amt needed for 4 hours of play

[Liezel]

Hi,

I heard that having 40x avg bet is good enough for 4 hours of play 95% of the time. Also that 30x avg bet is good enough for 4 hrs of play 90% of the time. Question is there can I find that information and can someone tell me how much of my avg is needed for say, 80% of the time or 75% of the time? and if this is true, couldn't I just do (avg bet x 30x) / # of hours i wish to play? 4 hours is a long time and it seems that the 30x or 40x is too much money to be playing at $10 table... Also does this depend on the betting progression? bc i like 2 use the walter prog.

Thanks,

~LieZeL~

[Grifter]

Walt recommends a bankroll of 20 times the lowest bet for each hour you intend to play with his method.

Grifter

[Liezel]

Thanks grifter, but can u answer the rest of my questions?


Lowest bet? Or avg bet? And where can i find the diff. %'s of time it'll be okay? like 10x will be good 50% of the time or all the other stuff like that?

[PJ]

If you are talking about buy in amounts, I usually only buy in with $100 at a $5 or $10 table. And $300 is certainly not too much to HAVE at a $10 table.

[Liezel]

If you are talking about buy in amounts, I usually only buy in with $100 at a $5 or $10 table. And $300 is certainly not too much to HAVE at a $10 table.

PJ, not once did i ever mention "buy-in amount"... try rereading the posts

[acanuck]

well a few days ago i went to the casino and watched 100$ disappear at 10$ a hand in about 10 minutes ( 2 double downs and a split in there, lost all 3) but if you were doing walters youd quit after 4 losses, which is hard to do at the beginning of a 6deck shoe half full table :cry: . However just last month i sat down with 30$ and left with 400$. funny game it is ill tell ya, buy in for as much as you want, 100$ is good for 10$ but be ready to reload your chipstack a few times without suprise and doubt, cause those losing streaks do damage :shock:

[stainless steel rat]

I played at a $5 table at the tropicana early this summer with my wife. I lost every last hand except for a couple of pushes, and blew out $100 in about 20 minutes. That can happen. You can also do the opposite as my son sat at that same table later that night and won over $250 flat-betting nickles for about 90 minutes...

[PJ]

Liezel,
You are correct. But you did mention "seems that 30x or 40x is too much to be playing at a $10 table", which I responded to. If I missed main context of your post, please forgive me.

[Liezel]

no problem pajamas! :lol:

anyway, does anyone know where i can get that info? where can i find the diff. %'s of time it'll be okay? like 10x will be good 50% of the time or all the other stuff like that?

[Ray]

You ask how to determine BR requirements for some time period?
You ask how can I extend that to different amounts and periods.

Suppose you wanted to play:

-4 hours @ an average bet of $20 dollars
-hands per hr can be 60-80-100,etc....I'll use 60

One SD will cover you about 75% of the time
Two SD will get you in the 95% range

For example:

SD=1.1 * sq root of hands played * ave bet
SD=1.1 * sq root of 240(15.6) * 20(ave bet)=$343
(2) SD=343 * 2=$686 for the four hr session at 95% cover

Note: If you are playing heads-up one can see that the number of hands
will increase and so will the BR requirements. Ave bet has about the same
affect.....make sure you know how you plan to play,etc

There are two ways to extrapolate other time and dollar requirements:

1) Just change the hands played to match your time requirements.
change the ave bet to match your bet requirements.

2) Use the sq root method ( your volatility(SD) is proportional to the
length of your session. Example: In the above, our session was 4 hrs.
now suppose I wanted to play all weekend or 16 hrs how much BR do
I need. Well the sq rt of 4 hours is two and the sq rt of 16 hours is 4
which is two times as large. We would need 686 * 2 =1372 for the wkend.

These are general guidelines that work. Understand that if your play is
somewhat different from most(like mine) you may need to hone the
above via experience.

Some counters use methods that relate to Kelly, while others may just
use a rule of thumb of 50-60 average bets,etc.

Ray

[PJ]

Liezel,
Did I once mention "pajamas"? Please re-read my post!

Moderators, can I change my sign-in to "JP" please?

[Liezel]

Ray, thanks a lot!!

But does that formula you gave automatically put it at 4 hours playing time? Suppose I just wanted to see how much I would need for 1 or 2 hours? How many hands an hour does the rule I heard of 30x avg bet being good for 90% of the time and 40x avg bet being good for 95% of the time?
Is there anyway to tell how good % 20x avg bet or a certain # would be?


Also does the formula only apply when using the walter prog?

Thanks :)

~LieZEL~

[Ray]

In the example given, total hands played is equal to time.


60=1hr
120=2hrs
180=3hrs
240=4hrs

The number of hands vary depending on number of players/your table
conditions. If you can get in 80 hands an hr you will need more money
for 4-3-2 or 1 hr session.

Suppose we want to play one hr at 80 hands per hr with an ave bet of
$10:

SD=1.1 * 9 * 10=$99 and 2 SD=$99 * 2=198 or 200

[Grifter]

Ray - Thanks for answering Liezel. I was going to do it this morning, but you saved me the time and did a better job. Good post!!

Grifter

[Ray]

Grifter- No thanks required.....One interesting point that some may have
noticed: The more hours you play, the less money required for number
of hands played. What I mean by that is I can play 16 hrs for just two
times the money needed for 4 hours in the example given. It would
seem that the longer you play, SD becomes less of an impact due to
the up's and down's null. Thus, counters can expect to win in the long
term and perfect basic strategy players can expect to lose their .5.

