The "Hybrid" Loss Recovery Strategy...
  • Also known as The Delayed & Limited "Hybrid" Progression/Regression...

    At a $5.00 to $500.00 table,
    I patiently FLAT Bet $5.00 per Hand,
    then,
    AFTER Losing 4 Hands in a Row (= $20.00),
    I Bet $25.00 on the 5th Hand,
    and if I lose,
    I Bet $50.00 on the 6th Hand,
    and if I Lose again,
    I Bet $100.00 on the 7th Hand,
    and if I Lose again,
    I Bet $200.00 on the 8th Hand,
    and if I Lose again,
    I Bet $400.00 on the 9th Hand,
    and if I Lose again,
    I Bet $500.00 (Table Max) on the 10th Hand...

    I use this Strategy when playing "Head-On" alone with the Dealer
    at the 4 & 5 Deck CSM's (definitely my Favorites/very Predictable),
    and sometimes at the 6 Deck Shoes,
    but NEVER at the 8 Deck shoes,
    and NEVER with ANY other people at the Table.
  • All 3 Betting Strategies Cover 9 Consective Losses in a Row...

    The "Hybrid" 3 : 15/15/30/60/120/240/480...
    After Losing 3 Hands in a Row (= -$15.00),
    Bet $15.00 on the 4th Hand,
    then $30.00 on the 5th Hand,
    then $60.00 on the 6th Hand,
    then $120.00 on the 7th Hand,
    then $240.00 on the 8th Hand,
    then $480.00 on the 9th Hand.

    The "Hybrid" 4 : 20/25/50/100/200/400...
    After Losing 4 Hands in a Row (= -$20.00),
    Bet $25.00 on the 5th Hand,
    then $50.00 on the 6th Hand,
    then $100.00 on the 7th Hand,
    then $200.00 on the 8th Hand,
    then $400.00 on the 9th Hand.

    The "Hybrid" 5 : 25/50/100/200/400...
    After Losing 5 Hands in a Row (= -$25.00),
    Bet $50.00 on the 6th Hand,
    then $100.00 on the 7th Hand,
    then $200.00 on the 8th Hand,
    then $400.00 on the 9th Hand.

    After you eventually Win a Hand in the Sequence,
    you Regress back to the $5.00 Table Minimum,
    and start Flat Betting again until you Lose at least 3 Hands in a Row.
  • Quote from Arnold Snyder in Blackbelt In Blackjack Book/2005 Edition,
    "computer simulations show that without counting cards, per se,
    certain playing conditions will indicate that the house advantage
    will be higher or lower on the next hand to be dealt.

    In fact, there is a truth to this claim.
    As far back as 1978, Dr. John Gwynn and Professor Armand Seri (both of California State University in Sacramento)
    published a paper that first described valid situational betting techniques - and Gwynn and Seri based their findings on extensive computer simulations...

    What Gwynn and Seri determined beyond any doubt were these facts :

    1. If a player loses a hand, he will be more likely to win the next one - i.e., losing one hand is a positive indicator that the player has a better expectation on the next...

    2. If a player wins a hand, he will be more likely to lose the next one - i.e., winning one hand is an indicator that the player's expectation on the next has dropped...

    All of this can be proven by computer simulation"(pages 98-99).

    Quote from Ian Andersen in Burning The Tables In Las Vegas Book/2003 Edition with Foreward by Stanford Wong...

    He writes of a person
    "operating under the false notion that increasing a bet after a win improves a player's chances.
    In fact, as simulations have now proven,
    players who don't count will do marginally better by increasing their bets after a loss than after a win"(page 85).
  • According to Advantage Player John May in his Book,
    "Get the Edge at Blackjack"(page 110/2001 Edition),

    "There is a small but tangible correlation between advantage
    and the results of the previous hands..."

    The effects,
    calculated by Dr. John Gwynn,
    and published in Advantage Player Arnold Snyder's Blackjack Forum (1986 Edition),
    revealed that :

    1. Following a win, player advantage decreases by 0.10%

    2. Following a loss, player advantage increases by 0.12%

    3. Following a push, player advantage decreases by 0.15%
  • Surfteg- No doubt that based on the large/small card theory, you would have a tiny increase probability to win the next hand after a loss. A long simulation would support that claim and I agree that you would lose marginally less. The math can't help but support that view, but I think it would be a fantasy from a practical application point of view.

