ex 1: If you start playing the oscar with a 100 unit br vs a 500 unit br, you have a higher % to complete a 100 unit target profit with a 500 br than a 100 starting br, that is simple math and that is fact, which shows you have a higher probability of success with a larger br than a smaller br. Actually I will run a quick simulation and post the result for exactly this:

Rules - 8 decks / Surrender / DAS / soft 17

Starting BR 5000
Starting bet $10
Target = 100 units or $1000
Or go broke

Simulate 1000 games = 82.6% of the time you reach your 100 unit goal and 17.4% of the time you go broke
Sim1.jpg

Starting BR 1000
Starting bet $10
Target = 100 units or $1000
Or go broke

Simulate 1000 games = 47.4% of the time you reach your 100 unit goal and 52.6% of the time you go broke
Sim2.jpg
As you can see these 2 different br starting points yield a completley different result or probability of success, so if you understand this basic concept then we will move to

Ex 2: Once recovery starts in oscar you have a higher probability of success when you are recovering at the 1 betting unit level than at the 10 betting unit level. Again this is fact.

For example - you buy in for $1000 and are playing at the $10 starting level and your hands go like this:
hand 1 - L (-$10)
hand 2 - L (-20) double
hand 3 - L (-5) surrender
hand 4 - L (-10)
hand 5 - w (+20) double

now you are $35 away from your (1) bet target, and your next bet is actually $20, or we are 1.75 betting units away from target. What is the % of the time we will hit our target when we are 1.75 units behind? That is my question in OP, but I was asking it at 10 betting units.

If you have any other specific questions on this math or need further clarification just ask, but hopefully you understand what I am asking for now - Thanks potstuck

[Norm]

Potsluck, the problem you are having here is that our members aren't really interested in losing. Your original post isn't clear on what you are looking for. If you want to know how long you can last, on average, with a certain bankroll, without going broke -- that is calculable. Or, how many trips will result in a loss, that is calculable. Not certain what you are looking for.

[potstuck]

Potsluck, the problem you are having here is that our members aren't really interested in losing. Your original post isn't clear on what you are looking for. If you want to know how long you can last, on average, with a certain bankroll, without going broke -- that is calculable. Or, how many trips will result in a loss, that is calculable. Not certain what you are looking for.

I understand its complicated, but you all think I am trying to convince you all to use Oscars Grind, that is the furthest thing and I could care less what you do. And i don't think any one is interested in losing, but that is no where near correlated with what i am asking, again, this is a math question, If you are interested in truly helping, I can walk you through it and I beleive I have explained it very well in my post #9. So again, I don't care how you play BJ, counting, voodoo, don't care, this is a math question, so I'll ask you, do you understand how to play Oscar?

[Norm]

Your "sims" are meaningless as they are statistically insignificant. Your "objective" is poorly stated. There is no answer to your question as you only give an example. That one answer can be calculated -- but would have no overall significance.

[potstuck]

Your "sims" are meaningless as they are statistically insignificant. Your "objective" is poorly stated. There is no answer to your question as you only give an example. That one answer can be calculated -- but would have no overall significance.

I just showed in the example 1 that the sims show that a larger starting BR is better than a smaller starting BR, with percentages, so how is this statistically insignificant?

My objective, if you understand Oscar's grind, is what was stated in original post - 1. When in recovery with the grind there is a point that I call the 'tipping point' in which the amount of betting units down (x), has a better chance of recovery or not. Example: we are betting $1 units and are at the $10 recovery bet and are 100 units down, meaning we are exactly 10 betting units down right now, so are we likely to recover or less likely to recover from this point?

The entire reason why I am asking has significance, for me, maybe not for you, but that is your opinion.

If you understand Oscars Grind and how it is played, then you would easily understand my question, I also gave examples in post #9 to help you along (BR examples and betting unit examples)

So, ask me a specific question instead of just saying its insignificant.