Very Basic Situational Betting #1

[Egalite]

their pick is as good as yours, and your pick is as good as mine.

For an individual hand this is true. However if you lose the hand will the "newbie" change what they are doing? Will they change after losing two hands or many? Is there "reason" or some kind of logic concerning the bet selection being used? So while for any individual hand the experienced player and newbie odds will always be the same, the experienced player may realise over time (a few shoes even) singles and two's will fall in an abundance, or that long streaks are less likely than short runs, or they may readily accept what pattern or percentage of patterns that they are willing to lose a series of bets too. So while each players odds are the same and all bet selections resolve to a 50/50 state, overall the experienced player takes more knowledge to table, either through prior table action or via testing, they should have all aspects of their monetary moves well rehearsed and already mapped out

[Archer]

For an individual hand this is true. However if you lose the hand will the "newbie" change what they are doing? Will they change after losing two hands or many? Is there "reason" or some kind of logic concerning the bet selection being used? So while for any individual hand the experienced player and newbie odds will always be the same, the experienced player may realise over time (a few shoes even) singles and two's will fall in an abundance, or that long streaks are less likely than short runs, or they may readily accept what pattern or percentage of patterns that they are willing to lose a series of bets too. So while each players odds are the same and all bet selections resolve to a 50/50 state, overall the experienced player takes more knowledge to table, either through prior table action or via testing, they should have all aspects of their monetary moves well rehearsed and already mapped out

I really hate to waste commenting here but don't you see the basic contradictions of your statements? A 50-50 game is a 50-50 game whether or not you bet the 2nd or third line or 5th line or . . . On one hand you state bet selection is of no consequence while on the other you seem to advocate betting the run lengths that are more abundant (1's and 2's). The only difference in outcome is bet frequency. By example: betting 2>2 will not win anymore or less than 2>3. The only difference is you get more chances to bet 2<2 than if you wait for a run of 5 and bet 5<5.

Again you "LYAO" at those who bet the trend. Why? Isn't realizing "over time (a few shoes even) singles and two's will fall in an abundance, or that long streaks are less likely than short runs" basically betting the trend? It makes no difference whether or not you bet the trend or the anti-trend or switch or whatever. A 50-50 game is just that and no more.

Bet placements are always going to be all about breaking up losses in a row when using any progression and tailoring ones bankroll and progression to overcome those uncommon but inevitable down turn. Bets, as Seth and others have stated ad nauseum, are all about winning more big bets than small bets.

Ask soxfan (or maybe former sox fan after last season). At some point you got to reach into your pocket and make a bet(s) to get out of a hole. How you want to do that is up to you.

Archer

[Archer]

Also, Frits Dunki-Jacobs tried to do this and had an interesting concept using (he said) algorithms to break up losses in a row and parallel those losses with a bet progression in order to come up with a purely mechanical method. Neat idea but . . . no cigar! Like Ellis he comes up with a new and improved grid every time he gets a batch of losing shoes.

A

[soxfan]

All bet selection is 50-50 and can only be described as attempting to identify some TREND(old/ftl), or random style like z or zz, hey hey.

[swami]

I think there is something missing from this discussion, and that is called "Drift," by Stetson Baily. What this means is this: draw a straight horizontal line. Now take your pen and draw half circles above and below that line. The half circle above represents your winning curve. The half circle below represents your losing curve, that is the time that you will lose more bets than you win. Your play will continually follow these patterns. In other words, your BS is subject to drift, no matter what you do.

An experienced player has a huge advantage over the Newbie. He has seen it all, fallen into all the traps, made all the mistakes, lost his bankroll and his discipline, and because of that he has learned how not to make those mistakes again, or he is no longer a player. He is very aware of drift and how it affects his BR. He knows when to increase and when to lay off. That is why almost all experienced players are never playing every hand, but more like 50%. There is a huge difference in betting trends and looking at winning and loosing situations. When I look at a shoe, I always chart. When I like what I see, I bet, and when things are not going well, I do not.

So, now the trenders will say, "See you are trending as well." True to a point, but I am not in the business of basing my game only on these trends. I call it using judgement. Well, if it is a 50-50 call, how does good judgement come into it? Look at drift. Wins and losses come and go in the ebbs and flows of drift. And drift is as sure as bankruptcy for countries that overspend. It cannot be avoided. Experienced players know this, look for it and take advantage of it. I never get wrapped up in the drama of the moment. Whatever happens, wins or losses, I stay calm, analyze, and make decisions. And often that decision is to go to the bathroom. I can wait for my chance. There is always another game, another hand, another bet, and I do not HAVE to win or get even right now. It is just one bet out of hundreds, and has little effect on my long term winnings.

Drift will always come in my favor and always come against me. I do not know how long it will last. But while I am above the line, I will win. And when the drift goes below the line, I have patience. And this is a big problem with systems and MM that are written in stone. Great when drift is for you, and you get your butt handed to you the rest of the time. love,swami

[Archer]

I am a big fan of Bailey myself. Another way of looking at drift is simply losses in a row. IOW, in a 50-50 game flat bet we will break even (sin commission). So all we have to is bet a NP 1,2 for LW. It's the "drift" that ruins us, not the commission because we will drift into more losses than wins. So any NP wins until we hit the wall of table max. Incidentally, Seth made an astute comment when he mentioned casinos regulating that max bet. 5-500 is a big difference compared to 10-500 or 25-500. As Seth said, casinos are afraid of progressive bettors! But I digress.

