Surfing analogy reminds me..
that 'wipeouts' are part of the seascape when one goes out into the big waves. Sure you can surf at Lighthouse Beach in Cape Hatteras and not worry about a little spill or two. Small stakes are nice but the long ride on North Beach in Oahu takes some practice with good technique. If I was planning to play $2 games at the Gold Spike all my life, then what the hell? Your risk of ruin playing these deviations may not be significant at $5 tables in the GNW, but what do you take with you when the Dobermans are ripping the franklins out of your fanny pack and there are only two tables available?
The more I play the more anecdotal evidence shows me that being overly agressive will take you into areas of risk that I for one, do not wish to travel. It is probably true that in my short life as an winning player, I have been very lucky so far. It is not reasonable to expect that I can win 80% of my sessions as I have to date. I know that making fifty units like I did yesterday has a lot to do with having the luxury of small bets during the long stretches of negative or neutral advantage in shoe games.
It is also true that I have been enjoying an extended stay in the Valhalla of variance and that this vacation will someday come to an abrupt end. I hope I can be as philosophical about my rude awakening as I have been appreciative of the 'good cards' that have come my way.
I expect that as my bankroll grows I will be tempted to increase my exposure and bet more aggressively but the idea that I could lose all that I have worked diligently to acquire in conservative terms is frightening. I know you have excellent games to play and I hope very soon to get the chance to share in the bounty. Around here it takes a steely discipline to make money. All I know is that chances of making progression play pay off in the long run are ruinous. I will gladly go into my pocket during a slow climb up the positive ladder, even if I am losing. The small bets in a negative shoe that win are like icing on the cake. I can't see putting out a 10 unit bet during a negative count because I have won the last few hands, but I will leave a table that the dealer has been turning every last stiff into a 20 or 21 and my faces are meeting with nothing but low and medium partners.
So I guess I could say that I am skeptical about the potential of incorporating the progession into the hi-lo scheme of things. If I can grind out a couple of franklins more sessions than not, this makes me complacent around the ploppies who have career nights sitting next to me and then put it back in the casino over the next several visits. You have said that you cap a third after a win each time for the next hand. To me that is asking for trouble. If you are counting and putting out the max bet in any positive count, then aren't you approaching a 'big bet' 'small bet' mentality that is akin to flat betting? The only thing I know about flat betting a shoe game is that it is a losing strategy. To my mind, it is the spread that allows you to take care of the 53% probability of losing hands that most casino games offer. I am glad that you have such good games to play, but your advice seems to have limited utility in an area where it is much more of a struggle to hang on to your bankroll. Personally, I have come to the point where I want to win the old-fashioned way. When I leave the casino with some franklins it is because I have earned it with my 0-12 spread, not because I have been given a day pass to ploppy heaven.
Having said this, since opinions are like other well known body parts, stretching the envelope of advantage play is a noble pursuit. Protecting my bankroll is something I learned the hard way after financial experts helped me turn a $50,000 bankroll into one very small 'large' in less than six months. Thank you Morgan Stanley. If it works for you in the GNW, more power to ya. In my neck of the woods it is jungle warfare and you have to conserve your ammunition for the battles where you have a statistical advantage.