An unpleasant road trip!

[stopgambling]

straight rigid thinking is not gonna take you to a higher level of AP.

[stopgambling]

on three separate occasions I had multiple max bets out due to splits/double-downs against a good bust card and the dealer drew to a 20 or 21! That was probably close to half of my losses (three hands!). But I digress, that becomes just another day in the office for APs.

you must play thousands of hands with an edge to have a decent chance to win. i mean thousands ,that is the reason you need to understand N0 ( n zero), CE certainty equivalent .what i meant was at max bets that is probably going to be 1200 hours plus ,depending on your game.

[Bigdaddy]

I'm truly surprised I did so bad considering the quality of the new games. How much of this loss can be attributed to the following?:

1) With the house edge smaller, I should have been spreading earlier (true count of +1 would represent an advantage in the shoe game and +0.5 in the double deck game). I waited to +2 to start spreading.
2) I didn't learn the rules of S17 by heart beforehand.
3) I used an inferior count system (hi low) to tackle the double deck game where PE is much more important than BC. I understand hi-opt 2 w/ ace side count is the ideal choice but I'm having difficulty finding indexes for this system (I understand how to keep the running count and adjust for aces, that's easy). Further, since the house edge was so low I thought the game could EASILY be beaten even with hi low.

dalmation -

The 3 points you noted above don't mean diddly squat (in the words of Granny Hawkins) to your results for 1,200 rounds. All of those are swamped by variance. Bottom line - you got a lot of high counts and you got your butt kicked - join the club. Now you get to see what you're made of. Longer term, you should consider all of your concerns and seek continuous improvement in your game. But to get to the long term, you need to steel yourself and understand that a 1% advantage means nothing in the short term.

[San Jose Bella]

I've never heard of these terminologies. What is HE? What is PE? What is BC?

I recently did a 6 hour trip in ONE direction to a store offering truly excellent rules. On DAY ONE I played a shoe game and on DAY TWO a double deck for a total of ~12 hours of play. Both were vast improvements to my standard poor choice of game (6D, H17, HE~0.6%). The catch was that they were S17 which I never played before. Upon realizing I had not prepared for this (BIG MISTAKE), I quickly looked over a generic strategy chart and learned the few differences and tackled the games with a 1-20 spread for the shoe game (HE~0.4%, pen 95%) and a 1-8 spread for the double deck game (HE~0.15%, pen 55-60%). I used hi low with ~50 index plays from Stanford Wong's book for these games.

Well, to be blunt, I got demolished. I lost a little over $2000. This represents ~15% of my current bankroll. I know I didn't do my homework fully but I have played hundreds verging on a thousand hours of the crappy 6D game and never had this bad of a streak. I'm truly surprised I did so bad considering the quality of the new games. How much of this loss can be attributed to the following?:

1) With the house edge smaller, I should have been spreading earlier (true count of +1 would represent an advantage in the shoe game and +0.5 in the double deck game). I waited to +2 to start spreading.
2) I didn't learn the rules of S17 by heart beforehand.
3) I used an inferior count system (hi low) to tackle the double deck game where PE is much more important than BC. I understand hi-opt 2 w/ ace side count is the ideal choice but I'm having difficulty finding indexes for this system (I understand how to keep the running count and adjust for aces, that's easy). Further, since the house edge was so low I thought the game could EASILY be beaten even with hi low.
4) Although the 95% pen was AMAZING for the shoe game, I was unsure if 55-60% pen was bad for the DD (I played mostly heads up and with one other player, occasionally a third would pop in for a short while). Again, I didn't think it mattered so much because of the stellar HE (0.15%).
5) At my home store I am only a 10 minute ride from home. I therefore tend to play until I'm satisfied with my result (either leave early if I'm up a decent amount or stay longer to chase losses). With the 6 hour trip I was forced to play a set amount of time regardless of the result (I possibly would have stopped after losing a grand but I was forced to continue play due to the distance I traveled and trying to get enough EV in to justify the trip).
6) I have literally no idea what my exact ROR is or what my optimal bets should be.
7) This store was SUPER sweaty and I didn't feel comfortable wonging out and played through every count. At my home store I wong out to my hearts content with zero heat.

In summary, ~ how much of my poor performance could be attributed to the above listed points and ~ how much was just normal bad variance? Where can I get a detailed explanation of applying hi-opt 2 with ace side count (full indexes), as I find myself more likely to try double deck in the future? Should I resize my bets now that I lost 15% of my bankroll? Thank you very much for any help. I'm only a beginner but very eager to learn!

[Freightman]

I've never heard of these terminologies. What is HE? What is PE? What is BC?

HE or house edge. The edge the casino has over you based on player playing perfect basic strategy.

