I tried this system online betting 1 on red then 2-4-8-16-32-64-128-256-512. 10 bets on red…came up black 10 in a row and lost 1023.00. If I had more money…I probably would have bet 1024, but it broke me! So no…this is a very bad system. If I were to ever do it again, I would just roll the ball until black or red came up for 4-5 in a row and then start betting on red or black
[quote]AzCats wrote:
If I were to ever do it again, I would just roll the ball until black or red came up for 4-5 in a row and then start betting on red or black[/quote]
This is a fine way to play and can be fun. However, I want to warn you that your odds are not any better of it coming up black if it has been red the time before, 3 times before or 10 times in a row previously.
I’m not saying that you can’t play this way, it can be perfectly fun to do this and is part of the fun of playing games of chance. I just want to caution you that the odds of black or or red are, and always will be 18/38, regardless of the previous spins and your payoff will always be 1/2 or 19/38, which gives the house an edge of 1/19 or 5.26%, which is the house edge for every bet in roulette, no matter how you combine them or what the previous rolls were.
[quote]artw wrote:
In blackjack, it’s possible to minimize the chances of losing due to bad luck because it’s such a mechanical game…[/quote]
Well yes, and no.
Typically, a skilled blackjack counter not using any advanced techniques such as shuffle tracking or ace cutting, can expect a win rate and standard deviation such that it will take close to 20,000 hands before the win rate is equal to the standard deviation.
The law of large numbers will come into play, since standard deviation increases in proportion to the square root of the number of hands while win rate increases linearly. However, the numbers are truly very large and can be very difficult to reach for a single player.
Typically for a $40 per 100 hand win rate you are looking at an expected return of $2000 over 5000 hands played. However, the standard deviation is going to be somewhere around $4500. So after 5000 hands, there is roughly a 1 in 3 chance you will be more than $2000 in the hole.
[quote]artw wrote:
BodyGuard,
I highly doubt you are as skilled at poker as you say you are, or you would either be a pro, or a retired pro. That seems to be your line of logic. But I can assure you that I am most certainly as skilled at blackjack as I claim to be. I am NOT skilled at all at setting limitations for myself or managing my bankroll. All of this talk about odds and strategy and whatnot aside, knowing your limits and managing your bankroll are the true keys to making money at gambling, and since you have never acknowledged this once, I have to assume that you aren’t much of a poker player. That and the fact that you apparently play 1/2, 2/5 and 5/10 poker.
If you are as good at figuring out ambiguous odds as you claim to be, sit down at a 20/40 table with some serious cash and play. According to your previous posts, you’re quite the player, so sitting down at one of these tables should be an even bigger guaranteed payday for you. Trust me, there are a lot of “fish” at those tables, too.[/quote]
Calm down little man and put your dick back in your pants. I don’t have a tape measure with me but I already know you’re smaller the minute you open your mouth. I’m a break even or better recreational cash player, maybe better. Nothing to brag about and I’m certainly not bragging. Like I said, I paid for the lessons to now be able to play profitably.
I’m not rolled for bigger games and given that I make a very good living, I’m not real interested in the fantasy land of playing poker or gambling for a living. You’re clearly a degenerate so you should probably stay away from this thread entirely. 1800-gambler dude. There are fish at every level degen, but you need to be rolled for the game. I’ll play the levels I’m rolled at, make or lose the money and still pay my mortgage. Are we clear?
And again, if BJ was so good to you, you wouldn’t need to gamble on such uncertain outcomes like fucking sports betting. Can you spell degenerate? I bet you have a system for the horses too? LOL. Guys like you are a dime a dozen in the casino. One week you have a 20k watch, the next week you’re borrowing bus fare.
[quote]artw wrote:
jtrinsey wrote:
artw wrote:
Oh yeah, I can also easily triple a $500 bankroll in blackjack…
oRly?
My intention is not to start an e-war here, but…
This statement tells me you have never seriously been a card counter, or that perhaps you have learned the basics of it but you just gambling anyway rather than working the game as a serious advantage player. I suppose you could “easily triple” a $500 bankroll, but even playing at a $10 table, your risk of ruin is going to be over 90% with a $500 bankroll.
If by easily you mean, “over 10-15 hours I could expect to triple a $500 bankroll, provided I have the money to refill my bankroll to cover the inevitable swing that will occur,” then yes, I will agree with you.
Well, easily was a poor choice of words, but if I were dumb enough to wager everything I had as soon as the count got really high, I’d stand a great chance at doubling up, or more if I hit blackjack. But I would never bet everything even if the count was really high since all it would take is one unlucky turn of the cards to break me. But if I had a shitload of cash to gamble with in my pocket, I could theoretically do this with really high counts and have a much better than 50/50 chance of making a large profit.