    Starting out with some HA, say .5, is the reduction expected to be something like .01, .001 or something much smaller? I think even smaller.

    It appears like you are operating under the assumption that when you lose 3-4-5 in a row, the advantage accumulates to the point that you can risk the higher bets, up to $480 (maybe more small cards have fallen). Thus, another reason to limit your play to you and the dealer, which I don't think matters other than the speed of play.

    If the advantage was other than microscopic, you would think that it would be used or at least published.

    From a practical point of view, isn't your method just another application of the martingale progression?
  • Surfteg- I didn't see your numbers during my post....I'll chk it out...... After further though, the numbers do not effect the house advantage of .5. How you bet is the important consideration because to lose less you would need to increase your bet after every loss. The reason for this is due to the fact that you spend most of your time at the win/lose levels of 1,2,3.
  • Hi Ray...

    Basically,
    I mostly play the 4 or 5 Deck CSM's (which are very Predictable),
    and over and over and over again,
    I see the exact same Repeating Win/Loss Pattern/Trend :
    Lose 2/3 Hands in a Row,
    Win 1/2 Hands in a Row,
    so AFTER I Lose at least 3 Hands in a Row (at $5.00 minimum),
    I start Raising my Bets accordingly,
    because I know that I will Win at least One Hand in the next 6 Hands...
    As soon as I Win One Hand in the Loss Recovery Betting Sequence,
    I Regress right back down to the $5.00 table minimum,
    and continue to Flat Bet $5.00 until I Lose at least 3 Hands in a Row again.
  • Surfteg- Yes, I understand your method, but for the "bet more after a loss" idea to have meaning, you need to bet more after each loss. That is the only way to gain the benefit described (lose less).

    Can you explain the logic for the delay of 3-4-5 hands prior to an increase in your bet? I know how it looks, but you may have other reasons.
  • Surfteq said:
    Also known as The Delayed & Limited "Hybrid" Progression/Regression...

    At a $5.00 to $500.00 table,
    I patiently FLAT Bet $5.00 per Hand,
    then,
    AFTER Losing 4 Hands in a Row (= $20.00),
    I Bet $25.00 on the 5th Hand,
    and if I lose,
    I Bet $50.00 on the 6th Hand,
    and if I Lose again,
    I Bet $100.00 on the 7th Hand,
    and if I Lose again,
    I Bet $200.00 on the 8th Hand,
    and if I Lose again,
    I Bet $400.00 on the 9th Hand,
    and if I Lose again,
    I Bet $500.00 (Table Max) on the 10th Hand...

    I use this Strategy when playing "Head-On" alone with the Dealer
    at the 4 & 5 Deck CSM's (definitely my Favorites/very Predictable),
    and sometimes at the 6 Deck Shoes,
    but NEVER at the 8 Deck shoes,
    and NEVER with ANY other people at the Table.



    In a earlier post you were claiming to count cards. Now you are a progressionist who believes that CSM's are predictable?? WTF? What is up with this site? Why is so much wrong Info spouted here? using a progression system doesnt change the house edge.
  • Ray...the Delay is so that you can cover up to 9 Losing Hands in a Row without exceeding the $500.00 table maximum.

    Cass...I Count when playing/betting at the 6 Deck Shoes...
    I use the Delayed & Limited "Hybrid" Progression/Regression
    Loss Recovery Betting Strategy when playing/betting at the CSM's,
    which I definitely prefer because they are very predictable & beatable...

    "Stanford Wong was one of the first to beat the Continuous Shuffle Machines (CSM's).
    When the first generation of Continuous Shufflers were introduced at the Mirage,
    two teams of professional card-counters,
    one led by Stanford Wong, beat the casinos,
    making off with tens of thousands of dollars before the casino removed the machines.
    Needless to say refinements have been made to the Continuous Shuffle Machines since then.
    Many believe they are still beatable, however, if you learn their shuffle patterns"...

