Cutting Edge Blackjack
  • I haven't heard anyone mention the book "Cutting Edge Blackjack". Is it any good. I have read parts of it where the author talks about card behavior(win/loss patterns) and how depending upon your your win/loss ratio you should consider walking away from a table or not. Does this books teachings really help?

    Also, what is the most consecutive number of losses ever known to happen at BJ? It seems that after having an unusually high amount of losses in a row should exponentially increase the odds of a win coming.

    For example, if i bet minimum bet for 10 rounds and lose all 10 bets. Wouldn't it make sense to start betting higher or progressively at that point?
  • I disagree with that last statement. Each hand of blackjack is independent of all past hands, the only thing that matters is the cards that were used for those 10 losses. In other words, if I lose 10 straight hands to start a shoe, and all 10 losses involved me getting dealt 20 and the dealer getting a blackjack, than Im actually more likely to lose the 11th hand because of the compostion of cards over those first 10 hands.
  • You're right in what you are saying because obviously the count would kill me. However, I should 've been more specific. Lets say their are other players at the table and their cards keep the count even, or close to even. I'm saying purely from a win/loss standpoint wouldn't the odds be in my favor to win. The odds of winning your first hand(considering a good shuffle and penetration) are a little less than 50%. So you would think that after losing 10 hands(assuming RC between+2 to-2) that your chances of a win would be significantly higher right?

    Lets say you are flipping a coin...and you get 2 tails and 12 heads is there any reason you wouldn't place a higher wager that a tail would come next? Lets say it was heads again. Why not then double your bet on tails again. Eventually the propability would play out I think.
  • just like every flip of a coin is a 50% probability of either result, every hand of BJ has the same prob of winning (given a count of 0)

    even if you flipped a coin 900 times and got heads every time, there is no reason to believe the next flip will be tails.
  • except...


    Just try to explain that to the patricks/pattersons of the world.

    :)
  • They believe in streaks, in progression betting, in stop-loss limits, you-name-it...

    All voodoo...
  • Answer this riddle using your own line of thinking.
    You decide to flip a fair coin 100 times just to see if they come out 50 heads and 50 tails. But after the first 20 flips, they're all heads. At that point you hire a Las Vegas oddsmaker to come in and put an "over/under" line on the remaining 80 flips. What would his most accurate number be?
  • not sure of the terminology, but I would choose "over 20". We already have 20 heads. The probability for the remaining 80 flips is 40-40 heads and tails. So I would expect the trial to end 60-40, once I have already gotten 20 heads in a row.

    that what you meant?

    Some might say 50-50, but not so once you have the first 20 in the bag...
  • The first 20 heads is history and has no meaning. The odds maker could
    not give you over/under numbers because there is no favorite. I think
    he would suggest 'pick'um' as the odds. The odds maker knows that this
    is not a 40/40 or 50/50 probability. The probability of getting exactly 40
    heads out of the 80 flips is far less than 50% and the same is true for
    40 tails. Streaks occur and there is no way to forcast what kind of streaks,
    heads or tails.
  • The most accurate number to set as an over/under betting line in this case would be 40. That's because the chances that the next 80 flips will produce over 40 heads is the same as producing under 40 heads -- regardless of what the first twenty flips were.
    Yes, that would indeed mean that the expected number of heads for the whole 100 flips would be 60 and not 50 -- this particular time around. So then, how do things even out in the long run? That happens as previous lopsided results merely fade into the past -- rather than get corrected.
    After these 100 flips, you're most likely to have about 60% heads. Continue flipping out to 1000 and you're most likely to have about 51% heads. Keep going out to 1,000,000 and you're most likely to have about 50.001% heads etc. -- all by getting 50% heads the rest of the way.
  • Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2005 1:22 pm Post subject: When are "tails" due?

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Answer this riddle using your own line of thinking.
    You decide to flip a fair coin 100 times just to see if they come out 50 heads and 50 tails. But after the first 20 flips, they're all heads. At that point you hire a Las Vegas oddsmaker to come in and put an "over/under" line on the remaining 80 flips. What would his most accurate number be?


    That's a classic. I'd bet on heads in a minute because its probably a trick coin.

    I always have this gambler's fallacy problem in my thinking. (not the trick coin, the real gambler's fallacy). Its that darn infinity that gets me every time. The real problem is that infinity minus 20 is infinity; and infinity + 20 is infinity.
  • "when are tails due?".......Black came up 22 straight times on a wheel in
    LV. Was red due? There is nothing to say that in the above example that
    tails can't occur 51 times vs 29 for heads. Not likely, but possible. At times
    SD looks like a mountain range, other times flat like a table top, or both...
  • It seems to me that a 6 deck game would keep those type variances to a minimum. Yes, steaks do occur but they always revert back to the mean. For the past few months, I have been playing various online "free" BJ games and keeping up with streaks, variance, etc. I definitely don't suggest playing those online games with real money but believe that varying your bets helps you win. I have done pretty well at the casinos and the online games using this format. I know "Stainless" calls it voodoo but theories do not always work in real life.
    I use two types of betting formats:
    1. 5,15,35,75,155, walk (I go up if I lose and start over if I win).
    2. 5,5,5,25,50, walk (I go up if I lose and start over when I win).
  • 5,15,35,75,155, walk

    Here's the problem with this (and all similar) strategies.

    Win 1 hand (or more): $5
    Lose and then win: $10
    Lose twice and then win: $15
    Lose three times and then win: $20
    Lose four times and then win: $25
    Lose five times: -$285

    Your maximum gain is when you lose 4 hands and then win 1, and you gain $25. You would have to do that 12 times to overcome losing five in a row just once. On your original bet, you'd have to win 57 times in order to overcome one five-in-a-row loss. The numbers just aren't with you. Someone else can do the math if they want to prove it more empirically, but you will have lots of times when you lose five in a row, and trying to make that up will be an uphill fight.

Howdy, Stranger!

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