lets see you do it

hi fellow blackjack players,

I been playing blackjack for over 2 years now and in the beginning of those two years, I have been asked to leave 2 blackjack tables in vegas at 2 different casinos. Those were double deck games. I am originally from the east coast and ever since my returning trip back here, I have not won in blackjack since. Now it might be me that was the problem idk. But I have not been playing any differently since I got back. It just seems that whatever I do, I cannot win. But you guys say that in order to beat a six or eight deck game, you need a large bet spread. I don't see how or why. I rather use progression. I used it quite often and not only did I lose with it, but I also lost with counting. So, what's the difference? I mean if multiple deck blackjack is beatable, how do you do it? Because honestly, I don't think it is. I have tried everything and anything and I don't need anybody telling me that I don't know how to count and bet because I was clearly betting right. You guys say raise your bet when you have an advantage and when the count is positive. I did that. So when I lose, you guys say "it was bad luck". So then whats the difference between counting and just gambling if your still prone to lsoe either way? I honestly don't think counting gives enough force to overcome a casino. Unless someone can prove me wrong. Here's what my bet spread looks like and how I been betting:

True 1=nothing
True 2=2 units
True 3=4 units
True 4=10 units
True 5=20 units

So heres what it looks like. And the reason I bet 20 units at true 5 is because I have been told on here that the only way to beat a multiple deck game is to bet large when you have the "edge". I think this bet spread is crazy. not only because it's a lot of money and most people cannot afford to play this amount of money but what do you expect me to do or how to play? You want me to bet everything I have? I don't think you need to bet that much in order to win. Betting progressively and counting result are actually not a far percentage apart. They are both losing systems in my opinion. But unless someone can prove me wrong I'll believe you all. So here's what I had in mind. I don't know where you guys are located, but with the money I lost counting, I could have seen one of you people play a game instead. So who actually has the guts for me to watch them in live play? And no I'm not a pit boss. So don't say you dont want your "identity" seen because I as well am revealing myself.

Fluctuation !

First, let's go over some nomenclature. Your bet spread is from 1-10, not 2-20. This spread is good.

You are frustrated with your results. I can relate to that. A few years ago, I went on a three year losing streak. However, I continue to play (albeit not very often), because I trust the math. I simply know that if I play long enough I will be ahead.

The math also tells me that if I play a progression, I will lose if I play long enough. Certainly, I can use a progression which will allow me to have more winning sessions than not, but the fact remains that I will eventually lose more than I win.

You cannot judge the effectiveness of a system by observing a few hundred or even a few thousand hands. If you play a game with a SCORE of 50, you need to play 20,000 hands to have an 84% chance of being ahead. You need to play 80,000 and 180,000 hands to have 98% and 99.9% chances of being ahead, respectively. Expect to play around 100 hands / hour.

Note that you don't need the 100's of millions of hands that are used by simulators. These programs attempt to calculate the expected value with a precision of less than 0.01%. In the real world, you don't need to be that precise.

P.S.: SCORE is a number used to compare the effectiveness of card counting strategies. To learn more, read Blackjack Attack or join green chip or both.

Suppose you and five equally good players play a strong shoe game. After 200 hrs the odds are one of you will still be losing.

I've been there. It sucks. It makes you and your partners question everything. It is also inherent to today's BJ games.

The math works but it can take a very long time for the casino's luck to run out.

This is why there are so few that do this. It is a very hard way to make easy money.

But I thought it wasn't about the money but beating the casinos at their own games. At least that is the way Thorp presented it. But then he defected to Wall Street and shot his whole premise full of holes.

You'll always lose more hands than you win in this game, but by playing bigger money when you have the edge, and optimizing strategy to win as many hands as can be possibly won, then you will - in the long run - get the money.

That remains the most significant benchmark for success. As for beating he casino, well, how do you do that if you don't take their money?

You don't.

I like your last sentence: It's a very hard way to make money.

He said "it's a hard way to make EASY money".

Francis Salmon, I intentionally left out the word "easy" because you and I know it is not easy money!

What you told us is your bet spread, but I don't think you have told us anything else. First of all, do you know basic strategy and do you know it, perfectly? Are you counting the cards correctly and accurately? What counting system are you using? Are you converting to the true count accurately? Do you know when to take advantage of a positive count and deviate from basic strategy?

Once you got the clue and enough capital, it's like a money making machine. I wouldn't trade it for an office job anymore.

Francis Salmon