See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 76

Thread: "Preserving The Win"

  1. #41


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by ZeeBabar View Post
    You think it’s stupid because, as you say...”when I am on a trip, I want to make as much EV as I can...”. Well, as a recreational activity, I want my trip to be recreational and fun as well. It’s a compromise. You trade some EV for less stress and some fun. You get your goal, then you have some fun....
    Absolutely. I suppose when I said I want to make as much EV as I can right now, I should have said I want to make as much EV as I had planned for. There's nothing wrong with taking a break from gambling to relax and do recreational fun stuff like going to the beach, having nice dinners, going to the museum if you're a nerd, or doing stuff like that.

    But you don't have to be stupid about it. The bottom line is that you still need to make enough EV to counteract your expenses to keep your ROR at an acceptable level. Worst case scenario is where your expenses exceed your EV, in which case your ROR is certainly 100%, because your net EV (EV - expenses) is negative. The next worst case is where EV = expenses such that you have zero net EV, in which case, again, your ROR is 100% -- variance cuts both ways, sure, but once you've hit ruin it can't swing up anymore. The desirable case is where EV > expenses, but even then, EV needs to be big enough relative to expenses in order to keep ROR at an acceptable. If the sim says you have a 1% ROR, you play absolutely perfectly, but you have expenses (taken from BR), then your ROR is greater than 1%.
    "Everyone wants to be rich, but nobody wants to work for it." -Ryan Howard [The Office]

  2. #42


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Expenses are not part of the CV Data simulator ROR equation and are unique to each player...consequentlty expenses will have a different effect on each individual's ROR...and profit...which seems not to be taken into consideration by my critics (my expenses are minimal, so they have minimal effects...unlike, I suspect, many members here). So, No, logic is not enough.
    "This is a discipline thing. You either do it right or you don't do it at all."

    Don Schlesinger, pg 2, "Blackjack Attack: Playing the Pros' Way", 3rd Edition.

  3. #43


    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Wave View Post
    Expenses are not part of the CV Data simulator ROR equation and are unique to each player...consequentlty expenses will have a different effect on each individual's ROR...and profit...which seems not to be taken into consideration by my critics (my expenses are minimal, so they have minimal effects...unlike, I suspect, many members here). So, No, logic is not enough.
    Yes, others have higher expenses than you do. Just because your expenses may not have a huge effect on your ROR doesn't mean it doesn't for others nor does it mean that you should give the appearance that "preserving the win" is in any way a smart decision. That is a disservice to the community, especially newer players, who might read your original post and come to the incorrect conclusion that setting a win goal or quitting because you're ahead is smart. It is unequivocally not.

    Having minimal expenses (subjective) doesn't necessarily mean it has a minimal effect on ROR. Oftentimes, a small change in an input can have huge effects on an output.

    You are asserting that minimal expenses have minimal effects on ROR, but also allude to the fact you can't sim that on CVData/CVCX for your ROR, while also saying that a sim is necessary to back up an assertion and logic is not enough to back up an assertion. Am I reading that correctly?
    "Everyone wants to be rich, but nobody wants to work for it." -Ryan Howard [The Office]

  4. #44


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by RS View Post
    Yes, others have higher expenses than you do. Just because your expenses may not have a huge effect on your ROR doesn't mean it doesn't for others nor does it mean that you should give the appearance that "preserving the win" is in any way a smart decision. That is a disservice to the community, especially newer players, who might read your original post and come to the incorrect conclusion that setting a win goal or quitting because you're ahead is smart. It is unequivocally not.

    Having minimal expenses (subjective) doesn't necessarily mean it has a minimal effect on ROR. Oftentimes, a small change in an input can have huge effects on an output.

    You are asserting that minimal expenses have minimal effects on ROR, but also allude to the fact you can't sim that on CVData/CVCX for your ROR, while also saying that a sim is necessary to back up an assertion and logic is not enough to back up an assertion. Am I reading that correctly?
    Excellent post. I’m responding, incognito so to speak, to mask my online persona with regards to item 2 in this response, the reason which will become evident.

    They’re different ways of calculating travel expense, with its impact on ROR. I do the following. Calculate expense as an impact in dollars per hour, differentiated between driving and air trips. Calculate win per hour, with few “intangibles, and redo the spreads to “account for travel expense”. Then, after calculating the differentials, along with ROR, redo the sims, with actual game conditions, including aggressive spreads, and ALL “intangibles”, and calculate the differentials with cvcx. CVCX can do these different calculations very quickly.

    I recently ran into, and had a very brief conversation with a disciple of Colin. I don’t know if this person reads these boards. This kid ground out 260 hours last month. His bankroll shrunk from 10k to 5k. He now does this full time and I think is paying his living expenses from this. This was in a different city than his home location and so travel expenses are part of the scenario. I’m curious enough to check this out with cvcx, with what has to be an enormous probability of going broke. I really need to ask in depth questions. I think he said he’s been playing on Colin’s system for 3 months, and believes that his game is perfect. I did tell him that fundamentals are one thing, but seasoning gets you out of holes.

    If this is what Colin is churning out, then that’s pretty sad.

