The rollercoaster that is professional card counting.

[jbjb]

$29K isn't bumpy?

Depends. To someone with a $100k roll, sure. To a team with a multi-million dollar roll, no.

[Moses]

Depends. To someone with a $100k roll, sure. To a team with a multi-million dollar roll, no.

You can add a 0 to the roll for me and the cheese would start sliding of my cracker.

[kewlJ]

Depends. To someone with a $100k roll, sure. To a team with a multi-million dollar roll, no.

You can add a 0 to the roll for me and the cheese would start sliding of my cracker.

Unlike jbjb (an/or his team), I don't have a million dollar bankroll. But I do have more than 100k. I don't know what it is fair to say my bankroll is.

My buddy Kim Lee used to tell me a players entire wealth was his bankroll. And I used to argue like hell with him. Now I am not so sure he isn't right.

I start every year with 100k in funds that I designate as my BR. I break the BR from the previous year, reset to 100k, placing any excess into my personal funds. If I were to have a losing year, which hasn't occurred, I would replenish to that starting 100k from personal funds.

So, start every year at 100k. If I were to lose that during the course of the year, which has never come close to happening, I could easily replenshible to a second 100k. If necessary, I could go a 3rd 100k, but it would require liquidating some things, maybe taking a mortgage )loan) on property. I could probably come close to a 4th but that would really be deep into selling off everything.

Now would I do that? That used to be my argument with Kim Lee, that a player wouldn't really do that. Now I don't know what the answer is. That is one of those things you can't really answer until you are in that situation. I can tell you this much....I believe in the math, so much that I would risk everything I had on the math.

BUT, the math also say losing 2, 3, 100k BR's can't happen. Mathematically impossible stuff. So while I would be willing to do it because I believe in the math, believing in the math also means that this scenario couldn't happen. So if the impossible happened and I lost say 2 different 100k BR's, I would have to take a serious look, a re-evaluate and try to figure out what the F*** is going on. Was I being cheated? Had I developed holes in my game? Had the game changed in a manner that I had not accounted for? Had I lost all discipline and was somehow chasing losses (this is related to hole's in my game).

Anyway, I can tell you this, a 29k loss seems like one hell of a lot, if you say you are playing to a 100k BR. But look in context. I was in the second half of a year that I was already almost 130k ahead! Much further ahead than expectation. In that context, while it still burns, it almost seems more like "a correction".

I'll tell you the year that was much more difficult for me was 2013. I began the year with my 100k BR and immediately went red. By Mid April I was 32K (I believe) in the red. That is a third of my bankroll...well at least what I call my bankroll. I was debating whether it was time, to reduce my spread and max bet as real Kelly wagering calls for. I have never had to do that and frankly the idea of trying to "win back" losses with reduced spread and max bets seems a nightmare scenario.

So I decided to press on for a bit more. I set 40k as the amount that I would have to resize. Well never hit 40k. as a matter of fact, I have already mentioned my 2013 once today. It was at this point that I went on this 110k massive run in 5 weeks! Just imagine if I had resized to half my spread and max bet? OMG!

[Moses]

I can tell you this much....I believe in the math, so much that I would risk everything I had on the math.

BUT, the math also say losing 2, 3, 100k BR's can't happen. Mathematically impossible stuff. So while I would be willing to do it because I believe in the math, believing in the math also means that this scenario couldn't happen. So if the impossible happened and I lost say 2 different 100k BR's, I would have to take a serious look, a re-evaluate and try to figure out what the F*** is going on. Was I being cheated? Had I developed holes in my game? Had the game changed in a manner that I had not accounted for? Had I lost all discipline and was somehow chasing losses (this is related to hole's in my game).

Anyway, I can tell you this, a 29k loss seems like one hell of a lot, if you say you are playing to a 100k BR. But look in context. I was in the second half of a year that I was already almost 130k ahead! Much further ahead than expectation. In that context, while it still burns, it almost seems more like "a correction".

Okay. Here is the math. 20 sessions a week of your game and your control. Win 60%. A win is $500. A loss is $500. Play 50 weeks a year. The averages and percentages work themselves out. Voila - $100k annually without the volatility.

