2018 start

[Bill Yung]

Mickey did I read this correctly: you found a one minute play that's worth $15, and isn't that $900 an hour?

Yep, that's right. The seat time is worth $900 an hour. I think I get about 2 hours seat time a year on that play.

I hope Mr Boz saw this.

This ought to be interesting. High variance in stories.

[MaxPen]

None of that should matter going forward. If someone had a situation where they had 10 million in EV in a few hours of time betting. Now suddenly that opportunity dried up, and yet they broke even. That doesn't mean they will somehow run really well on other stuff in the future and make 10 million.

Thank you for a sensible answer.

Just to be clear...despite what he thinks, the fact that he played many hands with an advantage on the day that he lost
has absolutely no effect on his future results.

He did not accumulate EV...that is not possible.

Is that correct?

Let's not forget he never said how much EV he accumulated. That 8800 probably doesn't represent the EV he had at that time.

I think someone can explain it much better than I can.

It would be nice to be able to sell accumulated EV, even for a discount.

I will sell all of mine at 80% face value on each day that it is created.

















* Disclaimer-I will not reimburse you for what the casino steals.

[kewlJ]

Ok, let's talk about "accumulated EV" since Axel and some others don't seem to like that term.

In Blackjack card counting AP, your real positive situations (+EV) is the max bets counts, or strong plus counts, where the player has an advantage of 3-4%. What happens on these hands are going to determine whether you win or lose for the session, day, week, and year. That's where your results REALLY come from, not what happens on all the neutral, slightly negative or even slightly positive counts.

So let's say I max bet $400 when I have a 3% advantage. These are my max bets counts. And $400 x 3% advantage is $12. Each of these max bet counts is worth $12 in EV, or win expectation of $12. (more with higher advantages)

So when you have a winning day it is because you won more of these max bet opportunities that you lost. And when you have a losing day, it is because you lost more of these max bet opportunities than you won. Simple enough right? So the goal is to get as many of these opportunities as possible. That is why I jump tables to better opportunities.

So on a day like Alan is dwelling on that I lose $8800 or any amount really, it is likely I lost more of these max bet opportunities. On a big losing day...probably most of these opportunities.

But given enough trials, you eventually HAVE to win you fair share. The math GUARANTEES this! It might not be that day, or the next day, or even the next week. Losing periods like that are not uncommon, as a matter of fact they are quite common in blackjack. But say over 25-30 max bet opportunities a day, at a 3-4% advantage, over 250-300 days a year, the math will work. And that is what accumulating EV really is about.

Each max bet opportunity is worth $12-$16, occasionally $20 at higher true counts and advantage. Your results for a day, a week, won't necessarily match this accumulated EV, but over the long run, and we can debate what long run is, but over a year, actual results will come pretty close to this accumulated EV. It has to mathematically. Arguing that it won't is arguing against the math, something a few people here seem to do regularly. They might as well be arguing the earth is flat.

I am NOT a math guy, so I don't do a great job of explaining the math. It's hard enough for me to just understand it and sometimes I don't. Fortunately, you don't have to be a Math Wiz, to benefit from the math. Guys like Shackleford and Schlesinger and Wattenberger and his software do the work for me. But the math works. And people like Alan that are denying the math are denying reality. Just like the 18 y.o.'s in a row all over again.

[Alan Mendelson]

Ok, let's talk about "accumulated EV" since Axel and some others don't seem to like that term.

In Blackjack card counting AP, your real positive situations (+EV) is the max bets counts, or strong plus counts, where the player has an advantage of 3-4%. What happens on these hands are going to determine whether you win or lose for the session, day, week, and year. That's where your results REALLY come from, not what happens on all the neutral, slightly negative or even slightly positive counts.

So let's say I max bet $400 when I have a 3% advantage. These are my max bets counts. And $400 x 3% advantage is $12. Each of these max bet counts is worth $12 in EV, or win expectation of $12. (more with higher advantages)

So when you have a winning day it is because you won more of these max bet opportunities that you lost. And when you have a losing day, it is because you lost more of these max bet opportunities than you won. Simple enough right? So the goal is to get as many of these opportunities as possible. That is why I jump tables to better opportunities.

