See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 57

Thread: It occurs to me that ...

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Eastern U S A
    Posts
    7,041


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    It occurs to me that ...


    ... a huge handicap to becoming an advantage Blackjack Player is the
    emotional attachment to money that newbies so often bring to the table.

    This is so very much like the emotional attachment that they may have to an
    (abusive/neglectful) (partner/spouse)
    ~ just like the BJ game that is their mistress.



  2. #2


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    True dat, yo. Brotha Flash preachin the truth!

    But for real that's one of the things I love most about AP. It teaches you money is just money. It's a unit, a tool, something to be calculated but that you don't have to worry about every single dollar (in regards to variance and getting unlucky/etc). You need to be able to take the swings, and in order to do that, you need to not sweat the bad luck and losses. Freedom from moneys hold on most of us is something I really love that I got from AP'ing.

  3. #3
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Eastern U S A
    Posts
    7,041


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    As well as helping researchers understand how much a bet is worth in purely mathematical terms, wagers have also revealed how we value decisions in real life. During the eighteenth century, Daniel Bernoulli wondered why people would often prefer
    low-risk bets to ones that were, in theory, more profitable. If expected profit was not driving their financial choices, what was?


    Bernoulli solved the wager problem by thinking in terms of “expected utility” rather than expected payoff. He suggested that the same amount of money is worth more—or less—depending on how much a person already has. For example, a single coin is more valuable to a poor person than it is to a rich one. As fellow researcher Gabriel Cramer said, “The mathematicians estimate money in proportion to itsquantity, and men of good sense in proportion to the usage that they may make of it.”


  4. #4
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Eastern U S A
    Posts
    7,041


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    The economists "utility function" explains several things, e.g.
    how a lottery ticket can be a good purchase for a poor person.
    or why only a fool would risk his entire bankroll simply because
    he "has the best of it." If my bankroll is $10,000 and someone
    offers to have ME flip MY coin (and call it) placing $10,500 to my
    $10,000 in escrow, I instantly refuse because the LOSS of 10 K
    has a devastating effect, while winning 10.5 K has a salutary, (but
    not life-altering), effect.

  5. #5
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    arkansaw
    Posts
    26


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    true, as in playing stocks, one golden rule.....it takes money to make money. what i need to get over (@64 years young) is that it doesent bother me as much to lose,...we'll say a goodly amt. tinkering with equities, but it bugs the shit out of me to lose 4/500 at bj.

  6. #6


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by fiddler View Post
    true, as in playing stocks, one golden rule.....it takes money to make money. what i need to get over (@64 years young) is that it doesent bother me as much to lose,...we'll say a goodly amt. tinkering with equities, but it bugs the shit out of me to lose 4/500 at bj.
    The Older you get, and assuming one has been diligent in the accumulation of money for retirement, the Less the need or want for excessive risk. The mix if my retirement funds are in light to medium light risk funds, with approx 10% in medium risk. So, with reference to Married Putters very interesting post, the educated person, may well choose the lower return scenarios simply because excessive risk for higher return is not needed.

    I suppose the same philosophies could be intelligently directed towards AP activity. Interesting topic - maybe someone will start a thread on it.

  7. #7


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Freightman View Post
    So, with reference to Married Putters very interesting post, the educated person, may well choose the lower return scenarios simply because excessive risk for higher return is not needed.
    Which is why those close to retirement put more and more money in US Treasuries. Woe to those who had most of their life savings in the stock market as they were approaching retirement in 2008.
    Let's play with these numbers more, shall we? If instead of numbers like $4,000 and $3,000, let's say we were talking about $4 and $3. If it were a one-time offer, you'd probably just go for winning the $4. But if it were $4,000,000 vs. $3,000,000, I too would take the $3,000,000 because that is all that I would need. I wouldn't even need to play the "long-run" game anymore.
    Certainly there can come a time when percentages and odds don't matter anymore. If a big payout is all you need, and the one-time offer covers it, go for the sure thing.

    Ever see Brewster's Millions? I probably would have taken the million.

  8. #8


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Economics teaches us that value is subjective and that utility is ordinal (ranking). We cannot say 'how much' a man values something, only that he values X > Y and that action demonstrates preference.

