HOT STREAK - Free Bet Blackjack
The Win-Vector blog is a product ofa data science consultancy.
Contact us for custom consulting and training:.
Some material under redistribution agreement.
The Win-Vector LLC mailing list All comments are held free poker rooms moderation.
Only comments that will be interesting to other readers will be considered for posting.
Comments that are irrelevant, offensive learn more here link-spam will be deleted.
Also we do use a mechanical comment spam filter, and would like to apologize in advance for any comments that get lost to the filter.
By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: The recent tells the story of Don Johnson who won millions of dollars in private room custom blackjack betting trigger high stakes blackjack.
Johnson click used is, surprisingly, not card counting as made in Beat the Dealer.
It is instead likely an amazingly simple process I will call a martingale blackjack betting trigger pump.
Blackjack The game According to the article Don Johnson developed a reputation as a non high roller in gambling circles.
This tempted revenue hungry Atlantic City casinos to invite him to private room gambling with custom blackjack betting trigger and special considerations.
Johnson is quoted as estimating the rule changes brought the house advantage or edge down to about 0.
This is much less than the.
This is essentially free money- but most gamblers lack the discipline to take advantage of it.
The blackjack rule changes were not the problem.
The issue was the rebate.
Again, the casinos know what they are doing.
Rebates are free money, but most gamblers lack the discipline to hold onto the money.
Johnson clearly is a disciplined gambler.
And he is very right.
Here is some math I am sure Mr.
Johnson knows either formally or intuitively, probably both.
If the gambler never ends a night ahead, then any money collected by the casino seems like profit no matter how deep a discount is offered.
Breaking a fair game Mr.
Johnson no doubt knows how to break this scheme.
He will play a very disciplined strategy that loses a bounded amount of money most days keeping the casino happy, yet exploiting the discountlooks like the behavior of an undisciplined gambler, but happens to have a positive expected return for Mr.
Suppose you try to exploit these rules.
That for each and every bet the casino has exactly a 50% chance of winning.
Further suppose you gamble with the following strategy.
The expected value is p X-B + 1-p X+B where p is the unknown probability of your betting exiting the interval as a winner.
This is a standard result in Martingale theory.
And it just means: if neither you or the house have an advantage on individual games played, then neither you or the house have an advantage on any sequence of games even with you choosing the bet sizes and choosing when to stop playing.
This is one of the hooks of gambling: players think there is great power in choosing bet size and when to stop, when usually there is no way to use those to any advantage beyond choosing not to gamble.
Things change when we add in the discount.
So the expected value of a bet of X+500,000 is: 0.
It actually makes sense in terms of expected value, not in terms of risk for you to bet.
In a sense casino is subsidizing every one of your large bets, not just the end of day settlement.
This isbut still a problem.
Even if the odds were fair or near-fair you want to make large bets to exit the phase interval in a reasonable amount of time.
The issue is the scheme requires virtuoso play on each hand.
You have to play well almost every hand this web page eat into the house advantage, and that is going to be exhausting.
The only way of having a high blackjack betting trigger of exiting on the profitable side of this web page of your phase intervals is to make large bets.
With small bets the law of large numbers will almost always force you to lose the phase and the day.
Also with bad odds, you find above a certain size you no longer want to bet.
The house has an expectation advantage proportional to the size of your bet, so eventually the bonus you are pulling per-bet due to the house insuring losses is overwhelmed and bets become unprofitable.
Getting barred The fair-odds phases strategy is pretty much guaranteed profit if one is allowed to play long enough.
To do this you have to have enough bankroll to finance enough losing nights to have a good chance of a win, and you have continue to have access to the discount.
We know three casinos eventually stopped given Mr.
Johnson off on nights at winnings somewhat above this valueand not invite you back if you are ever net-ahead over a few nights.
When we add this possibility of getting barred: the overall betting scheme looses money is if it looses 9 nights in a row as we assumed the casino will not allow you to win enough to recoup that loss.
This represents a high risk expected return on the stake most money the scheme is prepared to lose of around 13% in ten days.
The idea is: Sharpe ratios on smaller time-period investments are necessarily smaller smaller returns, and larger variances.
A crude conversion to move from a monthly scale to a yearly scale would be to just look at how variance should decline by a factor of about sqrt 12so a good monthly financial instrument might have Sharpe ratio of around 0.
So this is a high-risk but also high-return scheme.
To lower your risk you would want to play this scheme at multiple casinos, as the Atlantic reported Mr.
Johnson is reported to have won millions from three casinos.
Since the strategy has about a 70% win rate it is safe to assume to see 3 wins we would have to play at about 4 casinos.
Unfortunately my calculations show there is still a good chance of losing money remain high now around 33%, but your Sharpe ratio is now 0.
I do however, love thinking about martingales.
Blackjack - Betting Systems
I recently saw a new blackjack side bet called Royal 20's at the Gold. This is a lot higher than most BJ side bets.. Trigger true count: +6
Bravo, your phrase simply excellent
It agree, rather useful message
You are not right. I am assured. I can prove it. Write to me in PM, we will discuss.
In my opinion you are not right. Write to me in PM, we will talk.
Rather amusing answer
What necessary words... super, magnificent idea
Full bad taste
In my opinion you are not right. I am assured. Let's discuss. Write to me in PM, we will communicate.
I can recommend to visit to you a site, with an information large quantity on a theme interesting you.
I apologise, but, in my opinion, you are not right. I am assured. I can defend the position. Write to me in PM, we will discuss.
Between us speaking, try to look for the answer to your question in google.com
I can not participate now in discussion - it is very occupied. But I will return - I will necessarily write that I think on this question.
Likely is not present
I consider, that you are not right. I am assured. I can defend the position. Write to me in PM, we will talk.
I regret, that I can help nothing. I hope, you will find the correct decision. Do not despair.
It is the amusing answer
I confirm. And I have faced it. Let's discuss this question.
And how in that case to act?
I recommend to look for the answer to your question in google.com
Bravo, remarkable idea