How often should you win in blackjack?
  • Plenty, frequently, 9 out of 10, 2/3 of the time or what. I maintain that
    there is not a good answer for such a stupid question. Don't you?

    Suppose you are like me and average-out about every 6 sessions
    and you had these results for two periods: WWLLLL and LLWWWW.
    Further, suppose that each of the above is for one month of play.
    Now look at some example results:

    W1000, W1000, L300, L300, L300, L200=+900 winner

    L1000, L1000, W400, W400, W400, W400=-400 loser

    Total=+500 winner, but I had an equal number of win/loss sessions

    The reason I thought that this post may interest some players is how
    well it should eliminate any consideration toward hipo win goals and
    lost limits. Where would you place your win goals and lost limits in
    the above example?
  • My goal is to win every time I play. I expect to win. I also understand what is reasonable. I will not turn $300 into $3,000 over a two day trip. In 2003 I averaged about $18 per hour. My 2004 results had me just under breaking even at the tables. Good thing I got comps. My loss limit is 40% of my session bank roll. I don't ever set a win limit.
  • PJ said:
    My goal is to win every time I play. I expect to win. I also understand what is reasonable. I will not turn $300 into $3,000 over a two day trip. In 2003 I averaged about $18 per hour. My 2004 results had me just under breaking even at the tables. Good thing I got comps. My loss limit is 40% of my session bank roll. I don't ever set a win limit.


    So do you play until you win?
    Statistically, there could be a situation where you will actually lose all your bankroll.

    What's your max bet and what's your bankroll?
  • I like to answer the general question this way:

    For every 100 hands you play, you win 43, lose 49 and tie 8. The 43 wins generate 91.5 units, and adding the 8 ties, you have 99.5 chips of the original 100. How you bet, determines wether or not this long-term statement prevails.

    If you don't have a goal and stop-loss points in which you do not continue the session at that table, then the chances of being ahead or behind are nearly 50-50. All the goals and stop-losses do is limit financial variance, they do NOT limit or alter your chances of being ahead or behind.

    How you bet and how much pain and gain you're willing to accept determines your outcome. You may have to endure lotsa pain before the gain, and you may have lotsa gain before the pain sets in.

    Take two asprin. ;o)
  • We all know the logic of proper BR and it does not need further
    elaboration. Suppose you are a $5 player and believe you should
    have 50*5 before going to the casino. Nothing wrong with that at
    all, good thinking. But, you are one of the players who sets your
    lost limit at 40% and that may sound good and reasonable to you
    and any number of other players. Evidently BR means nothing to
    you because 40% of 250=100 and that should be all you will ever need.

    When you go to the casino with proper BR there should be no question
    in your mind that you are willing to risk it all, every cent. The reason
    for that is that your win sessions must exceed your losing sessions and
    no power on earth can tell you how these sessions will configure over
    time.
  • Unfortunately Ray, I have surmised that one has $1000 to start in your example, and at the end of the 2nd 1000 loss, the original 1000 is bankrupt by 100. One had to dig up extra money to finish the run.

    But I see your point.
  • slpgh,
    I was only stating my optomistic approach to the game. I understand the numbers. Reality sunk in last year when most of my trips were in the negative column. I am mostly a red chipper with a limited bank roll. I just enjoy the challenge of beating them on their turf. It's rare when my max bet exceeds $100.
  • PJ said:
    slpgh,
    I was only stating my optomistic approach to the game. I understand the numbers. Reality sunk in last year when most of my trips were in the negative column. I am mostly a red chipper with a limited bank roll. I just enjoy the challenge of beating them on their turf. It's rare when my max bet exceeds $100.


    Didn't mean to offend you. I am a red player myself. In fact, I prefer playing for even lower stakes, 3$ US or canadian red. Then again, as a graduate student I can't really afford more than that.

    I was wondering what your total bankroll was and what your maximum spread is. I'm always wondering whether people follow Kelly and what allowances they make way for.
  • No offense taken, slpgh. I, for one, have not studied Kelly much. I probably over bet my bankroll a lot. I'll take $750 for a two day trip and hang around the $10 table or $15 DD game. One trip in 2003 everything went right. I bought in for $100 and never had to dig again for the two days! I actually ended up playing green on the last session.

Howdy, Stranger!

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