So on a day like Alan is dwelling on that I lose $8800 or any amount really, it is likely I lost more of these max bet opportunities. On a big losing day...probably most of these opportunities.

But given enough trials, you eventually HAVE to win you fair share. The math GUARANTEES this! It might not be that day, or the next day, or even the next week. Losing periods like that are not uncommon, as a matter of fact they are quite common in blackjack. But say over 25-30 max bet opportunities a day, at a 3-4% advantage, over 250-300 days a year, the math will work. And that is what accumulating EV really is about.

Each max bet opportunity is worth $12-$16, occasionally $20 at higher true counts and advantage. Your results for a day, a week, won't necessarily match this accumulated EV, but over the long run, and we can debate what long run is, but over a year, actual results will come pretty close to this accumulated EV. It has to mathematically. Arguing that it won't is arguing against the math, something a few people here seem to do regularly. They might as well be arguing the earth is flat.

Yeah. But the bottom line is you lost $8800.

Everything else sounds like a con artist telling his mark to ignore that his initial investment disappeared and that he should pour in more money because a big payday is coming. I helped put con artists in federal prison with that spiel as they bilked retirees out of their life savings in a mortgage investment scam.

[kewlJ]

Yeah. But the bottom line is you lost $8800.

THAT DAY I lost! Big woop. I am still ahead 3 grand total for the 10 days played this year! AND 600K over the last 8 years! AND just under a million dollars for my career!

I never claimed that I don't have losing days, weeks, months. Unfortunately they are all to frequent.

I don't know what it is you want from me Alan? I don't know what you are trying so hard to prove or disprove?

[mickeycrimm]

Mickey did I read this correctly: you found a one minute play that's worth $15, and isn't that $900 an hour?

Yep, that's right. The seat time is worth $900 an hour. I think I get about 2 hours seat time a year on that play.

I hope Mr Boz saw this.

Why?

[MaxPen]

Ok, let's talk about "accumulated EV" since Axel and some others don't seem to like that term.

In Blackjack card counting AP, your real positive situations (+EV) is the max bets counts, or strong plus counts, where the player has an advantage of 3-4%. What happens on these hands are going to determine whether you win or lose for the session, day, week, and year. That's where your results REALLY come from, not what happens on all the neutral, slightly negative or even slightly positive counts.

So let's say I max bet $400 when I have a 3% advantage. These are my max bets counts. And $400 x 3% advantage is $12. Each of these max bet counts is worth $12 in EV, or win expectation of $12. (more with higher advantages)

So when you have a winning day it is because you won more of these max bet opportunities that you lost. And when you have a losing day, it is because you lost more of these max bet opportunities than you won. Simple enough right? So the goal is to get as many of these opportunities as possible. That is why I jump tables to better opportunities.

So on a day like Alan is dwelling on that I lose $8800 or any amount really, it is likely I lost more of these max bet opportunities. On a big losing day...probably most of these opportunities.

But given enough trials, you eventually HAVE to win you fair share. The math GUARANTEES this! It might not be that day, or the next day, or even the next week. Losing periods like that are not uncommon, as a matter of fact they are quite common in blackjack. But say over 25-30 max bet opportunities a day, at a 3-4% advantage, over 250-300 days a year, the math will work. And that is what accumulating EV really is about.

Each max bet opportunity is worth $12-$16, occasionally $20 at higher true counts and advantage. Your results for a day, a week, won't necessarily match this accumulated EV, but over the long run, and we can debate what long run is, but over a year, actual results will come pretty close to this accumulated EV. It has to mathematically. Arguing that it won't is arguing against the math, something a few people here seem to do regularly. They might as well be arguing the earth is flat.

