Would the following spread be enough to give me an edge in a 2 deck game? I would bet the minimum ($5) on negative counts, bet $10 on neutral counts, and increase the bet as the count goes up, but make my maximum bet $25. If $25 was not enough, what would my max bet need to be? Using this betting procedure, what kind of spread would I need in a 6 deck shoe?
It should give you an edge, but a very small one. Also, betting $10 at neutral counts will increase your variance but not help you win more. You would be better off betting $5 at both negative and neutral counts.
Your spread should be determined by factors such as what the casino will tolerate, table limits, your bankroll and your tolerance for risk. Having said that, a 1:8 spread is often recommended for double deck and 1:12 for six decks.
If you keep your minimum bet at $5 then a 1:8 spread would mean a max bet of $40. The bigger your max bet, the bigger the bankroll you need to play at a comfortable level of risk. If you can lower your minimum bet, then a $3-$24 spread would be better than what you suggested (you could try $2-$24 at six deck). If you can't lower your minimum bet and you don't have the bankroll to raise your max bet then you will need to find a better game or avoid negative counts.
Always try to avoid or bet the least amount possible in neutral and negative counts. If $25 is the most you want to bet, place it at a tc of 3 or more. I would stay with DD for now and not try to take on the shoe yet.
good luck.
$5 in negative AND neutral counts...then bet $15 at +2 and $25 at +3 HiLo giving a 1-5 spread. If rules and pen are good you'd have a decent edge. To play shoes you can use a smiliar spread (a $3 minimum would be better) except that you'll need to wong out at -1 HiLo.
What if I used a 1-5 spread on a 6 deck game in AC? (DAS, S17) Do I at least break even? Or would that not be enough to overcome the initial casino edge?
(1 unit on negative and neutral counts, 2 on TC+1, 3 on TC+2, 4 on TC+3, 5 on anything greater)
Yes, you have a positive EV, but it is tiny, so you would need a huge BR to overcome variance and avoid ruin. Assuming 6/8 Pen with the specified rules and spread, you would need a BR of $9 K for $5 units, $17.5K for $10 units and $44K for $25 units in order to get an acceptable (13.5%) ROR.
In other words, with a $25 unit, you would need a BR of $44K and would make about $6 per 100 hands, or $3.50 per hour.
On the other hand, if you fly to Vegas and find a SD, H17 game with 26 card penetration, then a $10K bank will allow you to play $25 units (1-4 spread) and make $37 per 100 hands (@$46 per hour) with the same 13.5% ROR.
When I play with a smaller spread. Doesn't that decrease the variance on my play? I mainly just want to be able to get my money's worth when I sit down to play and have a good time, so a low ROR is #1 priority. (well, behind having at least a small edge)
The numbers I gave you were from BJRM and they factor in the reduced variance from a lower spread. I will let one of the math experts explain it better, but the basic idea is that the EV is so low, that it takes a significant BR to overcome the variance. The only ways to lower both variance and required BR (for a given ROR), are by wonging in/out, or by finding a game that offers surrender (which I understand is illegal in AC, but is common in alot of other places).
If you use a 1-20 spread, then your required BR for $10 units at 13.5% ROR is $17K, and your EV/100 hands is $16. It is true that your short term results will swing more wildly with a 1-20 spread than they will with a 1-5 spread, but the increased EV from the 1-20 spread overcomes the increased variance resulting in a lower ROR.
I think a lot of advantage players start out just wanting to break even. The trouble is, in order to break even you need to spread your bets which, as you said, increases your variance. It really isn't much fun going to all the trouble of learning to count and enduring swing of several hundred dollars, just to win small change per hour.
If your happy to win small change per hour then you should be happy to lose small change per hour - and you can do this with far less variance by flat-betting the minimum at the best game you can find. With comps you could even come out ahead.
If you really want to beat the casino, give 'em everything you've got.
Thanks. I know what you mean now. 1% edge with a 1-10 spread has a smaller ROR than 0.01% edge with 1-4 spread. (Or something like it?)
Alright, back to practicing then.
Magician... what would you think of an idea of occationaly placing a max bet (hmm... or even higher?) at neutral and +1 counts as a cover play? After all, this would be a theoreticaly "free" play that could significantly extend your longevity at the casino. This is an idea I've been kicking around for a while, but have yet to implement.
index
a "break-even" game. The long run for "break-even" will be so long that it might take you 10 years of play to have an 80% chance of breaking even. You should try and play a winning game and you'll really have a much better chance of actually breaking even.
...orginally by the "Silver Fox", Ralph Stricker. It's called "opposition betting", and is covered fairly extensively in the Bishop's BBBJ. Wagering over your max, or even your max with this scheme is definitely not recommended, as this ploy is plenty costly as is.
ANS
...we weren't even accounting for mistakes, cover plays, tips, expenses, etc. which turn that "break-even" game into a losing proposition.
Let's take a look. I picked a 3.0/4.0 S17, DAS game with an optimum 1:12 play-all spread. With a $10K bankroll and $10 units we will win about $30/hour with a 6.5% ROR. If we place a max bet at TC=0 about 1/12 of the time, our average bet at TC=0 increases from 1 to 2 and the result is we will win only about $1/hour less but with a 8.5% ROR. (DI*DI drops from 42 to 36.)
So although this play is almost free in the EV sense, it does bad things to your ROR. Everyone has different needs for cover, but I prefer the kind that has nothing to do with the way I bet or play.
Making a max bet, even if the count doesn't call for it, may just draw attention to you anyway. One thing you could do is instead of betting exactly (say) $50 at a particular count, sometimes bet $40 and sometimes bet $60. As long as you average $50 the impact should be negligible.
How can the ev on this wager ever result in loss??
index