But to lose $29k in a week only to recover it all 3 months? Hard for a grown man able to drive a car, practice/play blackjack, and run sims to believe. Control your game or their game controls you.

[kewlJ]

Okay. Here is the math. 20 sessions a week of your game and your control. Win 60%. A win is $500. A loss is $500. Play 50 weeks a year. The averages and percentages work themselves out. Voila - $100k annually without the volatility.

But to lose $29k in a week only to recover it all 3 months? Hard for a grown man able to drive a car, practice/play blackjack, and run sims to believe. Control your game or their game controls you.

That is the math? Where are you getting your math....The Rob Singer school of alternative math? I mean seriously 60% win...where did that come from? A win of $500 and losses of $500? Only number you posted that looks close to right to me is about 50 weeks in a year.


Let me share my math with you. Real blackjack math!

I play 70,000 to 100,000 rounds of blackjack a year. Lets say 80,000 to make it easy. Since I play almost exclusively one spot, no need to add anything there. so 80,000 rounds. My average bet is a bit complicated because I use different spreads, ramps and top bets, but lets make it real easy and say average bet of $100. It is really somewhat more than that. So 80,000 rounds at average bet of $100 = $8,000,000. I put roughly 8 million dollars into play a year.


My total advantage is slightly more than 1% because of aggressive wong outs of negative counts and tracking multiple tables, resulting in higher than average number of max bet opportunities, but, let's round off low to 1%.

$8,000,000 x 1% (advantage) is roughly $80,000. That is my expected win for the year roughly $80,000.


Ok next is variance. I assume you know the standard formula. Average bet ($100) x 1.15 = $115 x square root of number of rounds played

Square root of 80,000 rounds is 282.84. 282.84 x 1.15 = $32,526 That is one standard deviation.

So my annual expected win is $80,000, but anything $32,526 below or above that would be within one standard deviation. Or completely normal. so any result for the year between $47,474 and $112, 526, would be within one standard deviation or very normal. Results should fall in this range 65% of the time. Anything 2 standard deviations above or below would also be considered pretty normal (should occur 95% of the time).

So my results have been within 1 standard deviation 13 of my 15 years. And the other 2 years were within 2 standard deviations, 1 below and 1 above.

Now I am not really a math guy. I use the math that other people came up with. But that is the real math of blackjack card counting as it relates to my play. I mean I do things like multiple bet spreads, and max bets that increases variance, and probably changes my numbers from someone playing a more traditional spread, ramp, but, basically, you get the drift.

So THAT is the math, not this 60% winning sessions? where does that come from? session win rate means nothing. Session win rate can be manipulated if that is important to you. Take martingale for instance. You will end up with many small winning sessions and a few much larger losing ones. Means nothing. So lets stick to the real math.

[Moses]

Okay. Here is the math. 20 sessions a week of your game and your control. Win 60%. A win is $500. A loss is $500. Play 50 weeks a year. The averages and percentages work themselves out. Voila - $100k annually without the volatility.

But to lose $29k in a week only to recover it all 3 months? Hard for a grown man able to drive a car, practice/play blackjack, and run sims to believe. Control your game or their game controls you.

That is the math? Where are you getting your math....The Rob Singer school of alternative math? I mean seriously 60% win...where did that come from? A win of $500 and losses of $500? Only number you posted that looks close to right to me is about 50 weeks in a year.


Let me share my math with you. Real blackjack math!

I play 70,000 to 100,000 rounds of blackjack a year. Lets say 80,000 to make it easy. Since I play almost exclusively one spot, no need to add anything there. so 80,000 rounds. My average bet is a bit complicated because I use different spreads, ramps and top bets, but lets make it real easy and say average bet of $100. It is really somewhat more than that. So 80,000 rounds at average bet of $100 = $8,000,000. I put roughly 8 million dollars into play a year.


My total advantage is slightly more than 1% because of aggressive wong outs of negative counts and tracking multiple tables, resulting in higher than average number of max bet opportunities, but, let's round off low to 1%.

$8,000,000 v 1% (advantage) is roughly $80,000. That is my expected win for the year roughly $80,000.


Ok next is variance. I assume you know the standard formula. Average bet ($100) x 1.15 = $115 x square root of number of rounds played

Square root of 80,000 rounds is 282.84. 282.84 x 1.15 = $32,526 That is one standard deviation.

