Buy In

[Freightman]

The DD games I've simmed (H17, DAS) call for a 2 unit bet at TC +1, as there is a +0.3% advantage. Isn't software amazing?

Interestingly enough, I'm prepared to make that bet, trading variance with the house, when even with the house. Makes the next parlay look more natural. Granted, the comment could comes from a mostly shoe player, but the principle is the same.

[21forme]

Interestingly enough, I'm prepared to make that bet, trading variance with the house, when even with the house. Makes the next parlay look more natural. Granted, the comment could comes from a mostly shoe player, but the principle is the same.

That, too. I have no problem pushing out more when the edge is zero.

[Romes]

That, too. I have no problem pushing out more when the edge is zero.

You can definitely get a slim advantage at TC +1, but I'd suggest a SIM with your bankroll and spread to re-calculate your RoR. Most of my students I teach to up their bet (for a H17 game typically above .5%... below .5% I always recommend upping at TC +1) at TC +2. Once they become more advanced I'll let them know about running a SIM as I just described to see if they're comfortable with the added variance.

Personally, with a HE of 0% I would never push more out. Sure, you could say it's cover to up your bet at that time, but the game has enough swings and variance for my flavor. No need to add variance with no real return in EV, in my opinion.

[Freightman]

You can definitely get a slim advantage at TC +1, but I'd suggest a SIM with your bankroll and spread to re-calculate your RoR. Most of my students I teach to up their bet (for a H17 game typically above .5%... below .5% I always recommend upping at TC +1) at TC +2. Once they become more advanced I'll let them know about running a SIM as I just described to see if they're comfortable with the added variance.

Personally, with a HE of 0% I would never push more out. Sure, you could say it's cover to up your bet at that time, but the game has enough swings and variance for my flavor. No need to add variance with no real return in EV, in my opinion.

The shoestring bankroll would favour your approach. The more bullish beefy type bankroll would favour the 2 unit long term break even wager.

[Freightman]

The shoestring bankroll would favour your approach. The more bullish beefy type bankroll would favour the 2 unit long term break even wager.

Which brings up a prior discussion on floored true counts, interpolation, the difference between break even true 1.0 vs clear advantage true 1.5.

[Bubbles]

Which brings up a prior discussion on floored true counts, interpolation, the difference between break even true 1.0 vs clear advantage true 1.5.

There are times I raise at +1 hi-lo and other times I do not. This is mostly due to floating advantage, how close it is to being +2, and cover. +1.0 on the first round of the shoe is a lot different than +1.9 two rounds from the cut card.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Romes]

The shoestring bankroll would favour your approach. The more bullish beefy type bankroll would favour the 2 unit long term break even wager.

Because noooooone of us have ever over bet our bankrolls ;-)... and/or we're all "very well funded" from the start =P. Aka most counters shouldn't do it, but if you're advanced enough to understand your variance, bankroll, and RoR, then by all means.

[Freightman]

Because noooooone of us have ever over bet our bankrolls ;-)... and/or we're all "very well funded" from the start =P. Aka most counters shouldn't do it, but if you're advanced enough to understand your variance, bankroll, and RoR, then by all means.

Wise words. In other words, if you're going to raise at break even, know what you're getting into.