I don’t know, the whole point of this thread was trying to beat the house, so when people claim that poker is the way to make money, it may be, but not if you want to beat the house. You don’t even play the house in poker, you play other people, so poker shouldn’t even really be a part of the discussion anyways. The fact that the table’s players can change throughout the course of the evening changes the nature of the game so much that the odds are just too hard to figure out with any real certainty.
I mean, if you play with a bunch of predictable players, of course it’s easier, but you still never know for sure what the odds are so it’s too dubious to say that the odds are in a highly skilled player’s favor. That’s why there are so few pros that make it to the final table in the Main Event each year. Luck is the great variable. Like Phil Hellmuth says, if luck weren’t involved, he’d win every tourney.
In blackjack, it’s possible to minimize the chances of losing due to bad luck because it’s such a mechanical game. Luck will always be present, but if you know the game and know how to count accurately, your odds are ALWAYS about.5% better than the house’s, regardless of the other players or the dealer. You just can’t say that about poker.[/quote]
For someone who claims to be an ace card counter, I’m mystified that you just don’t get it. What the fuck does the WSOP have to do with wining poker? Tournaments are not even real poker and STILL you see the top names at least cash more consistently. A winning cash game player can make 20/40 hour at a 2/5 table with a substantially smaller bankroll that what is needed for you to be similarly profitable at blackjack. About the only thing you’re right about is your comment that poker is not a house game. We all know what a house game is. It’s the one where they win over the long haul, no matter how good you are, because even guys that claim to be good like you have poor bankroll management skills (betting on other games, sports, as you have claimed) or self control issues. The casino is rolled to play you forever - they don’t have to manage their roll or the cards. All they have to do is wait for your human frailty which apparently, you have in abundance. Get it??
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
Asian Noodle Bars- Underrated places to hit on cute asian chicks at casinos while their aging grandmother spends her retirement check at the slot machine. If you are really looking to get the best bang for your buck, skip the table games and spend your $200 buying drinks here and you will probably end the night happier than if you had been sitting at the felt all night long.
[/quote]
LOL best advice yet. Which do you recommend???
[quote]artw wrote:
If you are as good at figuring out ambiguous odds as you claim to be, sit down at a 20/40 table with some serious cash and play. According to your previous posts, you’re quite the player, so sitting down at one of these tables should be an even bigger guaranteed payday for you. Trust me, there are a lot of “fish” at those tables, too.[/quote]
It just occurred to me that you’re on of those higher limit fish the regs in those games wait for. The guy that just had a hot run at BJ or craps, or hit a big bet on a game and now he’s going to sit at a high limit table and give it away. I hear them talk about the likes of you all the time.
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
jtrinsey wrote:
Asian Noodle Bars- Underrated places to hit on cute asian chicks at casinos while their aging grandmother spends her retirement check at the slot machine. If you are really looking to get the best bang for your buck, skip the table games and spend your $200 buying drinks here and you will probably end the night happier than if you had been sitting at the felt all night long.
LOL best advice yet. Which do you recommend???
[/quote]
Trump Taj Mahal in AC is always a good place to go to cure your yellow fever. Personally, I will always be fond of the Tropicana though. It’s kind of a POS, but it’s the first casino I ever went to when my best friend and I couldn’t get our junior year homecoming dates to go home with us so something possessed us as 16 year olds to scrape up $94 between the two of us and drive to AC to try our luck. Every other time I’ve been back, I always go there, even if it’s just for a half hour or so. I’m sentimental like that
I thought you were going to say the Taj. I play there pretty often but believe it or not never tried the famous noodle bar. Is it really a spot to hook up? I pretty much don’t even want to even scratch my ass let alone eat after being in that filthy poker room with those filthy chips. A tetanus shot should be required to play. I think I saw that card counter there playing the horses and borrowing bus fare LOL.
For the most part, AC is not great for hooking up in general as I think some would imagine. Not like Vegas. I think the reason being is that the majority of people in AC are somewhat local and go there for the day and go back late at night or maybe stay one night with some friends. Whereas with Vegas, you are typically there at least 2+ nights and everybody is coming from out of town and there’s less of a “make sure the group stays together” vibe as you get in AC.
There are a bunch of clubs and beach-bar type deals, if you want to go that route, but IMO they are nothing better than the standard club atmosphere in any city.
For some reason, I’ve always liked Caesar’s poker room.