[Liezel]

Yes, but that 0.5% that we're expected to lose cant really be calculated in the times we play at the tables right? Because aren`t streaks the main determinents of whether we win or lose, especially if we use a positive progression like walter prog? :)

The way I look at it, since I play basic strategy and a good progression, the only way I'll lose is if I hit more losing streaks than winning streaks (or small clusters or LLLW or LLWL) but with blackjack being a game chochbored with streaks, streaks are bound to happen and I just hope for the win streaks when I play.

Is this okay guys?


~LIEZEL~

[Ray]

Not ok, streaks have nothing to do with our expected outcome because
they occur in the amounts that probability suggest. No progression of
any kind will alter your expectation because none of them, no matter how
well crafted, is any different from a flat betting basic strategy player.
What ever can be said for the BS flat betting player can be repeated for
the progression player. The only difference is the progression player will
lose more with the same negative EV because his average bet is higher.

[Liezel]

[color=red]

Right, but as blackjack is such a streaky game the progressive better will do much better than the flat better! And i don`t exactly get your 1st sentence. We never know when streaks will occur so what if we just win 10 in a row and we're up so much? Also, how can they occur in the amts that prob. suggest... maybe sometimes but not always.

And with a v. good prog like walter prog with 4 loss qp isn`t this very good ? have u read his book? i recnetly buyed his book and he shows how good his prog is.

[acanuck]

We never know when streaks will occur so what if we just win 10 in a row and we're up so much? Also, how can they occur in the amts that prob. suggest... maybe sometimes but not always.


win 10 in a row and yeah youll be up a good amount. but consider this, if your using walters progression, say you lose the first 4 hands of a shoe and decide to sit it out, next shoe comes along you lose the first 4 hands again, and decide not to stop because its got to get better right? so you keep going, and yet you keep losing :roll: , because sadly losing streaks cancel out the winning streaks unless you adjust your bet amount according to how favorable the deck is to you (# of 10's > # of low cards 2-6).
i think some people just dont understand the math and theory, if your flat betting against a house edge of about 1%, then sure enough your gonna be playing a progression against a 1% house edge its as simple as that. the only thing that differs between a progression and flat betting is the bet fluctuations

[Surfteq]

Re :
"if your using walters progression, say you lose the first 4 hands of a shoe and decide to sit it out, next shoe comes along you lose the first 4 hands again, and decide not to stop because its got to get better right? so you keep going, and yet you keep losing, because sadly losing streaks cancel out the winning streaks"...

The Hit and Run "Delayed and Limited Progression" is much more Effective and Profitable, especially if used with the Count in a Double Deck/S17 game.

[Ray]

It has been proven that the win rate of flat bets and progressions is the
same. There is a good reason for that fact: Each possible outcome of a
progression has an equal chance to occur. Based on this fact, all possible
outcomes cancel out. In otherwords the effect is ZERO. Thus, progressions
will lose more, simply, because the average bet is higher. Otherwise the
outcome is exactly the same as flat betting.

Computers and progressions

Some want to believe that real life BJ is some how different from millions
of hands played on the old electronic brain. That's BS, total, absolute and
complete BS. Frequently, we here the statement: Well, I'm never going to
play millions of hands.This is like saying I can slip in a lot of wins before I
finally lose. Simple logic will tell you if a system has a good chance of
working (see above), we only run millions of hands to eliminate luck from
our consideration and to gage just how well our design works.

[Liezel]

Okay, so lemme get this straight. If I want to play for only 2 hrs, 60 hands an hour using the walter prog: 50-75-100-125-125-..., 75% of the time about $900 would last? I figure: 1.1 x 75 x 10.95 (sq(120)) = $903

Is this right? If so, and i start out with $900 then what happens if after 2 hrs i still have $900 left in relation to the formula ? Does that mean anytime after that i decide to play after that time (since 2 hours has already passed) there's no guarantee that i wont just get a 3 or 4 split and dd situation and lose half of it at once? Or did i just get lucky to have the same that i started with after 120 hands or 2 hrs? in oder words would i be risking a lot by continueing 2 play w/ only dat limited br?

Also, i understand that after doing 1.1 x 75 x (sqr 120) u have 2 mult. by 2 to make it good 95% of the time, or 90% of the time? If that`s da case, than what does mult'ing by 1.5 make it good til? about 85% of the time (in b/t 75% and 95%)? What if i multiply x 3 will it be good 100% of the time? where can i find online that talks about this formula as well as the diff. things i can mult. to get the diff %s ?

Basically, im interested in what % of the time it will be good, if i multiply the total by something larger than 1, mainly the 1.5 (decimals) and stuff like dat.

thx !

-liezel-

[Grifter]

TROLLING??

To All – The above post has been “asked and answered”. I received it yesterday via PM and responded to the poster with a link that provided an explanation of standard deviation and the formulae that would allow the above questions to be calculated by the poster, including a listing of the fractional standard deviations from mean relative to the percentage (which is the “bottom line” of the questions above).

Grifter

[Liezel]

Grifter, i dint get nething from u... and other people might want to reply 2 my msg so y dont u just let them reply? and what is 'trollin'

-liezel-

[Liezel]

hello can some1 answer me?

[Surfteq]

Hello mate...I'm here in Southern California...where are you???

[stainless steel rat]

Liezel:

If Grifter answered you, you won't get a better answer from anybody else. Read his answer over and over until you understand it...

[Ray]

Correct....especially the "over and over" part.........................when
it comes to blackjack, books, articles, post and the like are not quick
reads. You've got to study the damn thing!