• If this board gets any slower, I might petition to bring back the Bug. Someone needs to post a big fat lie about something so we can bag on him or her for a couple of days.
    :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :oops: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

  • Yeah, it has been really slow around here lately...

    Ummm... progressions work better than counting... maybe that will start some arguments.
  • maybe everybody's at the casino today"bringing down the house."
  • Now there's a subject. After studying and playing blackjack for three years straight, I have learned that using basic strategy I can expect the house to still beat me over the long run between .5 and 1.0 %. Also, If I get to be a good card counter, the house advantage drops and I could actually gain a small advantage over them. Considering this, how did the MIT team manage to take Vegas by MILLIONS? Was it because they had a huge bankroll? Or does the TEAM effort increase the percentages so much that the advantage swings heavily in their favor? Just wondering how they did it. (BTW, I did not read the entire book.)
  • in the a&e movie "breaking vegas" (available from one of the players,the russian guy i think, says he would sometimes make bets for $25,000,$50,000, and if i remember right he also said $100,000-and he was just one member of the team that visited and played in vegas for years!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Well, I can say for me that I'm far more interested in poker than blackjack these days. Other than counting (for BJ) or cheating (any other casino game), it's the only way I can expect to leave the casino as a winner on a consistent basis. And it's a lot easier to manage your bankroll in poker than BJ. Don't like your cards? Muck 'em. Doesn't cost you a penny unless you're one of the blinds.

    Just spent 3 days out in Vegas and hardly played any BJ at all. Probably played a total of 4-6 hours over that period. I played 20-30 hours of poker in the same span.
  • I still would like to know, mathematically, how they were able to pull it off.
  • PJ- It's all in the numbers. If you have quite a few player and all are
    playing with an advantage, more will win than will lose. But, be aware
    that even this don't work all the time. If you recall when they went on
    a losing streak they lost back most of what they had won. The big
    problem I saw with their efforts was the lack of street smarts. MIT may
    be great for theory, but to stay in business they should have had more
    input and training from professionals and professors are not BJ pros.

    All that, "thou shall not" do this or that sounds like some professors that
    I can remmember, or other such prima donnas.
  • PJ - From the book it looks like they used teamwork. You had people sitting at the table using Basic Strategy and low bids to keep count untilk the deck was ripe for a few hands.. Maybe a +15 (whatever their card counting strategy was).. then someone would call in the big money (the $25,000 - $100,000 bets that they talked about).. this person would come in and bet large and walk away with the winnings. So even though the small people making minimum bets might lose some the big money woudl win and move on to win at other tables.
  • So that started the chain of events that got us where we are today. Lower table maximums, poor pen, restricted mid shoe entry, csm's, and the list goes on. If the game of blackjack is one that keeps the casinos so occupied and worried about a few that may affect their bottom line, why not just shut it down forever.
  • sure is dead around here
  • Well at least its still good quality post, when there is post, its pretty quiet in few of the forums, not just this one,
    Is it just me but have you started to notice that online casinos are starting to get quite agressive in their mailings, I think the on-line poker is taking the crowd away from the normal casino ( blackjack, roulette, video poker ) games, ok they are getting a % of the rake, but I don't think it match's the loss their taking in the lack of people playing those games. may be its the same with the forums, the same people who were posting now and then are now playing poker, poker takes a wee bit more time up ( as your folding a lot of hands ect ect ), than just playing blackjack for a quick 30 mins - 1 hour here and there and grabbing a few $'s, just a thought



Howdy, Stranger!

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