40x Table Minimum Question
  • So I know having 40x table min. pretty much covers the negative swings in BJ, since, this is what the Experts suggest you bring... but, HOW FAR ON THE NEGATIVE END IS NORMAL in this game? For instance, if I'm playing with 007 progression and started with 40x the table min. and have been winning & losing but am suddenly down to only 10x the table min. does this mean that I'm about to go soaring back up? In other words, how strong a figure is 40x to "quit" after you lose it all? If I lost 40x (all), would that just be just really bad luck, and the chances of that happening are real slim, given the fact that I'm using a strong betting progression or what? I know it should not happen, but anything in BJ is possible...

    ALL HELPFUL FEEDBACK WELCOME!!!!!
  • :( Am here to tell you the "soaring back up" may not occur right away because you have lost 30 of your 40 units ! If you get even close to the break even (or maybe a 50% loss?), may be good idea to call it a day & run like Hell from that Casino! Lick your wounds and call it the "end of that session". And, as Scarlett in Gone With The Wind would say, "Tomorrow IS another day"...
  • I've done a lot of "soaring back up" after getting hammered at the Taj Mahal in AC. Problem is the "soaring" was in the express elevator going back to my room.
  • LOL Ted :( And the only time I was "soaring back up" was when I was getting high off losing all my money

    Yeah, first and only time I gambled in Vegas I lost my ass off. It was unbelievable! Seemed everytime the dealer had a real bad hand, like hard 15/16 they'd draw a 6 and 5 respectively!!! Then I saw dealer's BJ'ing 3x in a row!! WTF is that?!?!??! :x :x :x

    Anyway, crackers, if one loses 1/2 of the their 40x bankroll and quits, then what would be the point of bringing in 20x more in the first place? I know there's a reason for briging 40x - to cover the LARGE up and down streaks while playing, so I dont think quitting is the proper move... what does everyone else think?
  • "Anyway, crackers, if one loses 1/2 of the their 40x bankroll and quits, then what would be the point of bringing in 20x more in the first place? I know there's a reason for briging 40x - to cover the LARGE up and down streaks while playing, so I dont think quitting is the proper move... what does everyone else think?"

    Well, Bug. I did not mean to "quit" for the rest of your life! I meant TAKE-A-BREAK, man. You are on a LOSER streak, and they can last :twisted: just a long as a WINNER streak. I think I understand what you are saying--- ie, 40 units should be "enough", mathematically, to cover the ups/down, according to the Experts. But I "play" differently when I find myself in such a FUNK. I, psychologically, "lose my Kool". I find myself getting ANGRY (at the Dealer) & frustrated and I take STUPID chances and get a little stupid & "wild". A Big Time looser streak (30 to 40 units)is not good for your concentration if you let it bother you intellectually or emotionally. And it BOTHERS me! So, whatever the experts say about 40 units being "enough" on average, so you can hang in there, I know better. I know that 40 PLUS units CAN GO if you stay & try to fight it out. And, I don't care how many times you change tables or dealers, if it is your "turn" to hit that WALL, you WILL, mathematically, hit that wall.
  • So I know having 40x table min. pretty much covers the negative swings in BJ, since, this is what the Experts suggest you bring... but, HOW FAR ON THE NEGATIVE END IS NORMAL in this game?


    Bug – Your key words here are “pretty much”……40 units will “generally” cover you for a four hour session. Or to put it another way, if the cards fall “pretty much” as they are supposed to (you winning about 47.5% of your hands excluding pushes) then “most” of the time you will be o.k…….but there are always exceptions, and these are “normal” also.

    An “absolute” answer to your question depends on how you define “normal”. Do you want to use 1, 2, or 3 Standard Deviations for ‘normal’??......I am going to use one standard deviation, or what will happen 66.67% of the time. ”Normal” for the SLD progression would be about the same as your buy-in (gee, surprise), in that the “normal” swing would be in the range of -40 units to +40 units for a four hour session.

    Quick note about “soaring up”: Crackers is right. Just because you have been losing doesn’t mean “you are due” to soar back up…..but the favorable thing about the positive progression you are playing is that when you do hit that streak of eight wins you recover 20 units almost instantly.

    Regards…..Grifter
  • I see... so if I get up 40 units ($1000 profit) should I necessary stop at once, or what? Say this does happen... how likely am I to continue this streak, and maybe make $2500 profit? This of course isn't unusual right? I know Sld has won $2500 using his system and almost 2/3 of the time he's a winner anyway...

    As for me, I'm way due up to win because I've been losing and luck has not been my way the last couple of times.