  5. #45


    0 out of 2 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Without sim data one is opining.

    My OP was in regards to trip bank roll, not total bank roll, but don't pay attention to little details like that...

    And NO, as the sim data supports, quitting early DOES NOT increase ROR...FOR A TRIP BANK ROLL...quitting later does (see sim data from OP).
    Last edited by Wave; 01-12-2020 at 04:01 PM.
    "This is a discipline thing. You either do it right or you don't do it at all."

    Don Schlesinger, pg 2, "Blackjack Attack: Playing the Pros' Way", 3rd Edition.

  6. #46


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by RS View Post
    Yes, others have higher expenses than you do. Just because your expenses may not have a huge effect on your ROR doesn't mean it doesn't for others nor does it mean that you should give the appearance that "preserving the win" is in any way a smart decision. That is a disservice to the community, especially newer players, who might read your original post and come to the incorrect conclusion that setting a win goal or quitting because you're ahead is smart. It is unequivocally not.

    Having minimal expenses (subjective) doesn't necessarily mean it has a minimal effect on ROR. Oftentimes, a small change in an input can have huge effects on an output.

    You are asserting that minimal expenses have minimal effects on ROR, but also allude to the fact you can't sim that on CVData/CVCX for your ROR, while also saying that a sim is necessary to back up an assertion and logic is not enough to back up an assertion. Am I reading that correctly?

    You have 11 posts with zero containing any sim data of your own origin. Before you try and call me out, you'd better have some sim data that is replicable or I'm going to call bullshit on all you parrots that are simply regurgitating what you've read or heard somewhere else. With no attributable source or data, YOU are the disservice to the community. And if your panties are in a bunch after reading this, get used to it, I'm not going away, and whether or not Norm likes it, challenging your arrogant pseudo experts that never post sim data will do a service to the community, not a disservice. ACTUAL data is what serves the community, not what you too smart by half, self gratifying assholes, post.

    Norm, if you want to ban me, no problem...I'll start a site that is strictly data driven.
    Last edited by Wave; 01-14-2020 at 12:35 AM.
    "This is a discipline thing. You either do it right or you don't do it at all."

    Don Schlesinger, pg 2, "Blackjack Attack: Playing the Pros' Way", 3rd Edition.

  7. #47


    3 out of 3 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Wave View Post
    You have 11 posts with zero containing any sim data of your own origin. Before you try and call me out, you'd better have some sim data that is replicable or I'm going to call bullshit on all you parrots that are simply regurgitating what you've read or heard somewhere else. With no attributable source or data, YOU are the disservice to the community. And if your panties are in a bunch after reading this, get used to it, I'm not going away, and whether or not Norm likes it, challenging your arrogant pseudo experts that never post sim data will do a service to the community, not a disservice. ACTUAL data is what serves the community, not what you too smart by half, self gratifying assholes, post.

    Norm, if you want to ban me, no problem...I'll start a site that is strictly data driven.
    "Everyone wants to be rich, but nobody wants to work for it." -Ryan Howard [The Office]

  8. #48


    1 out of 4 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by RS View Post
    As usual, no sim data or referenced souce. Fuck off poser.
    "This is a discipline thing. You either do it right or you don't do it at all."

    Don Schlesinger, pg 2, "Blackjack Attack: Playing the Pros' Way", 3rd Edition.

  9. #49


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Did anyone read my previous post on this subject?

    Don

  10. #50


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    Did anyone read my previous post on this subject?

    Don

    Yes, but you did not address what I am trying to illustrate. Obviously risk can not be eliminated, but it can be minimized or managed...and there is more than one way to do it. And to say that you can eliminate it by not playing is not a solution because then...wait for it...you are not playing. My objective is not to eliminate something that is not possible to eliminate, but instead to reduce it to an acceptable level. I am willing to accept some risk, but not all risk...and I am trying to identify sim based multiple methods of doing so, not someone's opinion. We try to minimize risk for our total bank roll, why should we not do the same for a trip roll?

    I started this thread with a trip roll example because it seems to me that often when a new player asks what size their trip roll should be, I see answers like "30 max bets" with no inquiry to what game will be played, what bet spread will be used, how many hands will be played (length of trip), will a win goal be employed, will you play all hands or "Wong", etc. which do seem to me like relevant factors (otherwise why did Norm include them in his software?) that are not being taken into consideration. Also because people used to give Z crap about preserving his wins which created the false impression that using a trip goal would cause disaster without providing any sim data to support their opinions.
    Last edited by Wave; 01-14-2020 at 11:08 AM.
    "This is a discipline thing. You either do it right or you don't do it at all."

    Don Schlesinger, pg 2, "Blackjack Attack: Playing the Pros' Way", 3rd Edition.

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Basic Strategy question regarding "soft" and "hard" hands
    By Letangs in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: 08-22-2018, 08:02 AM
  2. The "Sting" vs "Prevailing Wisdom": Limit on Number of Double Downs?
    By SteinMeister in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 08-14-2018, 04:29 PM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-12-2018, 03:41 PM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-15-2015, 12:37 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-29-2015, 09:44 AM

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.