    Quote from The History of Blackjack website at :
    http://www.gypsyware.com/blackjackhistory.html

    Also, I never said that any progression "system" changes the house edge,
    and different is not "wrong" as you say.
  • At a small but comfortable Indian Casino here in Southern California,
    I had a choice of playing many full tables with 6 Deck Shoes/$10.00 minimum,
    or one empty "Un-Beatable" table with 8 Deck Shoe/$5.00 minimum,
    so I reluctantly chose the empty 8 Decker/$5.00 minimum,
    and twice within the first hour,
    I Lose 7 Hands in a row,
    but on the 8th Hand I get a Blackjack!!!...

    I Flat Bet $5, 5, 5, 5, 5, then $25, then $50, then $100...
    It's definitely Awesome when you get a Blackjack on a $100 Bet!!!...
    Especially twice after Losing 7 Hands in a row twice!!!...

    My Pre-Planned Loss Recovery Betting Strategy (aka,"Loss Terminator Tactic")
    for this 8 Decker was :
    Flat Bet $5, 5, 5, 5, 5,
    then $25 on Hand 6 if necessary,
    then $50 on Hand 7 if necessary,
    then $100 on Hand 8 if necessary,
    then $200 on Hand 9 if necessary,
    then $400 on Hand 10 if necessary,
    and finally,
    $500 table maximum on Hand 11 if necessary...

    If this seems to be too "High-Risk" for most folks,
    that's OK,
    but it "ain't nothin" to me,
    as I Bet way more $$$ on NASDAQ Stocks each day when I Day Trade online.
  • Another important Factor in the Loss Recovery Strategy is that sooner or later,
    the Dealer is gonna BUST!!!...
    Especially at least once within every 10 Hands or less...

    In the 5 Deck CSM's,
    I expect the Dealer to BUST at least once within every 5 Hands (= 20%)...
    In the 6 Deck Shoes,
    I expect the Dealer to BUST at least once within every 6 Hands (= 16.6%)...
    In the 8 Deck Shoes (which I usually Avoid!!!),
    I expect the Dealer to BUST at least once within every 8 Hands (= 12.5%).
  • Surfteq said:
    At a small but comfortable Indian Casino here in Southern California,
    I had a choice of playing many full tables with 6 Deck Shoes/$10.00 minimum,
    or one empty "Un-Beatable" table with 8 Deck Shoe/$5.00 minimum,
    so I reluctantly chose the empty 8 Decker/$5.00 minimum,
    and twice within the first hour,
    I Lose 7 Hands in a row,
    but on the 8th Hand I get a Blackjack!!!...

    I Flat Bet $5, 5, 5, 5, 5, then $25, then $50, then $100...
    It's definitely Awesome when you get a Blackjack on a $100 Bet!!!...
    Especially twice after Losing 7 Hands in a row twice!!!...

    My Pre-Planned Loss Recovery Betting Strategy (aka,"Loss Terminator Tactic")
    for this 8 Decker was :
    Flat Bet $5, 5, 5, 5, 5,
    then $25 on Hand 6 if necessary,
    then $50 on Hand 7 if necessary,
    then $100 on Hand 8 if necessary,
    then $200 on Hand 9 if necessary,
    then $400 on Hand 10 if necessary,
    and finally,
    $500 table maximum on Hand 11 if necessary...

    If this seems to be too "High-Risk" for most folks,
    that's OK,
    but it "ain't nothin" to me,
    as I Bet way more $$$ on NASDAQ Stocks each day when I Day Trade online.


    You should write a book :D
  • Surfteg:

    After you have lost 9 straight, you are betting $400 to make $5?
    Now after the 10th loss you have hit table max, what do you do now?

    Are you aware that in an accumulated period of 24 hours of blackjack play, you will average (perfectly normal) to have one streak of at least 10 straight losses? I have lost 22 in a row once, 19 or 20 once, and at least 16 on two other occassions. What do you do in such cases.
    Your progression is another perfect example of a system that will most often leave you about even or with a small win but eventually a couple hundred or more of those $5 wins will be gone in one 10 or more hand losing streak and it will have to happen!

    ihate17
  • Surfteq said:
    At a small but comfortable Indian Casino here in Southern California,
    I had a choice of playing many full tables with 6 Deck Shoes/$10.00 minimum,
    or one empty "Un-Beatable" table with 8 Deck Shoe/$5.00 minimum,
    so I reluctantly chose the empty 8 Decker/$5.00 minimum,
    and twice within the first hour,
    I Lose 7 Hands in a row,
    but on the 8th Hand I get a Blackjack!!!...