PE or playing efficiency. More important in pitch games than shoe, though also useful there also. Inducates how well a card counting system handles changes in playing strategy.

BC or Betting Correlation, defines the correlation between card point values and the effect of removal of cards.

[Tarzan]

A couple of days of play is not enough to make a determination on your profitability, just too small a sample group. Even a month or two of full time play, about 160 hours worth is not all that definitive but at least gives you an idea. You can do everything right, be totally on track and it can go oh so wrong, so it's the bigger picture, the overall you're thinking about. Envision someone getting started, barely functional as a counter, that in their first few thousands of hours of play have done incredibly well. They're likely to think, "Wow, I'm really good at this! I'm invincible!" (a false sense of security and reality will catch up eventually). Compare this to someone getting started, extremely functional as a counter losing a huge chunk of their bankroll in the first few thousand hours of play... They're likely to think, "Damn this sucks! This counting shit just doesn't really work!" Both are a product of variance and this levels out over a period of time. Over a few years of play the better trained, more adept player will likely overtake the barely functional (but still quite lucky) player, provided they're not too shell-shocked from significant early on losses to continue.

I don't know what anyone's level of play might be, but most certainly the more you sweat in training is the less blood you'll spill in the field. That being said, everyone can have a bad run along the way and it's your long term overall profitability that you need to consider. A couple of days doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things.

[Sharky]

.... Even a month or two of full time play, about 1600 hours....

Say what???...I wish...lol

[trucker]

Losing sucks, I feel your pain. I'm on terrible 7 month streak, just as I bumped my minimum to $25. I have questioned many times whether I should continue, and also whether counting really works. But I'm just gonna continue with my replenishable bankroll. Losing $2000 per session has been a regular occurrence these last 7 months .hard to be successful when dealer beats your 20, you lose all double downs, and dealer gets blackjack most times you have it. You wouldn't believe what's been happening to me unless you saw it. ..on a side note I purchased norms $35 app and I'm up $850 after 4 shoes...smh

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[San Jose Bella]

HE or house edge. The edge the casino has over you based on player playing perfect basic strategy.

PE or playing efficiency. More important in pitch games than shoe, though also useful there also. Inducates how well a card counting system handles changes in playing strategy.

BC or Betting Correlation, defines the correlation between card point values and the effect of removal of cards.

Thank you

[San Jose Bella]

HE or house edge. The edge the casino has over you based on player playing perfect basic strategy.

PE or playing efficiency. More important in pitch games than shoe, though also useful there also. Inducates how well a card counting system handles changes in playing strategy.

BC or Betting Correlation, defines the correlation between card point values and the effect of removal of cards.

Replenishable bankroll is a good point lol, I always assume I have a larger bankroll than I actually have, cause I don't want to waste time making an unattractive amount of money.
When I shared bankroll with my partner, combined 150 hours, he wins 20% of times, I win 70% of times. He's definitely not cheating. I think it's just variance cause who played better won't have much effect in a short run.

[ZeeBabar]

A couple of days of play is not enough to make a determination on your profitability, just too small a sample group. Even a month or two of full time play, about 160 hours worth is not all that definitive but at least gives you an idea. You can do everything right, be totally on track and it can go oh so wrong, so it's the bigger picture, the overall you're thinking about. Envision someone getting started, barely functional as a counter, that in their first few thousands of hours of play have done incredibly well. They're likely to think, "Wow, I'm really good at this! I'm invincible!" (a false sense of security and reality will catch up eventually). Compare this to someone getting started, extremely functional as a counter losing a huge chunk of their bankroll in the first few thousand hours of play... They're likely to think, "Damn this sucks! This counting shit just doesn't really work!" Both are a product of variance and this levels out over a period of time. Over a few years of play the better trained, more adept player will likely overtake the barely functional (but still quite lucky) player, provided they're not too shell-shocked from significant early on losses to continue.

I don't know what anyone's level of play might be, but most certainly the more you sweat in training is the less blood you'll spill in the field. That being said, everyone can have a bad run along the way and it's your long term overall profitability that you need to consider. A couple of days doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things.

Great post. Perseverance is key.

[SpikeBJ]

Losing sucks, I feel your pain. I'm on terrible 7 month streak, just as I bumped my minimum to $25. I have questioned many times whether I should continue, and also whether counting really works. But I'm just gonna continue with my replenishable bankroll. Losing $2000 per session has been a regular occurrence these last 7 months .hard to be successful when dealer beats your 20, you lose all double downs, and dealer gets blackjack most times you have it. You wouldn't believe what's been happening to me unless you saw it. ..on a side note I purchased norms $35 app and I'm up $850 after 4 shoes...smh

Have you double checked your play for EV leaks? Ramps, misplays, etc etc etc.