I am NOT a math guy, so I don't do a great job of explaining the math. It's hard enough for me to just understand it and sometimes I don't. Fortunately, you don't have to be a Math Wiz, to benefit from the math. Guys like Shackleford and Schlesinger and Wattenberger and his software do the work for me. But the math works. And people like Alan that are denying the math are denying reality. Just like the 18 y.o.'s in a row all over again.

I don't think Axel is disagreeing with anything you wrote there.

[mickeycrimm]

Ok, let's talk about "accumulated EV" since Axel and some others don't seem to like that term.

In Blackjack card counting AP, your real positive situations (+EV) is the max bets counts, or strong plus counts, where the player has an advantage of 3-4%. What happens on these hands are going to determine whether you win or lose for the session, day, week, and year. That's where your results REALLY come from, not what happens on all the neutral, slightly negative or even slightly positive counts.

So let's say I max bet $400 when I have a 3% advantage. These are my max bets counts. And $400 x 3% advantage is $12. Each of these max bet counts is worth $12 in EV, or win expectation of $12. (more with higher advantages)

So when you have a winning day it is because you won more of these max bet opportunities that you lost. And when you have a losing day, it is because you lost more of these max bet opportunities than you won. Simple enough right? So the goal is to get as many of these opportunities as possible. That is why I jump tables to better opportunities.

So on a day like Alan is dwelling on that I lose $8800 or any amount really, it is likely I lost more of these max bet opportunities. On a big losing day...probably most of these opportunities.

But given enough trials, you eventually HAVE to win you fair share. The math GUARANTEES this! It might not be that day, or the next day, or even the next week. Losing periods like that are not uncommon, as a matter of fact they are quite common in blackjack. But say over 25-30 max bet opportunities a day, at a 3-4% advantage, over 250-300 days a year, the math will work. And that is what accumulating EV really is about.

Each max bet opportunity is worth $12-$16, occasionally $20 at higher true counts and advantage. Your results for a day, a week, won't necessarily match this accumulated EV, but over the long run, and we can debate what long run is, but over a year, actual results will come pretty close to this accumulated EV. It has to mathematically. Arguing that it won't is arguing against the math, something a few people here seem to do regularly. They might as well be arguing the earth is flat.

Yeah. But the bottom line is you lost $8800.

Everything else sounds like a con artist telling his mark to ignore that his initial investment disappeared and that he should pour in more money because a big payday is coming. I helped put con artists in federal prison with that spiel as they bilked retirees out of their life savings in a mortgage investment scam.

If you look at his results for a year he did not lose $8800 but won something like $100,000. That's what you are not getting, Alan.

[kewlJ]

If you look at his results for a year he did not lose $8800 but won something like $100,000

Actually I didn't. My half of my blackjack partnership was 62k. I contributed only 58k. (I did have a bit of other non-BJ AP earnings)

A down year. I was not only low man on my two man blackjack team, but I was not top earner in my household. But in my defense, I did miss 2 months with the heart surgery.

[AxelWolf]

Ok, let's talk about "accumulated EV" since Axel and some others don't seem to like that term.

In Blackjack card counting AP, your real positive situations (+EV) is the max bets counts, or strong plus counts, where the player has an advantage of 3-4%. What happens on these hands are going to determine whether you win or lose for the session, day, week, and year. That's where your results REALLY come from, not what happens on all the neutral, slightly negative or even slightly positive counts.

So let's say I max bet $400 when I have a 3% advantage. These are my max bets counts. And $400 x 3% advantage is $12. Each of these max bet counts is worth $12 in EV, or win expectation of $12. (more with higher advantages)

So when you have a winning day it is because you won more of these max bet opportunities that you lost. And when you have a losing day, it is because you lost more of these max bet opportunities than you won. Simple enough right? So the goal is to get as many of these opportunities as possible. That is why I jump tables to better opportunities.

So on a day like Alan is dwelling on that I lose $8800 or any amount really, it is likely I lost more of these max bet opportunities. On a big losing day...probably most of these opportunities.

