loss streaks
  • does anyone know how often streaks of 4, 5, 6, 7 losses occur? or where i can find the info
  • Just ask me. It happens usually every shoe.
  • Drew- A fellow used Bernoulli"s formula and figured it up.
    The Probabilitys of losses in a row are :
    2 1 in 3
    3 1 in 8
    4 1 in 18
    5 1 in 38
    6 1 in 81
    7 1 in 168
    8 1 in 356
    9 1 in 713
    10 1 in 1666
    11 1 in 3332
    12 1 in 9999

    These are the "probabilitys" and I am not sure how they can help you.
  • Midnite, I'm sure glad I got those 10 consecutive losing hands out of the way because it should be a long time until it happens again! Thanks for the info.
  • thank you. that is what i was looking for.
  • midnite said:
    Drew- A fellow used Bernoulli"s formula and figured it up.
    The Probabilitys of losses in a row are :
    2 1 in 3
    3 1 in 8
    4 1 in 18
    5 1 in 38
    6 1 in 81
    7 1 in 168
    8 1 in 356
    9 1 in 713
    10 1 in 1666
    11 1 in 3332
    12 1 in 9999

    These are the "probabilitys" and I am not sure how they can help you.


    Maybe it woulda helped had you made it clearer, bolded the amount of times instead of make it so messy: 1 1 2 3 5 2435 2345 2352 34 23 423 etc etc.

    Anyway, why dont you keep going with that and continue to 20 losses in a row.
  • midnite, will you please post the table for wins in a row?
    Do these tables ignore pushes or are the pushes considered?
    For a progression, tables that just ignore pushes would be useful.
  • Sage-Pushes were not considered. The general consensus was that wins in a row would be slightly less, but "about" the same.
  • Thanks midnight, I went to the "Wizard of Odds" web site at http://www.wizardofodds.com/ and found the following:
    The probability of an overall win in blackjack is 43.33%, a tie is 8.78%, and a loss is 47.89%. I'm going to assume you wish to ignore ties for purposes of the streak. The probability of winning n hands is a row is .475^n . So the probability of winning six in a row is 1.1487% and seven in a row is 0.5456%.

    using the formulas he gave I calculated the following:
    .475^n
    Wins In a row
    1 47.5000%
    2 22.5625%
    3 10.7172%
    4 5.0907%
    5 2.4181%
    6 1.1486%
    7 0.5456%
    8 0.2591%
    9 0.1231%
    10 0.0585%

    .525^n
    Loss in row
    1 52.5000%
    2 27.5625%
    3 14.4703%
    4 7.5969%
    5 3.9884%
    6 2.0939%
    7 1.0993%
    8 0.5771%
    9 0.3030%
    10 0.1591%

    Do these number fit with your numbers??
  • Hopefully he can answer you since I brought it back up.
  • While I am certainly no mathematican, I would say : Use which ever one is the easiest for you to understand. One is using "hands" and one is using "percents".
  • Sage said:
    Thanks midnight, I went to the "Wizard of Odds" web site at http://www.wizardofodds.com/ and found the following:
    The probability of an overall win in blackjack is 43.33%, a tie is 8.78%, and a loss is 47.89%. I'm going to assume you wish to ignore ties for purposes of the streak. The probability of winning n hands is a row is .475^n . So the probability of winning six in a row is 1.1487% and seven in a row is 0.5456%.

    using the formulas he gave I calculated the following:
    .475^n
    Wins In a row
    1 47.5000%
    2 22.5625%
    3 10.7172%
    4 5.0907%
    5 2.4181%
    6 1.1486%
    7 0.5456%
    8 0.2591%
    9 0.1231%
    10 0.0585%

    .525^n
    Loss in row
    1 52.5000%
    2 27.5625%
    3 14.4703%
    4 7.5969%
    5 3.9884%
    6 2.0939%
    7 1.0993%
    8 0.5771%
    9 0.3030%
    10 0.1591%

    Do these number fit with your numbers??


    Is there a reason, simply put, for the dramatic differences between these "wins in a row" and "losses in row" percentages? I look at these and (briefly) wonder why negative progressions don't work.
  • Yep, looking at those percentages , it looks like a negative approach , such as a Martingale, should be a good approach to the game of BJ.

    I have used Oscars Grind for BJ and have found it to do quite well.

    Of course, the problem begins as the amount of the wager increases and you tighten your orifices , when you have the opportunity to double or split.

    Maybe , double downs and splitting is the downfall of the Martingale, right along with limited bankrolls and table limits.

    Dylanfreak
  • And that brings us to the age old debate of negative progression vs positive progression. Save yourself one expensive lesson and don't do the negative progression.
    8)

Howdy, Stranger!

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