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.

"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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

One can only hope...

007...license to kill.

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.

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

Charles

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.