I don't object to leaving a game due to stop loss or win. Particularly for "mental health" reasons. But ultimately our wins are a function of hands per hour. If our goal is $ per hour then this becomes very important. Stop win or loss cannot hurt and may help - same with trending or bet placement.

IMO, a mistake that many of us make is increasing our bet to a much higher level then necessary which will make us hit our or the casinos wall too quickly - it puts us into the position of reducing our units and trying to make up large unit losses with small units. Consider that a NP 1234 makes us bet 400% of our base. Fine if your bankroll, your stomach and casino max can handle it but unnecessary. One thing we see from Bailey is that even an increase of 20% over our losing bets will provide plenty of profit.

"Drift will always come in my favor and always come against me. I do not know how long it will last. But while I am above the line, I will win. And when the drift goes below the line, I have patience. And this is a big problem with systems and MM that are written in stone. Great when drift is for you, and you get your butt handed to you the rest of the time. love,swami"

No matter what we are going to have to time our increased bets to overcome those losing strings. Our advantage is that most L strings are short and we cannot lose forever.

Archer

[gr8player]

IMO, a mistake that many of us make is increasing our bet to a much higher level then necessary which will make us hit our or the casinos wall too quickly - it puts us into the position of reducing our units and trying to make up large unit losses with small units. Consider that a NP 1234 makes us bet 400% of our base. Fine if your bankroll, your stomach and casino max can handle it but unnecessary. One thing we see from Bailey is that even an increase of 20% over our losing bets will provide plenty of profit.

Yes. Keen observation, A.

Those that are in a "rush to recoup" from their downward variances/drifts will, ultimately, fall prey to the casino's/their own betting limits.

Patience is a virtue, both outside and inside the casino. One's MM plan should account for the "worst case" scenario, and leave the player the very necessary "room" for recoup. How?:

By utilizing more than one progression.

Look, we have "anti" plays, we have "follow" plays, we have various trend plays. No reason not to have a couple of progressions to handle each different trending scenario. And, if you can construct those progressions around the variance/drift of each of those trending scenarios, I'm prepared to call it PERFECTION!

There's no law against using your brain at the tables. That's just as important as your BS and your MM. Tailor your selections, tailor your bet amounts, tailor your play around the current table conditions and your current results from same. And don't get caught "chasing" in a single linear progression. Don't be afraid to "mix it up". Use your brain. It's free.

Easy-peasy, no?

[Egalite]

A 50-50 game is a 50-50 game whether or not you bet the 2nd or third line or 5th line or . . . On one hand you state bet selection is of no consequence while on the other you seem to advocate betting the run lengths that are more abundant (1's and 2's). The only difference in outcome is bet frequency. By example: betting 2>2 will not win anymore or less than 2>3. The only difference is you get more chances to bet 2<2 than if you wait for a run of 5 and bet 5<5.

For any one individual hand, it is always a 50-50 shot, nobody is disputing that. However there is the FOO (Frequency of Occurrence), I suggest this is well proven. Singles and doubles will outstrip triples inside a few shoes, streaks ending at 4, 5 should outstrip streaks ending at 6 inside a few shoes if not a single shoe. The key is "the factor" how many streaks will end at 3 and 4 compared to those ending at 6. How many single and doubles compared to streaks that end at 3. Also keeping bets low, if I hit a shoe that starts with a 3 by 3 pattern 3 times, my next bet is 1 UNIT, if I hit a double six streak, my next bet is 3 UNITS.

Obviously I'm expecting and most probably hoping to see some streaks end at 4 and 5, but you just never know in games of random outcomes, however just in case I hit some shoe from hell and encounter 4 x streaks of six and NO streaks ending at 4 or 5, I can still handle that by shifting my Labochere strings and my next bet would still be less than 5 UNITS. If all I get in a single session is streak lengths of six or more with nothing stopping at 4 or 5, I guess I would be in trouble.

My philosophy is thus; if you have $10 or $10,000 on the table, your odds never change in regards to winning or losing the next bet. While deep progressions may be useful in cancelling a bunch of prior losses, I rather avoid any "inevitable" string of losses putting that far into the hole in the first place. For the keen eyed, yes I use multiple banks, just as described in that old Garcia method, albeit heavily tweaked.

[swami]

Sometimes there are gems hidden in posts. I would suggest that punters look carefully here. There is a LOT of very important and valuable information. Like multiple strings of BR, not betting in troubled times, not being locked in to one system with no latitude, making intelligent decisions (and even knowing what an intelligent decision is). The pro always stays mentally ahead of the casino. At the very first sign of you not knowing exactly what you are doing, get out of the game. Far too many punters are too concerned about winning or getting even "right Now." My rule is always: If there is pressure on the bet (meaning I HAVE to win it) I do not ever ever make it. love, swami