Loss Training

[DSchles]

My definition is from first hand played until I either quit playing forever or I die. Whichever comes first.

Well, then, your (one) session win rate is 100%. But that isn't very helpful for this discussion, is it?

Don

[Norm]

I think it is. Almost posted the same thing.

[Reyth]

No need to multi-quote about DP; I thought everyone would know that it stands for Disadvantage Player. I definitely ROFL'ed on D-Man's definition tho! XD

Almost all of those SESSIONS were played with positive counts skewed in our favor (BP call in at True 2) which promoted high variance.

I don't understand how a positive count promotes high variance? Does this occur because the dealer is able to receive the advantageous cards too?

@Counting: Great post, thanks. I play like a robot up to a point but if I don't start adjusting to game conditions, I will simply get wiped out in the most severe sessions.

For example, I just had a session that ended with a win after 58 losses and 29 coups. I admit, I used positive variance to win and I require it. If I had tried to strong-arm that session, I would have lost my bankroll probably at least twice.

I agree with Norm & Cookies about personal permanence. Unfortunately, I have never had the discipline to apply a method that factors it in. I really need to start doing this for peace of mind.

[ShipTheCookies]

Well, then, your (one) session win rate is 100%. But that isn't very helpful for this discussion, is it?

Don

There's no guarantee it'll be 100%. Might be 0%.

Some people gripe that they lost $30,000 this week, but are still miles ahead lifetime.

Point is, what happened today, tomorrow, or all week is irrelevant to lifetime.

[DSchles]

There's no guarantee it'll be 100%. Might be 0%.

Not for an AP who is properly bankrolled. The probabilities point to 100%.

Don

[UK-21]

Boo . . . yet another thread I've contributed to recently being unceremoniously consigned to the disadvantage forum. As I'm sure most here have noticed I don't make many postings to the forum anymore, largely as I no longer play BJ; in the UK exploitable shoe-dealt games are something that have largely been consigned to the history books, and for me it was never more than a challenge and a reason to keep the beads on my abacus from seizing up anyway. I responded to Reyth's original post as he's someone I've responded to on another forum before and out of curiosity - as for one moment I did think he'd had some sort of epiphany moment and was looking to make a major step change in his approach to tackling a different game of chance. Look's like he's still looking for that something that will get the variance fairy on his side?

As Reyth has stated that he's a "DP" (Disadvantage Player) and isn't looking to change that, I think there's precious little that can be said to assist him really - beyond learn to play perfect basic strategy and flat bet the table minimums (whatever that is) at all times. To my mind that really is about it?

[BoSox]

I am a DP player and that is not going to change.

Well, Reyth, that pretty much sums it all up! No need to continue wasting time.

[MikeWill07]

Sorry to bring up an old topic, but thank you for your willingness to be sympathetic to newcomers. It's nice to ask questions without fear of being judged.

[BoSox]

Sorry to bring up an old topic, but thank you for your willingness to be sympathetic to newcomers. It's nice to ask questions without fear of being judged.

Mike, I am assuming that you are addressing me since I wrote the post in front of yours is that correct? If that is a yes to my question, do you think that I treated the newcomer poorly? I am not sure where you are going with that rather vague statement you made.


Welcome to the board.

[Stealth]

I don't understand how a positive count promotes high variance?

The variance is higher because we intentionally bet more when we have a positive count, generally controlling our bets sizes based on our bankroll size and the acceptable RoR. The variance is a math function where the bet size is critical in its calculation.