    I Flat Bet $5, 5, 5, 5, 5, then $25, then $50, then $100...
    It's definitely Awesome when you get a Blackjack on a $100 Bet!!!...
    Especially twice after Losing 7 Hands in a row twice!!!...

    My Pre-Planned Loss Recovery Betting Strategy (aka,"Loss Terminator Tactic")
    for this 8 Decker was :
    Flat Bet $5, 5, 5, 5, 5,
    then $25 on Hand 6 if necessary,
    then $50 on Hand 7 if necessary,
    then $100 on Hand 8 if necessary,
    then $200 on Hand 9 if necessary,
    then $400 on Hand 10 if necessary,
    and finally,
    $500 table maximum on Hand 11 if necessary...

    If this seems to be too "High-Risk" for most folks,
    that's OK,
    but it "ain't nothin" to me,
    as I Bet way more $$$ on NASDAQ Stocks each day when I Day Trade online.


    Surfteg- In your example, I believe the following statements describle, in specific detail, the error in this type of strategy:

    - Starting with the first increase in your bet ($25)- This bet is no different from the first bet you made after entering the casino. The probability to win the next bet is 47/43 as usual. The dealer probability to bust is around 28% and the probability to win/lose X number of hands in a row is P(1)/P(2) ^ n starting with the $25 bet. All the $5 bets are history and have no meaning/no impact. All this means that you reach the table limit in 5-6 hands, a very common occurrence, even in a short session.

    -Next, you can't depend on the dealer bust rate as a win, regardless of how often it occurs. You and/or the dealer will have a stiff about 40% of the time. The problem with this is the dealer stiff or cards that could lead to a stiff are completely unknow to you. (13 vs 10 should you hit or stand...you don't know).

    -Further, the idea that you are more likely to win after a loss would apply for the last sequence of hands, but does that small reduction in HA justify the high risk? I think not...............
  • Hello ihate17 & Ray...

    I appreciate both of your comments, criticisms, etc...
    I don't expect anyone to agree with the way I Play & Bet,
    but for me,
    it's definitely the most Efective & Profitable Strategy of all the different ones
    that I've tried & tested over nearly 20 years of Blackjack...
    for me,
    the "Bottom Line/Acid Test" of Reality is how a Strategy Actually & Consistently performs in Real Casinos,
    with Real Cards, Real Money, and Real People, etc...

    If I ever did Lose 11 Hands in a Row,
    I would Bet the $500 table max again on the 12th Hand
    in order to RECOVER at least $500 of what I Lost...
    It's NOT just to Win $5.00,
    it's to RECOVER 100% of your Losses each and every time...
  • Surfteq said:
    Hello ihate17 & Ray...

    I appreciate both of your comments, criticisms, etc...
    I don't expect anyone to agree with the way I Play & Bet,
    but for me,
    it's definitely the most Efective & Profitable Strategy of all the different ones
    that I've tried & tested over nearly 20 years of Blackjack...
    for me,
    the "Bottom Line/Acid Test" of Reality is how a Strategy Actually & Consistently performs in Real Casinos,
    with Real Cards, Real Money, and Real People, etc...

    If I ever did Lose 11 Hands in a Row,
    I would Bet the $500 table max again on the 12th Hand
    in order to RECOVER at least $500 of what I Lost...
    It's NOT just to Win $5.00,


    it's to RECOVER 100% of your Losses each and every time...



    With a bankroll where you can continually put out $500 bets, why in the world would your first-fourth bet be only $5?
    Play as you wish, but with over 30 years of counting experience, plus other forms of advantage play, betting 100 times your minimum without knowledge of the remaining cards, the hole card, or a slug in the shoe, makes no sense. You are just saying I lost X amount of hands in a row so I should win the nextr one. Eventually you will but if it on that 11th, 12th, 15th or 22nd hand, you need to win a bunch of $500 hands. Better to bet big when at least you have some advantage.
    Again, I have no problem with how you want to play, my problem is your perhaps telling someone who is new to blackjack and their believing you.

    ihate17
  • ihate17...

