Money Management

Am I reading this right? I picked up a BJ book and the chapter on Money Management says don't walk up to the $5 tables with less than $120 per session, play three sessions and walk away from each when you win 20% or lose 40%. First off, those numbers seem very conservative to me. Secondly, why not just buy $50 in chips and walk away when you're tapped out or win $25? Thirdly, what's the difference between two sessions five minutes apart or five days apart?

Anybody out there use a different money management scheme?

Thanx in advance

TruFaux

P.S. Thank all of you for your thorough and sincere responses to my last post re: Players Cards.

Any book that tells you to walk away after you have won x amount of dollars or lost x amount of dollars is a garbage book. The only reason you should leave a "good" game of blackjack is because you have overstayed your welcome or if the game becomes "bad". The way we can overstay our welcome is because we are card counters or play using other legal advantage techniques. Casinos don't like us, when we play, if they start to catch on, we must leave to avoid permanent barring.

Back to your other questions. The $5 with $120 session bankroll is not conservative at all. Blackjack is a risky game. Even with an advantage, which card counting will give you, a player stands a good chance of being wiped out if they do not have enough money to play at the level they are betting.

Mathematically, there is no difference between a session 5 minutes after or 5 days after. The only real difference is that if only 5 minutes went by, you may not be focused or rested for anoher session.

Get your hands on one of the good books on blackjack. Anything by one of these authors:
Stanford Wong, Arnold Snyder, Vancura & Fuchs.

There are other great books and authors, but these authors will not be too advanced to start with.

Stay away from:
John Patrick, Frank Scobolete, Gregory... just stick to the ones I mentioned above.

I was reading John Patrick's Blackjack. I guess I won't be doing that any more. So you basically don't leave the table until you wong out, tap out, or get too much heat?

Trufaux

P.S. I assume Uston's MDB is on your "Good" list.

to become a very solid player. There is no reason to stop playing unless conditions deteriorate, you get tired, or you run out of money.

Get your hands on one of the good books on blackjack. Anything by one of these authors:
Stanford Wong, Arnold Snyder, Vancura & Fuchs.

There are other great books and authors, but these authors will not be too advanced to start with.

Stay away from:
John Patrick, Frank Scobolete, Gregory... just stick to the ones I mentioned above.

I agree with your recommended list and have read them. I also have Scoblete's Best Blackjack and I thought it was worthwhile.

Do you recommend against him because he also has books on how to beat craps and slot machines? I'm skeptical of this, too, but I didn't notice any Voodoo in his blackjack advice. It's been a while since I read the book though, so it's possible I filtered it out and don't remember it.

Car Geek

You said it! and yes, Uston is on the list... as well as Ian Andersen and Don Schlesinger.

Yeah, I have only skimmed the Scobolete BJ book, but it was my opinion that he is in general selling bad information. My opinion on this subject could be easily swayed if someone presents me some information though.

Scoblete's a traditional card counter, no voodoo in Best Blackjack at all. He irritates some people because he is a true disciple of controlled shooting in craps and those who have not seen him in action doubt it can be done. I've seen him. Back to blackjack. His advice is quite good as is his book Best Blackjack. He's had his share of "interesting" experiences with casinos, too. Patrick is a whole different animal. As a gambling writer Scoblete writes about all games and for all kinds of players but his advice is usually, for non-advantage players, slow the pace, bet less, do what you have to do to have a good time with the least risk possible. That's good advice IMHO. He's also one heck of a great writer.

Shaggy, if you could be easily swayed then I suggest you read Best Blackjack. You may not learn anything new for your game, but the book is worth $15 for the entertaining stories. Jim Dice is right, he's a good writer.

Car Geek

Scoblete doesn't write for advantage players, but his advice is basically sound. If you want to do this for big money then you need all the books by the aforementioned authors and a great deal besides.

There is something of a weird vendetta in some sections of the bj community against Scobe. Any one who knows Scoblete understands this is a bit like kicking a puppy. His theoretical grasp of some advantage play concepts is occassionally shaky, but then few "credible" gambling authors are as entertaining or impart the concepts as clearly.
In the context of the majority of dreadful gambling literature these accusations are baseless.

You wrote:

He irritates some people because he is a true disciple of controlled shooting in craps and those who have not seen him in action doubt it can be done. I've seen him.

The problem is that observing somebody for one evening is not nearly enough of a statistical sample to determine whether or not someone has a viable �controlled roll�.

I have not read much of Scoblete�s craps writings, so my opinion is based upon limited information. One thing I do remember is reading an article in the magazine where he observed a craps team. And he could tell, after watching them for a n evening, that they had an edge.

This statement reduced his credibility in my eyes.

Realistically, somebody who could have a controlled throw would make a fortune, and would not be spending time telling other people about it.

on his books and seminars. I think most Proff's would envy his yearly income.

All casino patrons would benefit greatly from reading his books, as they are meant for the general population. He is basically sound in his advice and doesn't sugar coat what may happen in the casino environment.

You should pay more attention to what is happening in the dice games as BJ, as a beatable game, is on the way out.

I recently had the pleasure of being involved with a dice team that took $40,000 off a table on New Years Eve, $26,00 to the team the rest to the other players along for the ride.

I agree that this type of skill should not be advertised as this activity will also in time be stopped, going the route of BJ. But people have written about BJ and given up the secrets for decades now so why use this argument as a means to discredit scobe? In fact are you not moving towards a publication on BJ? Because you write about what it takes to beat the game are you also to be discredited?