But given enough trials, you eventually HAVE to win you fair share. The math GUARANTEES this! It might not be that day, or the next day, or even the next week. Losing periods like that are not uncommon, as a matter of fact they are quite common in blackjack. But say over 25-30 max bet opportunities a day, at a 3-4% advantage, over 250-300 days a year, the math will work. And that is what accumulating EV really is about.

Each max bet opportunity is worth $12-$16, occasionally $20 at higher true counts and advantage. Your results for a day, a week, won't necessarily match this accumulated EV, but over the long run, and we can debate what long run is, but over a year, actual results will come pretty close to this accumulated EV. It has to mathematically. Arguing that it won't is arguing against the math, something a few people here seem to do regularly. They might as well be arguing the earth is flat.

I am NOT a math guy, so I don't do a great job of explaining the math. It's hard enough for me to just understand it and sometimes I don't. Fortunately, you don't have to be a Math Wiz, to benefit from the math. Guys like Shackleford and Schlesinger and Wattenberger and his software do the work for me. But the math works. And people like Alan that are denying the math are denying reality. Just like the 18 y.o.'s in a row all over again.

I don't think Axel is disagreeing with anything you wrote there.

Can someone get rid of this Kyke guy?

OF COURSE NOT. He just described a very basic rundown of something that's been described many times before and anyone who's not retarded should be able to comprehend.... How and where your EV comes from and how things should look in the long run.

Can /do you accumulate EV is an entirely different puzzle. I can see how many people could start to get confused when someone uses that term. It starts to imply dueness and other wacky concepts.

things seem to average out, but they almost never truly do, they just keep getting closer and closer so close where it doesn't really matter much. I doubt KJ will know on his deathbed if he's up or down 8800 from his EV since that 8800 will be a minuscule percentage.

[tableplay]

good explanation from someone else on a different forum on long term convergence:
in a coin flip, heads/tails converges, heads=tails does not,
i.e., the ratio 1,000,000/1,010,000 is close to one but 1,000,000 is not close to 1,010,000,
it is off by 10,000. 2,000,000/2,015,000 is closer to one, yet it is off by 15,000. When you
gamble, the ratio of heads to tails means nothing, but the difference between the number of
heads and the number of tails is everything.

[Alan Mendelson]

Why? Because Mr Boz claimed I created the $900 an hour figure while all I did was use the math for your return for one minute. Go back in this thread and read the exchange.

I am well aware that no matter what I say I will be challenged. Even when I agree with MisterV for example about DI schools even he challenges me.

[Alan Mendelson]

Yeah. But the bottom line is you lost $8800.

THAT DAY I lost! Big woop. I am still ahead 3 grand total for the 10 days played this year! AND 600K over the last 8 years! AND just under a million dollars for my career!

I never claimed that I don't have losing days, weeks, months. Unfortunately they are all to frequent.

I don't know what it is you want from me Alan? I don't know what you are trying so hard to prove or disprove?

You lost but you still claim that the EV of playing with the $8800 loss will still make you a winner. Do you realize yet how ridiculous that is? You can't lose cash and claim to be a winner at the same time.

Had you simply said I played my best game but had a losing day there wouldn't be this discussion about the real world value of EV, and by the way what is its real world value? LOL

Second point: you rejected a stop loss so you wouldn't lose all $8800 claiming the EV will make you a winner. I don't care what your long term theory says, you could have walked out after losing $2000 or as regnis suggested you could have walked after losing $4000.

Were you unable to get up and walk out? You of all people who plays for a job should value every dollar.

Me? I have a pension plan that alone is worth triple what your lifetime wins are. And social security is icing on the cake as is my health insurance for life.

You'll argue that you never know when the cards will change for you. Well they didn't change when you were down $2,000 and they didn't change when you were down $5,000 and they didn't change when you were down $8,000.

Put your theory aside and think about reality sometime. The whole world can't depend on theory. Meanwhile bills don't get paid with EV.