So my annual expected win is $80,000, but anything $32,526 below or above that would be within one standard deviation. Or completely normal. so any result for the year between $47,474 and $112, 526, would be within one standard deviation or very normal. Results should fall in this range 65% of the time. Anything 2 standard deviations above or below would also be considered pretty normal (should occur 95% of the time).

So my results have been within 1 standard deviation 13 of my 15 years. And the other 2 years were within 2 standard deviations, 1 below and 1 above.

Now I am not really a math guy. I use the math that other people came up with. But that is the real math of blackjack card counting as it relates to my play. I mean I do things like multiple bet spreads, and max bets that increases variance, and probably changes my numbers from someone playing a more traditional spread, ramp, but, basically, you get the drift.

So THAT is the math, not this 60% winning sessions? where does that come from? session win rate means nothing. Session win rate can be manipulated if that is important to you. Take martingale for instance. You will end up with many small winning sessions and a few much larger losing ones. Means nothing. So lets stick to the real math.

You are really over thinking it. 20 sessions 60% wins. is 12-8. or $2,000 a week. Spread over 5 casinos is $400 a week on average. i dont know what you mean by real math. But im not the one complaining about $29k losses in a week. Volatility might be breaking even for 3 weeks. But losing all 20 sessions is still only $10k. never happened. never close. You just played even for 5 months. BeCause you lost control for one weak.

[kewlJ]

You are really over thinking it. 20 sessions 60% wins. is 12-8. or $2,000 a week. Spread over 5 casinos is $400 a week on average. i dont know what you mean by real math. But im not the one complaining about $29k losses in a week. Volatility might be breaking even for 3 weeks. But losing all 20 sessions is still only $10k. never happened. never close. You just played even for 5 months. BeCause you lost control for one weak.

Ok, I tried, that's all I can do. You are way too far down voodoo lane for me to reason with.

[dannyj]

Okay. Here is the math. 20 sessions a week of your game and your control. Win 60%. A win is $500. A loss is $500. Play 50 weeks a year. The averages and percentages work themselves out. Voila - $100k annually without the volatility.

But to lose $29k in a week only to recover it all 3 months? Hard for a grown man able to drive a car, practice/play blackjack, and run sims to believe. Control your game or their game controls you.

That is the math? Where are you getting your math....The Rob Singer school of alternative math? I mean seriously 60% win...where did that come from? A win of $500 and losses of $500? Only number you posted that looks close to right to me is about 50 weeks in a year.


Let me share my math with you. Real blackjack math!

I play 70,000 to 100,000 rounds of blackjack a year. Lets say 80,000 to make it easy. Since I play almost exclusively one spot, no need to add anything there. so 80,000 rounds. My average bet is a bit complicated because I use different spreads, ramps and top bets, but lets make it real easy and say average bet of $100. It is really somewhat more than that. So 80,000 rounds at average bet of $100 = $8,000,000. I put roughly 8 million dollars into play a year.

KJ, dumb question. Do you use a players card at any stores in your rotation or would that just be like hanging a big target on your back? You probably already stated this long ago, but that's a lot of play to not get any PC benefits.

[kewlJ]

KJ, dumb question. Do you use a players card at any stores in your rotation or would that just be like hanging a big target on your back? You probably already stated this long ago, but that's a lot of play to not get any PC benefits.

Short answer no dannyj. I play blackjack unrated. The downside of playing rated is much greater than any benefit of points and offers. For one thing, reducing points and offers is usually the very first counter measure against a card counter who is a regular at a property. You know the pit rates players by skill level in addition to how much they win or lose and buy in for and cash out. Once the pit rates you as a skilled player, what you earn playing blackjack (in points and offers) becomes almost nothing, and it wasn't much to begin with.

There is exactly 1 place that I play rated playing blackjack. I play a break even game and a very small amount of play generates weekly free play and match play coupons, which is where my small amount of EV comes from. It is actually probably my lowest continuing weekly play (in terms of EV), but I just like the place, and the coffee shop (oh yeah, that small play also generates a free meal weekly), so I still hit it up. It worked better when my partner was alive and there were two of us, but I still hit it up.