Math no work, not variance, it's a hot streak..

[moses]

I usually stay out of these conversations because I know that someone will address the issue. Moses, I believe the above statement is one of the main reasons why you are driving others crazy. No one is stating that variance follows you from casino to casino - table to table - from shoe to shoe - deck to deck - or even one hand to the next. It is always with you, and you are stating it as if others believe that only negative variance follows you. If you accept the fact that sometimes positive variance helps you to win, you can accept the fact that negative variance will be the reason you lose sometimes, even with perfect play. I know you already understand this, I think the issue may be in the way you choose to express your mindset.

BJ Ploppy: "We are going to create a seal here and a seal their and run it up in the alley." Vince Lombardi

That is pretty much what I do most days in blackjack. single deck. Straight up. Take what they give me. Does that mean I always win? Of course not. Does it mean Im going to make a $100k a year? Not unless I play $100 minimum table. But I will not be allowed to play in 3 months based on my estimate of the advice taken from others on the forum. How do I do it? Practice, practice, practice. Thus very few surprises.

The game gives me all I want and more than I need. So where is the problem? Why would i run the risk of killing this goose?

So it begs the question. If you cant beat Verite in the quiet and privacy of your own home. Then how do you expect to win in the hustle of a casino? Did you handle variance? Or just accept losing as part of your game because winning is just too damn much work?

[cc12b]

Norm/Admin. This discussion is very valuable to rookies like me however the title of it is misleading. It deserve to be in main forum if it re-title to "How would you handle variance". We agree that the math and long run is what this game is all about. However the human brain is not make up with silicon chips and as Mose and T3 and Don S. pointed out that play "nice" under casino's tolerance with some "camu" are needed to be in the business. So we need to be "walks like a duck, quacks like a duck" some times. Yes, you should not walk away from hi count but if you are tired, desperate and angry because loosing hands after hands you need to take a break. The next round do not have to be in the same shoe, it could be next casino, next day or new location when you have fresh, clear mind to handle the math. Good cards to all.

[BJPloppy]

Did you handle variance? Or just accept losing as part of your game because winning is just too damn much work?

I guess this is where I am confused. If you study, practice, and learn enough to play flawlessly in the casino,and still lose some sessions...how do you not accept it? Not being able to accept some losses along the way, would drive me crazy. What does non-acceptance look like to you? I am assuming that you played as well as humanly possible, so going back to do more practicing will not help.

[moses]

Did the Warriors win every game this season? No. But they'd have to be ranked up with the best of all time. So does this mean they dont need to show up for practice when training camp starts? Might be a good idea in order to get paid for next season.

Here is what happens to me in a loss. First question, did i do everything in my power to win? Sometimes I feel worse after a win for playing lousy than a loss playing great.

Verite keeps me humble. I give myself no breaks that I catch in a casino. Sure I'd like to go with a simpler count. But Verite kicks my ass and quickly changes my mind.

In sports, we called it the 1000 mile stare. Only the others that had it could see it in you and vice versa. What it meant was that by the time you've done a 1000 games, you'd pretty much seen it all. Therefore, not a whole helluva lot surprises you.

[moses]

I guess this is where I am confused. If you study, practice, and learn enough to play flawlessly in the casino,and still lose some sessions...how do you not accept it? Not being able to accept some losses along the way, would drive me crazy. What does non-acceptance look like to you? I am assuming that you played as well as humanly possible, so going back to do more practicing will not help.

A couple of Steve Prefontaine qoutes. "Never let a losing mentality creep in."
"Giving less than your best is to sacrifice the gift."

[BJPloppy]

Here is what happens to me in a loss. First question, did i do everything in my power to win?

Moses, I am starting to believe that you are a spin doctor for some political personas in your other life (Smile). I know that you are a big believer in parables and stream of consciousness, but please provide a concise answer as to what you do to not accept variance once you decide that you did everything in your power to win. To me the statement that you don't accept losses due to variance even after they occur, sounds like someone telling me they don't accept gravity.

[moses]

First of all. Let's define Variance. To me it's a series of my 17s losing to 18s etc. Getting 20 in a negative deck only to see the dealer hit 4 cards to a 21. Get a blackjack only to see the dealer have a ten with an Ace in the hole. I could go on. But what I'm stating is it has little or no effect on me. Why? Because Ive seen it so many times before. Sometimes it's so bad it forces the loss of a session. But man, if I thought of it as a curse that was following me around? Well, that falls somewhere between sad and pathetic.

Now let's turn it around and I start winning those hands. Am I really that good? No. But there is a part of me that begins to think so.

Simply put, it's just the ebb and flow of the game we signed up to play. Now, there will be spots where my play makes a difference. THAT'S where my focus MUST always remain. Regardless of variance.

But these guys that lose for 6 straight months or 105 large bets in a row? C'mon Maaan, get some game. The tools are provided for you. They weren't for me.

[BJPloppy]

But what I'm stating is it has little or no effect on me.

This goes back to my original premise that you have to phrase things differently than some of us in order to keep your mental game sharp. In my mind when things are going horribly, I just accept the fact that it is part of the game, and I am alright with it. For you the word accept seems to connote some sort of defeatist attitude. I understand that is what works for you, and I wish you good variance.

[Frank Galvin]

BJPloppy, perfect ending for this thread. But we all know it will go on. Oh well.

