Betting Strategy vs none

[Liezel]

Hi guyz!

I was reading on wizardofodds.com some interesting stuff about blackjack and betting strategies. The guy there said that it doesn't matter what betting strategy we use because in the longrun we`ll always end up losing the 0.5%. I dont quite understand this because first of all we aren`t computers so therefore we wont ever play millions of hands in the first place! Also, I thought betting strategies were smart to use since we don`t know if we`re going 2 win anyway, might as well bet in a way we won`t lose so big at once you know? I thought it`s good 2 use a betting system that`s all!

Anyway I`m confused~~~!! Please un-confuse me! hehe

~|ieZe|~

[Surfteq]

He's probably talking about the House Edge = 0.5% no matter what Strategy we use...

[Liezel]

Right, but isn't it smarter to use a betting strategy so we wont lose such big bets for no reason?

[Surfteq]

Yes mate, we must have SOME Betting Strategy in order to WIN...

My Favorite is what I call "The Delayed and Limited Progression"...
I Bet the Table Minimum until I LOSE 3 HANDS in a Row/Dealer WINS 3 HANDS in a Row,
then AFTER that,
I Raise my BET for up to the next 4 HANDS,
until I WIN 1 HAND/Dealer BUSTS,
then I go right back to the Table Minimum,
and Start over again...
It works best in the Double Deck/Dealer Stand on 17 Tables...

The MOST common Double Deck PATTERN I see
is the Dealers usually BUST 1 in every 4 HANDS = 25% of the Time,
and almost always 1 in every 7 HANDS...

[acanuck]

i dont know about that man ive been going to the casino for about a year now, and soon i wont be able to count on both hands anymore how many times ive lost 8-10 hands in a row, progressions will never work some people just dont wanna believe the math. ive been to the casino a few times drunk with my buddies and have seen many people splitting tens, hitting on 15 against 6 standing on 15 vs 10, one guy said "i dont play by the book" and all we could do was laugh kinda, he ended up winning the majority of hands we were there, but i dont want to know how much he dumped into the place already. bottom line is if you bet more according to how many more 10's then babies there are in the deck then in the long run you will win.

[AlexD30]

Yes mate, we must have SOME Betting Strategy in order to WIN...

My Favorite is what I call "The Delayed and Limited Progression"...
I Bet the Table Minimum until I LOSE 3 HANDS in a Row/Dealer WINS 3 HANDS in a Row,
then AFTER that,
I Raise my BET for up to the next 4 HANDS,
until I WIN 1 HAND/Dealer BUSTS,
then I go right back to the Table Minimum,
and Start over again...
It works best in the Double Deck/Dealer Stand on 17 Tables...

The MOST common Double Deck PATTERN I see
is the Dealers usually BUST 1 in every 4 HANDS = 25% of the Time,
and almost always 1 in every 7 HANDS...
No one doubts the fact that single and double decks blackjack are beatable. But you have to be aware of the fact that you have the edge only after you won a hand. If you lost a hand but the count is still positive you may have some small edge because of blackjacks but the risk has also increased if you keep betting by the count. The increase of risk is not justifying to bet big because the count say so. Instead you should tie your future bets to your most recent performance in the game. On the other hand, if you won the previous hand and the count is still positive then if you increase your bet the risk has decreased and probably is justifiable to bet more.

To my greatest surprise I still find players who insist that you keep betting by the count when you losing since that is just natural random expectation. It is nothing of normal to keep losing 10 hands in a row on positive counts. You have to be aware of that if you keep betting by the count in that scenario it can be "fatal" to your bankroll.

Also, you have to be aware that positive counts do not generate more winning hands. The most gain of any positive count is from getting blackjacks. If you don't get the normal ratio of BJs during positive counts you will not win in this game regardless of your betting spread.

[Ray]

Alex- When the dealer is showing a lot of aces and Joe at first splits
aces a time or two, your in deep trouble on good counts. This happened
to me just a few days back. I escaped by making two doubles at the
tail end of the shoe, otherwise I lose big. I must have lost 5 out of 7.

[stainless steel rat]

are we once more drifting into voo-doo land?

I _always_ bet according to the count. Whether I won the last hand or lost the last hand, or whether I won the last 10 or lost the last 10. If the true count is at least 2 or higher, I expect to win more than I lose over the long run in that circumstance.

Something told me Alex would return to the progression/streak/voo-doo stuff sooner or later.

If he doesn't believe he should bet big on a + count, what in the world is the purpose of counting, because that is exactly what counting is for, to tell you when your expectation is > 0.00, which is when you bet big...

maybe I'm just getting too old...

[stainless steel rat]

also, as far as "you only have the edge after you have won a hand..."

I'd take the case where I got a 20, the dealer beat me by drawing 8 2's and then a 5, and bet big _any_ day on the second round of that heads-up game. I don't care who won or lost, I only care what cards have fallen, which tells me which cards are left to fall in future rounds...