Iggy.

but, it was a bj team, using craps as cover. One player simply got lucky over a couple of hours. Reread Math Prof's comments; he is astute on this topic, as always. PV

The problem is that observing somebody for one evening is not nearly enough of a statistical sample to determine whether or not someone has a viable �controlled roll�.

It depends what information you are testing for. If you are testing sevens to rolls ratio, that is correct (unless the control is unbelievable strong). If you are incorporating information about the throw into your sample, then you may well be able to tell. If the shooter consistently keeps the velocity and trajectory of his throw within certain paramaters then a small sample might be sufficent.

An analogy might be made with baseball. I do not have to watch a pitcher for hundreds of games to know he is a good pitcher, I can tell by his action, his accuracy, and his velocity, whether he is any good.

In the Mathematics Of Gambling uses a scientific method based on this principle and the theory of errors to test for consistency among roulette dealers, rather than simply measuring actual spin results. I believe a similar approach is optimal for testing shooters. Not that I believe there is much merit to doing so unless you are testing your own skill or that of someone you know who has trained themself to control the throw.

Realistically, somebody who could have a controlled throw would make a fortune, and would not be spending time telling other people about it.

Not neccessarily. I practiced till I could control the dice with enough consistency to prove I was not throwing at random, but not enough to significantly overturn the house edge, if at all.
Those who do claim to be alter the sevens to rolls ratio significantly, probably are not getting rich if their story is true. The individuals involved really don't understand much about kelly betting and exponential bankroll growth, which is essential to making big money out of a comparatively small edge. If they did try raising their bet size dramatically, this might destroy the consistency of the throw, since betting big money tends to tighten up the muscles.

Are you also saying that the doc is highly skilled in the art of dice control? Maybe you feel his degree in C.E. makes him an expert in this field, that is, the mechanics of dice control. Could be.

"he is astute on this topic, as always" Hmmm. Has he replaced Dale as you're new hero?

I also saw a highly skilled BJ player lose $36,000 in one long evening, does that mean BJ advantage play is a fraud? Or that when you win you are just lucky?

Iggy.

I don't think MP is attempting to discredit Scobe. He has a valid point, in that Scobe could not reasonably have determined a craps crew were advantage players from watching them for a session of play (without using a more sophisticated method such as I outlined below, which we can safely assume Scobe wasn't using).
This passage is from "Beat The Craps Out Of The Casinos", which to my mind, is far from Scoblete's best. Most of his other work is solid advantage play material and stuff for recreational gamblers. I also think surrounding himself with knowledgeable mathematicians like Don Catlin, has greatly improved his understanding of gambling theory, and his newer craps writings noticeably downplay the voodoo aspects of his theories. So I write this off as a one-time aberration.
But, it is still potentially dangerous information.

I had the good luck to see Scobe roll in Tunica in March of 2003 and in November of 2003. I witnessed four straight days of play from him in March and three days in November. I saw him have two rolls that lasted one hour each and dozens of hands of 12-30. On a few occasions he did go point seven but you could see from his form and how the dice reacted that he did indeed have control over them.

What was really interesting to me was that during his one hour roll in November, Jean Scott, the Frugal Gambler, was at the table (she made a lot of money) and so was Don Catlin and some other gaming writers whose names I've forgotten. Henry Tamburin also spent a few days with Scobe watching him roll so it would be interesting to see what he thinks of all this. I saw Scobe take away a large stack of purple chips after the hour long roll. He was a genereous tipper too.

On the days I saw him roll, he won a lot of money. I'm sure he doesn't win all the time, he's said this himself but for me the proof was watching him with my own eyes. Also watching his Crew.

His betting levels are around 200 per roll but as he starts to win he does escalate slowly.

He might not be a mathematician and know the ins and outs of some of the statistical stuff but do you really have to know the physics of baseball to be able to hit a home run? I like to use his analogies. How many home runs does a Barry Bonds have to hit before we say he's a home run hitter? You can tell from his swing, even when he misses the ball, that he's got the goods. When you see Scobe in action, you'll know he's got the goods. What's really interesting is that there is a group of some twenty players who now follow him and his Crew around the country, attempting to get on the tables when they roll. In Tunica, the table was four deep with onlookers!

Scobe says, however, that dice control is much harder than card counting. One is a lower level skill, like riding a bike. The other is a higher level skill, like hitting a baseball.

He has a new book out that is fascinating and tells the background to the controlled shooting phenomena. It's called The Craps Underground. It's a great read and might perk some of the advantage players on this site's interest. End of commercial for the book.

A guy I work with makes a pretty decent profit off of craps. He's got a craps table in his house he uses for practice, and he's in Vegas just about every weekend. He doesn't make a huge profit, as you said. But he does win enough to pay cash for a new truck, and all the extra goodies for it. He's definately not gonna retire from winning at craps, but he's proof it can be done. I actually bought one of Scobe's book on controlled throwing before I new what the house edge was. Once I found that out, I got discouraged and never read the thing. I usually have about three forms of advantage play gambling going at a time. If, as stated earlier, that the beatable BJ game really is on the way out. I might consider giving the dice control a shot, once I can't find good BJ games anymore.

the only point I am making is that seeing someone win tens of thousands of dollars in a short time does not necessarily mean they were experts at the game they were playing, or even that they played with an edge. I meant nothing else, except that, if there is a mathematical component to winning at craps, MathProf is more likely than anyone else I know to be able to find and quantify it. I don't know who Dale is, so please enlighten me. PV

my mistake about Dale.

Iggy.