    Grifter, do you play his system, or have you experimented with it at all? If so, I'd like to know your results.
  • Hello????????????????? :roll: :roll:
  • Bug:

    Understand that I'm a winner 2/3 of the time...but in VERY SMALL increments most of that 2/3. I walk out with more money than I walk in with 2/3 of the time. A lot of that is knowing WHEN to stop. No one can tell you when...you just gotta feel it. I know, I know this is supposed to be a scientific, mathematically driven game...and it is! But, all I can tell you is that when you start losing a "bunch" ITS TIME TO GO!!...I can't explain it...I just know that after 20 years of playing this game I can just "feel" when it's time to go, that's all!

    The 40x minimum is appropriate to weather the storm of bad fluctuations, only you gotta know when to quit, period.
  • Hello all. This will be my first post on these boards but I have been reading them for quite some time.

    Anyway, with regards to being due to "soar back up", I would have to agree with Grifter. Fred Renzey does an excellent job of explaining why you are never "due" for a win in his book BlackJack Bluebook 2. He gives an example of a series of coin tosses. If you are flipping a coin 50 times, the expectation is 25 heads and 25 tails. However, if the first 20 flips are heads then your expectation for the following 30 flips would be 15 heads and 15 tails. Therefore you would end up with 35 heads and 15 tails (70% heads). However, if you extend the series to, say, 500,000 flips, your results will be much closer to the expected 50% figure. Basically, he sums it up by saying that previous results do not predict future outcomes, but merely fade into the past.

    If you are looking for rationalizations of common blackjack misconceptions, that is an excellent book (actually, I think it is an all-around excellent blackjack book).
  • skrolldown - Renzey's logic is flawed. Whereas one coin flip has no bearing on the next flip, the cards that come out are gone and, therefore, HAVE a direct bearing on the mix of cards to come and therefore do affect what happens to you next. Counters (like Renzey) believe that you should track these cards that come out, in an attempt to predict what mix of cards will come out next so you can adjust your bet or play accordingly. Progression betters (like Thomason) rely on streaks and mathematical analysis to support increasing your bet when you are in a good one and flat betting when you are not.

    Either way...BJ should most assuredly NOT be played like flipping coins.

    007...license to kill.
  • sld007, it is not Renzey's logic that is flawed, it is my application of it. I mistakenly applied it to 21 when it was actually geared toward games of independent trails (craps, roulette, etc...).

    However, unless the 40 units were lost in a single shoe, that logic could still apply since each shoe (as far as the counter is concerned) starts with the same odds. So the "coin toss logic" holds true over multiple shoes and therefore, in the long run. Or at least that's how I see it.
  • Each shoe does start with the same odds, yes that is true regardless if one is a counter or not; however, as cards come out the odds change (for counters) and the bets either increase or stay flat (for both counters and progressive bettors). In order for the coin toss logic to hold true, you would have to play not just multiple shoes, but millions of shoes! In the short run, we progressive bettors can win a shoe here and a shoe there, but in the long run we are all dead!
  • so I guess it's in the very VERY long run then...
  • One can only hope...

    007...license to kill.
  • So if the in LONG RUN we are dead, in the VERY LONG RUN we are REALLY dead, get the correlation?
  • I don't think any progression will make one a long term winner. In my case using Renzy's A-10 Front count to reduce volitility I use a spread of $10 to $30. That spread is not wide enough to be profitable, but playing that way it holds my yearly loss to about $1000 to $1100. Comps cover about $500 to $600 of that loss, leaving a yearly loss of about $500. A lot cheaper than golf. I don't know if a progression would do better or not. I have used 007 for most of the past month. Am a little ahead with it, but over a years time I don't know. Only a little over 20 hours of play in that month. About my normal amount of play. Would be interested in how others have done with their progressions. Especially the 007 one.

    Charles
    PS Just read the preview. The A-10 Front count is of course not a progression.
  • tuffy:

    Where's my cut?

    007...license to kill.
  • By return mail. You will cover half of my losses in the next month won't you?

    Charles
  • I am not familiar with the 007.

    Dylanfreak
  • Sigh, I cant believe no one responded to you, Dylanfreak but I'll explain what the SLD progression is. If you're at all knowledgeble about Dahl's Progression, SLD's is just twice that, so instead of .5x .5x 1x 1x 1.5x 1.5x 2x 2x 2.5x etc., SLD's is 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4, moving up the totem pole ONLY on a NET win, staying at the same level on a net PUSH, and going back to the beginning on a loss. Dahl's says to skip 2 after a net win on a DD or Split and skip 1 after a BJ, but I dont think it makes a difference whether you skip or not...

    Lately though, SLD's has been modified to 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 because he says he usually loses the 5th hand after making it up like that and instead of losing 1/2 his profits, he'll only lose a 1/3 with a 3rd 2x bet. Also, he has incorporated WT's 4-loss quit point. Whenever you lose 4 CONSECUTIVE HANDS, you sit out the entire shoe and come in the on the next one.

    Hope this thoroughly explains SLD progression. Let me know.

Howdy, Stranger!

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