  9. #9


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Boz View Post
    Well, I'd think so! And it's impossible to track each hand without some sort of illegal device, so you're guestimating. I think it's absolutely useless and a giant waste of time.
    Tracking your EXACT EV may be difficult, but it's still important to track. Otherwise, how will you know if your falling slightly short or EXTREMELY short of your target???

    Actual results can be very misleading, especially to new players that don't understand the concept of EV or use the aid of software to give them a realistic idea of what their hourly expectation "should" be. For many new players, big losing streaks may totally discourage them completely; where as a few big winning sessions may empower them to bet foolishly and over-bet their BR as a result of being too overly confident. Winning $3,000 in a single session shouldn't allow you to over-estimate your blackjack skills, just as much as losing $3,000 should allow you to underestimate them too (as long as you're playing "correctly").

    I know for a fact that I don't track my EV 100% correctly, but if I fall anywhere between 70% and 80% of my "projected simmed EV", then I know I'm on the right track. I give myself that wiggle room to make room for counting/betting errors, cover plays, betting cover, over-estimation of rounds played per hour, etc.

    I suppose if you're playing recreationally, then I can understand the disinterest in tracking EV, but I certainly don't do it because I consider myself a stats junky by any means. I track EV (the best I can) because I treat blackjack like a business. Blackjack is an income supplement, so I try to stay on top of the stats as much as I can. I dread tracking the EV though. It's the least exciting part about this venture, but I do it anyway, as I feel it's necessary to any serious AP. Saying that tracking EV is "absolutely useless and a giant waste of time" is like saying a business owner shouldn't keep good P&L records, because it's a waste of time. That doesn't make sense...

  10. #10


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryemo View Post
    Tracking your EXACT EV may be difficult, but it's still important to track. Otherwise, how will you know if your falling slightly short or EXTREMELY short of your target???

    Actual results can be very misleading, especially to new players that don't understand the concept of EV or use the aid of software to give them a realistic idea of what their hourly expectation "should" be. For many new players, big losing streaks may totally discourage them completely; where as a few big winning sessions may empower them to bet foolishly and over-bet their BR as a result of being too overly confident. Winning $3,000 in a single session shouldn't allow you to over-estimate your blackjack skills, just as much as losing $3,000 should allow you to underestimate them too (as long as you're playing "correctly").

    I know for a fact that I don't track my EV 100% correctly, but if I fall anywhere between 70% and 80% of my "projected simmed EV", then I know I'm on the right track. I give myself that wiggle room to make room for counting/betting errors, cover plays, betting cover, over-estimation of rounds played per hour, etc.

    I suppose if you're playing recreationally, then I can understand the disinterest in tracking EV, but I certainly don't do it because I consider myself a stats junky by any means. I track EV (the best I can) because I treat blackjack like a business. Blackjack is an income supplement, so I try to stay on top of the stats as much as I can. I dread tracking the EV though. It's the least exciting part about this venture, but I do it anyway, as I feel it's necessary to any serious AP. Saying that tracking EV is "absolutely useless and a giant waste of time" is like saying a business owner shouldn't keep good P&L records, because it's a waste of time. That doesn't make sense...
    For years, my results have been significantly above simmed EV. How do I know that if I don't track EV? Because I tracked how much money I made. All that tells me is that the sim is a simulation, and not real life. Simulated EV tells you reliably how one game compares to another. And it tells you how one spread compares to another. But to think that it perfectly mirrors real life...I don't buy it. I think simple arithmetic tells you your edge, and EV need not be tracked. Simulation is for experimentation or projection or other thought experiments, in my book. Not comparison. If I'm falling 'short of my target', I get unhappy. And I start wonging in and out more aggressively. I go to lower minimums with a larger spread. This is based on ACTUAL results, not EV. I don't go to my computer and ask it what the problem is. Obviously, I'm not making recommendations to others.

    If you fall well below simmed EV, why are you on the wrong track? Doesn't variance ever put you below that margin? Do you normally play a billion hands in a session? I seriously don't see the point.
    Last edited by Boz; 05-08-2016 at 02:36 AM.

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.