[RS__]

I put a down payment on two houses, invested a relatively small amount into cryptos which is now worth a lot more than what it was (still not huge though), pay bills & expenses, and more.....because I follow the math and moreso ignore the day to day trivial wins and losses. So.....yeah, generating EV does pay the bills, and more!

[Alan Mendelson]

Bullshit. EV has no real world value.

[kewlJ]

Alan, I thank you for your 'advice' on how to generate income as a professional blackjack player.

In the 8 years since I have lived and played Vegas fulltime I have earned a profit of over $781,000 from advantage play, $587,000 of that from blackjack play. Being that YOU have earned $0 profit from advantage play ("never had a winning year"), you will forgive me if I keep doing it my way....which actually isn't "my way" at all, but the way all successful blackjack advantage players operate.

As far as your pension plan. Good for you. Sincerely, I am happy you have a nice retirement. You are 70 years old and I am half that. Don't compare where we are at in our retirement financial position.

[kewlJ]

So.....yeah, generating EV does pay the bills, and more!

Bullshit. EV has no real world value.

I have received 2 different mortgages in the last 8 years. When I walk into a financial institution with no job and walk out with a mortgage, that is the financial institution knowing that the EV that I generate turns into real dollars and acknowledging that "expected value" has real world value.

Why is it that every one of your arguments, it is you and your view against the opinion of the entire rest of the world? It is always "you are right and the entire rest of the world is wrong". I have known you (online) for about 6 months, but I suspect this "you are right and everyone else is wrong" dilemma has been a lifelong thing with you.

[RS__]

"Trust me, I saw 18 yo's in a row"
"That's BS, no way you can count two tables at once! I demand proof!"
"You can't get a 10%+ advantage, show me the proof!"
"That never happened, I want concrete proof!"
"You're just gonna have to believe me, I saw someone roll 18 yos in a row! I saw it with my own two eyes, that's proof!"

Alan is mentally retarded.

[kewlJ]

I am sure this will fall on deaf ears (or I guess blind eyes) as far as Alan. He sees and acknowledges what he wants to. But, I have spent the last hour or so, looking over my records for 2017.

I had 7 days that I lost $8000 or more (4 of $10k).

Alan proposes a stop limit of $2000. I had 58 days that I was down $2000 or more after one or two sessions. 19 of those days I finished the day in the black. 6 of those days down $2000 early, I finished up $5000 or more!

The total win from those 19 winning days (after being down $2000 or more) was $62,637.50.

Let me say that again. I won $62,637.50 on those days that I was down $2000 or more and continued playing and turned into winning days. Had I stopped playing at some sort of artificial "stop limit" of $2000, those 19 days would have generated a loss of $38,000.

That is exactly a $100,000 swing. ($100,637.50 to be exact)

Now in addition to those 19 days that I was down $2000 and turned into winning days, I had 22 days that I was down $2000 and ended up losing for the day, but losing less than $2000. (Losses of somewhere between $1 and $1999). Those losses on these 22 days that were less than $2000 represent a win of $23,175.

So lets add that to the total. That is winnings of $123,812.50 after being down $2000 or more early in the day.

Now for the negative. 17 days that I was initially down $2000 or more, ended up with a total loss of more than $2000. The total losses greater than $2000 are $85,425.

Subtracting $85,425 (additional losses) from $123,812.50 winning....that is a grand total of a profit of $38,387.50 I profited $38,387.50 because I didn't employ a stop limit and kept playing..

Any questions Alan? I don't know how I can make it any clearer that when you are playing with and advantage (advantage player), you do not stop playing because of some short term losses. The more you play...the more you will win in the long term.

I expect you will come back with some sort of "voodoo" money management strategy that is either of your own or Singer's but you are Flat out wrong. When you are playing at an advantage, you want to get in as much play as you can. Stop limits are only beneficial for negative expectation play (losing players). Period! End of conversation.

[Alan Mendelson]

Bullshit. No bank ever gave a mortgage based on EV. Stop your nonsense.