    The first 5 Bets were at the $5.00 table minimum because that's how I Bet :
    I Always Bet the $5.00 minimum until a High Count Plateau (in a Shoe),
    or until I Lose 5 Consecutive Hands in a Row (CSM or Shoe),
    whichever comes First,
    then, AFTER Losing 5 Hands in a Row I Begin to Raise the Bets...

    There is a Statistical Basis for This Loss Recovery Betting Strategy :

    Let's say that an 8 Deck Shoe is Really BAD = LOSE 66%/WIN 34% ...

    The Statistical Probability of Losing -
    1 Hand = 66%
    2 Hands = 33%
    3 Hands = 15.50%
    4 Hands = 07.75%
    5 Hands = 03.87%
    6 Hands = 01.93%
    7 Hands = 00.97%
    8 Hands = 00.48%
    9 Hands = 00.24%
    10 Hands = 00.12%
  • ihate17...

    You said,
    "I have lost 22 in a row once, 19 or 20 once, and at least 16 on two other occassions."...

    The most that I have ever Actually seen in Baccarat, Blackjack,
    or Roulette is 11 consecutive Wins or Losses in a Row...

    Did you Lose those on a 6 or 8 Deck SHOE???...
    Were you Playing with other people at those Losing Tables???...
    Were you Sitting at 3rd Base???...

    A few of my RULES...
    NEVER Play with other people
    ONLY Play Head-On ALONE with the Dealer
    AVOID the SHOES whenever possible (especially 8 Deck SHOES!!!)
    MASTER the CSM's (= very RANDOM/similar to Single Deck)
  • If it can happen, it will happen.......About 1.5 years back I won 9 hands in a row playing two hands at 70%. The probability to do that is P(t)=P(1)*P(2). My bet on each hand was $35(2U) and I had no reason to change it thu-out the run. You can imagine the attention I was getting after 5-6 rounds. Some hands went to three and/or DD's. The only way I could figure the wins was to subtract my buy-in from total chip dollars and guess at the rest.

    I told everyone about that one.......I had just come off 11 months of losing and something like this came as a much needed tonic....

    Surfteg- As you can see, there is nothing wrong with being lucky. It just don't happen often enough.
  • Ray...
    Great to hear that you won 9 Hands in a row,
    but that 11 months of Losing is devastating...

    I definitely believe in being Lucky, but I usually don't expect to...

    When I was watching the High Limit table at Pechanga a while back,
    this Lucky drunk guy was Betting 2 Hands @ $5,000 max Bet per Hand,
    and Winning like crazy,
    and he literally had a huge pile of chips worth at least $100,000 or more...

    Even Fred Renzey says,
    "The truth about gambling is,
    luck will play a big part in how you'll do on any given day"(Blackjack Bluebook II, page 126).
  • Surfteq said:
    Another important Factor in the Loss Recovery Strategy is that sooner or later,
    the Dealer is gonna BUST!!!...
    Especially at least once within every 10 Hands or less...

    In the 5 Deck CSM's,
    I expect the Dealer to BUST at least once within every 5 Hands (= 20%)...
    In the 6 Deck Shoes,
    I expect the Dealer to BUST at least once within every 6 Hands (= 16.6%)...
    In the 8 Deck Shoes (which I usually Avoid!!!),
    I expect the Dealer to BUST at least once within every 8 Hands (= 12.5%).


    I thought the dealer usually busts about 25% of the time. Am I off? ALso, why does the amount of decks make a difference? The percentage of high/low cards are the same no matter how many decks you are playing with.
  • stock_master_man said:
    I thought the dealer usually busts about 25% of the time. Am I off? ALso, why does the amount of decks make a difference? The percentage of high/low cards are the same no matter how many decks you are playing with.


    The ratio changes as cards are removed from the deck/shoe.
    1deck,take away a 10=15/51 remaing cards are tens
    2 decks " =31/103 "
    4 decks " =57/207 "
    10 decks " =159/519 "

    15/51 is different than 159/519.Slightly,but it is different

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!