[Three]

Let's define Variance. To me it's a series of my 17s losing to 18s etc. Getting 20 in a negative deck only to see the dealer hit 4 cards to a 21. Get a blackjack only to see the dealer have a ten with an Ace in the hole. I could go on.

Variance is the square of the standard deviation for the data or in the case of BJ your results. You don't win your EV every hand. When in the short run you fall above or below your EV for the number of hands played that is variance. Variance increases linearly as the number of hands played increases. What you are describing is more like a part of the game. 17's are overall losing hands. In a negative count the dealer isn't as likely to bust and will draw out more often. Variance/100 rounds is over 100 times your EV/100 rounds in AP BJ. So if you EV is $100 per hundred rounds the conservative range of variance is per 100 rounds is $100 plus or minus $10,000 or -$9,900 to $10,100. Use sim results for more accurate results. The amount you are away from your $100 EV is the variance you experienced. Variance is expressed in dollars not the results of the hands or what cards came out.

Now if you try to use variance as a verb you are just refer bring to the normal tendency for your results to be way off your EV. This is normal and you acting like there is some magic bullet to make this not happen is ridiculous. The more you play the closer to expectation you expect to be but variance doesn't get less relative to EV as you play more hands, standard deviation does which is the square root of variance. SD gets less relative to EV with more hands played because it grows proportional to the square root of the number of hands played and EV grows linearly relative to hands played. Since variance is the square of SD, variance and EV both grow linearly as more hands are played. So basically the likelihood of you being closer to expectation goes up with more hands played the variance does not get less relative to EV. In other words the possible range of results relative to EV doesn't change but the likelihood of being in the extreme edge of possible results gets smaller. Like you could win or lose every coin toss in a million trials (1 in every 2^(1,000,000) trials) but that is far less likely than winning or losing all the tosses in 2 coin tosses (1 in every 2^(2) trials).

Using the terms correctly would go a long way for people to agree with you.

[BoSox]

Norm/Admin. This discussion is very valuable to rookies like me however the title of it is misleading. It deserve to be in main forum if it re-title to "How would you handle variance".

I strongly disagree with this opinion. The title of the thread and the first post was all about voodoo period. The point of the first post was about the op belief in negative/positive trends that can either ruin you, or make you wealthy, pure and simple bullshit.

We agree that the math and long run is what this game is all about.

Correct! Keep this above line as your motto.

However the human brain is not make up with silicon chips and as Mose and T3 and Don S. pointed out that play "nice" under casino's tolerance with some "camu" are needed to be in the business. So we need to be "walks like a duck, quacks like a duck" some times.

Everyone is looking for positive EV period, and you should to. Along with the positive EV comes large meaningless variance swings in the short term in either direction, which a knowledgeable AP is well prepared to handle in stride, and has seen thousands of times previously. When there is more hands to be played in the shoe, and the TC is highly positive for making large lets there is no room for thinking of camo at this point in time, or thoughts that you just lost a half a dozen hands with a few splits and doubles. If your worry is now about ploppies quit in defeat, which is very likely but on the other side of the coin ploppies also go on TILT all the time, and besides your session is ending very shortly.

Yes, you should not walk away from hi count but if you are tired, desperate and angry because loosing hands after hands you need to take a break. The next round do not have to be in the same shoe, it could be next casino, next day or new location when you have fresh, clear mind to handle the math.

For a true AP, being tired,desperate, and angry " A true pro does not allow this to happen" is just part of an ACT that gives the appearance of just being another ploppy. If you still have good positive EV, the next round MUST be made right now in the moment not the next day or the next casino. A max bet situation today, is the same on any day of the week, to think otherwise is voodoo, that is why the thread was moved in the first place.

[moses]

This goes back to my original premise that you have to phrase things differently than some of us in order to keep your mental game sharp. In my mind when things are going horribly, I just accept the fact that it is part of the game, and I am alright with it. For you the word accept seems to connote some sort of defeatist attitude. I understand that is what works for you, and I wish you good variance.

There is a guy I know that owned a transmission biz. An employee embezzled him out of $400k. Something broke deep inside. Now he is still one of the nicest guys to talk to...until something makes him snap. Who knows what that something might be. But a glazed look comes over him and he becomes a very dangerous person. He is now institutionalized. Did he handle life's variance? Perhaps hindsight suggest he should have stepped back and look at his situation. Samething in blackjack. Why do you think coaches use all their timeouts as opposed to just playing the game. Sure it would be nice to win every game 118-0. But there is always going to be this thing called your opponent. So it's those little things you do that make the difference.

Maybe you can handle the V-word or maybe you just think you can. But if you "can't" it could be tragic. I see it nearly every damn day in those that couldnt. It's very sad.

[moses]

Bosox. How many times has Zee posted some question about his game? More than you can count I'm sure. Why? Nice guy. But bottom line is his entitlement issues outweigh his work ethic.

More than 3,000 years ago, a man named Jobe complained to God about all his problems.
God replied, "do you give the horse his strength?" Do you make him leap like a locust, striking terror with his proud snorting?

He pauses. Fiercely rejoicing in his strength and charges into the frey. He laughs at fear. Afraid of nothing. He does not shy away from the sword. He cannot stand still when the trumpet sounds. In frenzied excitement he eats up the ground.

In horse racing, that's the one I want to bet. In blackjack, I am the the horse and that's the one I strive to be.