You should look at it at the end of at least 1 n0 , I would look at each year hopefully playing 300-500 hrs /year with a good game. This is a long term investment of your time ,effort and money . For most people this game is better played part time with a steady stable income. Counting is anything but stable and steady.
You win 8 of 9 sessions because when you are in a hole or losing, you make the session longer and leave only after that session becomes a winning session. Sessions are only meaningful if every session is the same length. If that is the case, most would only win 6 of 10. The experienced player leaves after certain other considerations while the less experienced ones try their best to make every session a winning one. Those other considerations include (for those playing carded) ensuring regular losing sessions are recorded, heat considerations (leave after exposing max bets), longevity considerations and such.
The only reason I'd agree with that is due to the blisters on my feet after the start of the year. That put me out of commission for a couple days with how bad they hurt. Aside from that, if you're adequate bankrolled, and you are on top of your game and make little to few errors in your play, there's nothing out there stopping you from making a career out of this, other than your game. If anything, "Part time play" is more volatile than "full time play" simply due to the numbers of hands you'll see for the year, the hours you'll play, the number of times you'll eclipse n0.
I mean, the biggest emphasis to make on your post here is the "good game" message. I think that's important enough for all walks of life in this lovely little thing we call "blackjack" to find the best game we possibly can, with tolerable heat levels, so that we can do our "things".
I wouldn't speak so for "certain" about that.
I win most of my sessions with a small percentage of total sessions being ones I had to chase after losing to dig out of the hole. A session isn't "meaningful" if its the same length, that's nonsense. The experienced player does leave after certain considerations, but that doesn't mean the experienced player doesn't stick around to make a winning session. If anything, the experienced player knows he's going to lose in the short term, more often than in the long run, so we place it upon ourselves to grind through it, more than your "newer" short term results driven player would.
You are absolutely right though, about making my losses recorded on their end. Since I'm the social butterfly that I am in most places that I play, I'll make sure that "suit" is right there watching my hands through the negative counts to get an accurate average bet and "buy in". And then when I'm just about done, I'll ask him to comp me a room or buffet.
No kidding, and in some places there are games that are about as close to that depiction as possible, and getting a seat on those tables takes some patience, that's for sure.
As for the whole session thing. There's going to be times when your session lasts 2 hours, and times when your session lasts 28 hours. The important takeaway there isn't that sessions should be "equal" in time, hell no. The takeaway there should be that each session were played "the same", as in, your game never falters, your decisions are always the same, and you take the "gambling instinct" out of the equation and PLAY the game you know.
For that reason, its totally feasable to have sessions last 20 minutes or 2 days. If you "cut" your session down simply due to "equality" in time spent counting, you're only going to HURT your bottom line. Equal session time is one of the worst things a person could ever "focus" on.
You want to "cap" your wins and losses? Fine. You want to "cap" your number of max/super max bets seen? Awesome. But playing longer than you need to, or not long enough due to some arbitrary length of time defined differently from person A to person B as a "session" is idiotic. That's a great way to miss out entirely on a "unicorn count", by saying "oh well, my time is up, better abandon this TC3 count mid shoe".
I'm a HUGE fan of finishing what I start. I don't necessarily "dig" myself out of a loss and then produce a win because I'm "stubborn", most of the time where I have to "dig" out of a loss, its because I had the cards fall the other way in a STRONG count.
PRIME example. Yesterday.
45 dollar hand out there at TC4, double opportunity, lost. TC5 now. 90 dollar hand out there, double opportunity, pushed. TC5 still. 90 dollar hand still, double opportunity, lost. TC6 now. 180 dollar hand out there, Split, Split, Split, Double, Stay, Double, Double. Win, Loss, Win, Win.
I was "down" $270 dollars in 3 hands. By the 4th hand, I had recouped all of it and then some. If I had stop-lossed myself because I "triggered" a specific amount, I'd have lost a lot of money. Instead I made what? 630 dollars after 4 hands?
Point is "arbitrary" things, not supported by mathematics are ways to break up variance, sure, but they do not have mathematical support. Do what you want/will within comfort levels, but don't sell yourself short on time. Time is the ULTIMATE tool in this game.
I see the point you are making Exoter and I agree to it the way you express it.
Having said that I believe when people (including me in some ways) decide to end up sessions after time spent or some win or lose limit, the IMPLICIT assumption is that you NEVER walk away from a positive count. In fact most of the time the exit wil happen at a shuffle or a shoe count going down enough to not make it worthwhile.
The whole idea I get by reading your post seems not considering this assumption.
I have to agree. A session will tell you when it's over. And I have had many 2-3+ hour sessions as well as many 10-20+ sessions. I have tried to cut back on the 20-hour+ sessions, which are a combination of stubbornness in not wanting to end on a sour note, excess energy that propels me forward, and a realization that it's all one continuous session, with some impatience about getting to the long run. The reason I try to cut back is because it can be damaging to my life away from the casinos, interfering with other commitments. One thing I've learned is that life consists of more than a room without windows.
US-Casinos-Macau-Head_Crav_opt.jpg
Last edited by Aslan; 01-11-2015 at 10:49 AM.
Aslan 11/1/90 - 6/15/10 Stormy 1/22/95 - 8/23/10... “Life’s most urgent question is: what are you doing for others?” — Martin Luther King, Jr.
Bookmarks