Glad to see you understand the poker v blackjack thing. A good limit poker player, as I was when I was playing 15+ hours a week in casinos a couple of years ago, can consistently take 2-3 big bets per hour with maybe a ~5-bet standard deviation. That means that, with good skill and proper game selection, a good limit player can play $2/5 at $30 an hour with a $500 bankroll. To win $30 an hour at blackjack requires something in the range of a $15-20k bankroll. Of course, there is significantly more skill involves in poker and is much easier to tilt and go off of your strategy. The rake is also significant, compared to $0 in blackjack if you do not tip. However, limit poker and pass-line craps are still the two games I recommend to casino beginners as they are the most social games and, even for a beginner, will drain your bankroll the slowest.
there is a system in roulette that my dad used at least 20 times in his life to make a thousand dollars each time and taught it to me when I was older and I used it successfully also.
It is a progressive system starting with the table minimum, but instead of betting against the wheel…you bet with the wheel. Meaning whatever the wheel comes up you bet again. You only lose if the wheel comes up red,black,red,black,red,black,red,black or any combination of that plus zero/double zero. As soon as the wheel comes up the same color twice in a row…you win and start again with the minimum.
You also don’t double exactly. I went 10,25,50,100,250,500,1000,2000
Only on one occasion did I ever have to lay 1000 and I won that roll
It’s very nerve racking and not really worth the risk…which is why I learned to get good at poker. Poker is the only option really.
Thats still more or less the martingale system.
No matter the betting strategy, you can’t turn negative expected value (EV) into +ev. With martingale the most likely situation is that you reach the house maximum bet and have nowhere to go from there.
I make a very good portion of my living playing poker (i have 10h/week PT job, too). The amount of people who can do this is small. Playing poker for 30+ hours per week is very draining, once you reach certain stakes you are also generally playing against players who are also very good (If you are playing $200 holdem at your casino, then yeah, everyone is going to suck).
I generally play heads up sit and gos online. I have somewhere between a 9-12% ROI. So on average if I play say a $100 match, i’m winning around $10. Obviously this is not very much, the edge is very small. How I get most of my income is through volume, 1000+ games/month. On the flip side, when you are playing 1000 games a month, your ROI generally takes a hit as you are playing multiple tables at once.
Playing for a living has its pros and cons, I can’t say I recommend it at all, but its far better money then I can make currently in a real job.
[quote]Frank.S wrote:
Thats still more or less the martingale system.
No matter the betting strategy, you can’t turn negative expected value (EV) into +ev. With martingale the most likely situation is that you reach the house maximum bet and have nowhere to go from there.
I make a very good portion of my living playing poker (i have 10h/week PT job, too). The amount of people who can do this is small. Playing poker for 30+ hours per week is very draining, once you reach certain stakes you are also generally playing against players who are also very good (If you are playing $200 holdem at your casino, then yeah, everyone is going to suck).
I generally play heads up sit and gos online. I have somewhere between a 9-12% ROI. So on average if I play say a $100 match, i’m winning around $10. Obviously this is not very much, the edge is very small. How I get most of my income is through volume, 1000+ games/month. On the flip side, when you are playing 1000 games a month, your ROI generally takes a hit as you are playing multiple tables at once.
Playing for a living has its pros and cons, I can’t say I recommend it at all, but its far better money then I can make currently in a real job.
[/quote]
I hear ya Frank. I’ve got several month stretches playing 30 hours a week online in addition to my 40 hour a week job. I have no doubt that I could make as much and probably more just playing poker…but the guaranteed paycheck is too comforting to me right now having just bought a house
[quote]davidtower wrote:
I hear ya Frank. I’ve got several month stretches playing 30 hours a week online in addition to my 40 hour a week job. I have no doubt that I could make as much and probably more just playing poker…but the guaranteed paycheck is too comforting to me right now having just bought a house
[/quote]
If you truly believe in that roulette betting system you just posted, I find it very difficult to believe that you are a winning poker player over any appreciable sample size, especially online where the games are more difficult.
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
davidtower wrote:
I hear ya Frank. I’ve got several month stretches playing 30 hours a week online in addition to my 40 hour a week job. I have no doubt that I could make as much and probably more just playing poker…but the guaranteed paycheck is too comforting to me right now having just bought a house
If you truly believe in that roulette betting system you just posted, I find it very difficult to believe that you are a winning poker player over any appreciable sample size, especially online where the games are more difficult.
[/quote]
Agreed. This is why casinos make so much money. The vast majority of people who gamble, even those who know and understand the games and play with significant amount of money, simply do no track wins and loses and tend to overestimate wins and underestimate losses. I have an acquaintance who I believe did a study on this as part of a thesis paper. I believe he got it published, I will see if I can find it.
All of these roulette systems are not very complicated. If they truly worked, you would have people with 6-figure bankrolls backing these systems and they would take so much money off the casinos that the game would be shut down or changed a la single-deck blackjack. It’s as simple as that.