Let it ride betting strategy...correct me if I'm wrong

So I came across some literature that some pro blackjack players use the "Let it ride" strategy. This is I guess where if they win their first bet (1 unit) they "let it ride" and bet (2 units) the next hand. If they win this hand then they go back to their original bet of 1 unit for their third hand. Now lets say under the conditions that we are playing at a $5 table, and that this player is flat betting $5. Typically I've read 48% of the times the dealer wins, 44% the player wins, and 8% are pushes. Now lets examine 100 outcomes of the "let it ride hand". If a player wins his first hand for $5 and loses his next hand for $10, his net loss is -$5 for those two hands. Now if the player wins his first hand for $5 and wins his next hand for $10, his net gain for those two hands is $15. So lets say that 100 hands were played out, theoretically if he loses 48% (loss of $240 (48 x -$5) and wins 44% of the time (gain of $660 (44 x 15) and pushes the rest, it would seem that a positive expectation of $420 exists (granted there will be some standard deviation). So if this is the case, would it not be in the interest of card counters to "Let it ride", well at least during the positive counts? Please correct me if I'm wrong, sorry if this sounds stupid (I'm not a math whiz). Thanks for your replies.

You don't know which hands will win, lose or push. You don't know if the next hand you play is part of the 44%, 48% or 8%. If it was a losing hand, that doesn't mean the next one is going to be a winner because it has to match the "percents". Over the long run you lose 48% of the hands you play, win 44%, and push 8%. You have no idea when they're going to occur. Your idea sounds like a progression. Progressions don't get the money.

No pro in his right mind would ever play the way you're suggesting.

PS: You've obviously read some. Looks like you're straying from the good stuff.

So I came across some literature that some pro blackjack players use the "Let it ride" strategy. This is I guess where if they win their first bet (1 unit) they "let it ride" and bet (2 units) the next hand. If they win this hand then they go back to their original bet of 1 unit for their third hand. Now lets say under the conditions that we are playing at a $5 table, and that this player is flat betting $5. Typically I've read 48% of the times the dealer wins, 44% the player wins, and 8% are pushes. Now lets examine 100 outcomes of the "let it ride hand". If a player wins his first hand for $5 and loses his next hand for $10, his net loss is -$5 for those two hands. Now if the player wins his first hand for $5 and wins his next hand for $10, his net gain for those two hands is $15. So lets say that 100 hands were played out, theoretically if he loses 48% (loss of $240 (48 x -$5) and wins 44% of the time (gain of $660 (44 x 15) and pushes the rest, it would seem that a positive expectation of $420 exists (granted there will be some standard deviation). So if this is the case, would it not be in the interest of card counters to "Let it ride", well at least during the positive counts? Please correct me if I'm wrong, sorry if this sounds stupid (I'm not a math whiz). Thanks for your replies.

I think your math is faulty.

If you win the first hand and lose the second hand, you have a net of -5. This happens (44%)(48%)=21.12% of the time.

If you win both the first and second hand, you have a net of +15. This happens (44%)(44%)=19.36%.

What you missed: If you lose the first hand, your net = -5. This happens 48% of the time. Also, if you win the first hand and push the next hand, your net = +5. This happens (44%)(8%) = 3.52% of the time.

Therefore your overall EV =
WW: (15)(44%)(44%) = 2.90
WL: (-5)(44%)(48%) = -1.06
WP: (5)(44%)(8%) = 0.18
L: (-5)(48%) = -2.40
P: (0)(8%) = 0.00

Add them all up and you get an EV=-0.38.

Sorry if my calculations seem off, I've just been trying to read up on as much literature out there as possible and trying to decipher the good from the bad. Thank you for the responses.

A. Snyder, S. Wong, F. Scoblete's book on BJ (Stay away from his other stuff), D. Schlesinger, K. Uston, B. Carlson, Bootlegger's book is excellent for a beginner IMO. Those are just a few that immediately come to mind. I'm sure there's others. The BJ books offered on this site are all good.

The bad:

Stay away from: Patterson, Patrick, Thomason (I think that's how you spell it, anyway, his book is called "21st Century BJ" or something like that), or any book that suggests you can win by strictly money management or progressions.

The only way to win is to bet more when you have the advantage. Progressions and money management systems, "hot dealers", etc... do not give you an advantage.