joint bank question?

To anyone who can help me on a joint bank question, please email me at tjder23@aol.com. Thank you!!!

Table

Doesn't seem to be the type question that would give you away to the casinos and most of the knowlegable team players would probably be reluctant to allow their e-mail address to become known to an unknown.

Also, your area of need is vague which will probably limit the number of responses you get, and if you get bad advice, others will not see it to offer a correction.

And finally, others might learn from your question as well if you post.

I just usually ask people to email me, call it a force of habit i guess. Usually if i post on this website it is just a response, but i haven't been feeling too good for a long time either so maybe that is it too....LOL! So here it goes....I'm almost definite that i know the answer for this but i definitley wanted to find out for sure. Me and two others were planning on putting money together to play blackjack, we would all like to bet between $25 to $300. Now i say with minimal camouflage, that 30g's would be enough. But my two partners seem to think that in order for all of us to bet that way, we would need minimum of 75,000 to put our risk low. they say we would all have to put about 1000 units. I don't think so, because even if one or even two players are losing, and one even barely winning, we should be able to have the same risk as 1 person betting this way and with his or her own 1000 units, because we are getting 3 times the hands in per hour. I was wondering who is right here. I know a lot about blakjack, butalways played solo, never concentrated much on the team play stuff in all the books i read. Would appreciate any helpanyone could give me, thanks.

Table

Your total risk of ruin does not go up with 3 players because it is already based on infinite rounds played. 3X infinity is still infinity. As long as you play at different tables there is no difference than if it was only one player. Your friends are wrong. This is not an opinion on your amount of money or bet sizing. I'm just saying that you are not increasing ROR by having more players bet to the same criterion.

If you are making plans based on trip ruin then rate of play does have an effect. But I'm guessing that's not what you mean.

A solo player following the Kelly Criterion would react to losses by reducing bet size. I agree that the team has substantially the same ROR as the solo player, but only if the team follows the same procedure. Therefore, the three of you should touch base with each other a couple of times a day. If one of you has dropped a bundle, all three of you need to know about it so you can bet less.

Scheduling regular meetings facilitates the exchange of information and, when necessary, cash. It also provides the support system that's a nonmathematical benefit of team play. The wins are more fun and the losses are easier to take when they're shared this way.

A technicality: The ROR is "substantially" the same because the solo player could adjust bet sizes instantly. A team might find that, for a few hours, some of its members were overbetting the newly shrunken bankroll. The result would be a very slightly higher ROR for the team. You won't go far wrong by ignoring this factor.

in this case we are talking about a value predicted by a particular equation that does not include any resizing at all. It is a figure based on infinite hours at the same bet level.

Playing to an initial ROR and downsizing when half the bank is lost is generally sufficient. This requires for any player who has lost half his play stake to notify the team leader who can decide if resizing is in order. It is important to set up efficient methods of communication. When all are out playing at once it is best to have a call in time. Each can either call the leader's cell phone or voice mail and leave a report by 4pm. He just calls back their voice mail by 4:15 and tells them either to play on or to readjust bet sizes. Frequent intra-day team meetings that just eat up play hours should be avoided.

and the problem is trust. We put our $$ into a bucket and were doing VERY well but when a person goes on a losing streak SOMEBODY starts to worry (normally the guy in the streak).

It's something to be aware of and tackle as soon as it happens. Another thing is playing time for eash person. In our team of 3 one guy would play 4 times more often then the other two. Do you want this?

Just questions to ask.