dumb question

**Clint** · 07-13-2016, 09:47 PM

I'm not as advanced as all of you. But I'm not green. Putting aside MIT, and that astute man (forget his name) who took advantage of a temporary change in half a dozen casinos and made millions, here's my question: Is it possible - does anyone - make money ongoing, either as one source of income or even as their only source. Knowing this is possible would certainly motivate me even more. I'm operating on the assumption that it's possible. My own approach (at this point) would be the combination of basic strategy, card counting, adjusting the bet according to the count, relying on "hot" tables and (what is for me) the biggest factor, knowing when to leave the table.

Am I unrealistic? Does anyone in the forum make consistent money? This is a personal question but I would think most people would admit, aside from mathematical and other challenges, money is what this is about. Thank you in advance for any honesty.

**Three** · 07-13-2016, 10:26 PM

It is possible but it takes a lot more than just being able to count cards. First you need a BR large enough to make the big bets and ride out the variance. Then there is a lot of non counting aspects as well.

RS · 07-13-2016, 11:13 PM

Of course it can be done....and it is being done. That doesn't mean it's for everyone. Doesn't mean it's easy, always enjoyable, or tough situations arise. Doesn't mean money will be "rolling in" consistently, either. I wouldn't quit my regular job to be a full time AP, unless I had already spent enough time doing AP and was confident I could continue to make money doing it. A back-up plan, in case you fail, is also important.

**pilotzone** · 07-13-2016, 11:28 PM

You better think twice! Pros don't play hot tables or know when to leave, they just know when they have an edge!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

**ZenMaster_Flash** · 07-14-2016, 05:13 AM

The way that I will couch my reply may be a bit more meaningful to some.
For decades I have "earned" a middle-class existence as an A.P. primarily by
playing blackjack. Taken as an average yearly income, I earn much less than
I did as a forensic psychologist - but I am debt-free and very "detached" from
the almost universal "emotional attachment" to money.

**BigJer** · 07-14-2016, 12:36 PM

Originally Posted by ZenMaster_Flash

Taken as an average yearly income, I earn much less than
I did as a forensic psychologist

Thank you for sharing that with me. And thank you for allowing me the space to share with you.

relying on "hot" tables

The only hot tables are the ones where you have an advantage. I've seen, as well as nearly all here, tables go from hot to cold and vise-versa in one hand. So, how long would you play at a table that was hot then suddenly turn cold? Would you say it's just a couple of bad hands then the better game will resume?

Also, as tempted as I get to stay at a "hot table" when the count is bad it takes everything I have - the guts it takes - to leave. It is tough at first.

One last note, Ian Andersen, the one of BJ fame, said in one of his books that he gives the impression of being a "gambler" at the tables. Well, Colin from BJA, ran a simulation on his method and found that Andersen is loosing 1/2, I think he said, of his E.V. Now don't think I do not believe that Andersen isn't a good player but to loose 1/2 of your E.V.?

P.S. Thank you for being you ZMF!

**stopgambling** · 07-14-2016, 12:55 PM

In those days losing half of your Ev but getting it back in some form of comp and allowed to play for long hours certain made a good part of it back i assume. i used to play a game that is 3 x the profitable of a good game and i often give back 1/3 to 1/2 of Ev with stupid or EV hurting plays. it (probably score80-100 after the stupid play) was still better than a good game.

**ZenMaster_Flash** · 07-14-2016, 12:59 PM

Originally Posted by BigJer

"Ian Andersen, the one of BJ fame, said in one of his books that he gives the impression of being a "gambler" at the tables. Well, Colin from BJA, ran a simulation on his method and found that Andersen is loosing 1/2, I think he said, of his E.V. Now don't think I do not believe that Andersen isn't a good player but to loose 1/2 of your E.V.?"

Anderson played in a very different era.
Bare that in mind. Losing a large fraction of your e.v. is
fine if it all but guarantees that you'll not be backed-off.

**Jabberwocky** · 07-14-2016, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by ZenMaster_Flash

Anderson played in a very different era.
Bare that in mind. Losing a large fraction of your e.v. is
fine if it all but guarantees that you'll not be backed-off.

True words. I played UTH and Pai Gow to avoid back offs but it didn't stop the half shoes and flat betting.

**Clint** · 07-14-2016, 07:53 PM

Thank you for your reply.

**Clint** · 07-14-2016, 07:55 PM

correction: thanks for your reply, zenmaster_flash.

**stopgambling** · 07-14-2016, 08:04 PM

He does not like to move around and he is playing rated as i read from his book ,true? Just another way of playing . Won't work today at most places i assume

**ZenMaster_Flash** · 07-15-2016, 06:08 AM

Anderson's first book was completely dreadful, to the point of being ludicrous.
A one word change in the title and a complete re-write and copyright, led to a
book that was worthwhile in its time. However, that time certainly came and went.

Note that the book never had much to offer to those not betting black (decades ago).