Not a big gambler, but I doubled my cash in Vegas

[NsXMas]

I usually play about $20-$30 every time I'm in Vegas, losing it mostly in the slot machines.

I studied up on Blackjack, and applied the principles of what I learned for the first time this week.

I was able to double my cash from $70 to $140 in a few hours, playing $5 Blackjack tables. This is a big deal because I usually end up losing $10 - $20 every time I visit Vegas.

One of the pet peeves I have about Blackjack is when you have a winning streak, someone else butts in and starts playing, reducing your advantage and improving the house advantage. When I approach a Blackjack table, I study the game in progress, and watch several hands to see if there are any streaks. If someone is winning, I don't butt in until that streak is done.

I also encountered a few very foolish players who seemed to act like they knew what they were doing, but did absolutely the wrong things with every hand. I felt really bad for them.

Anyway, I'm really happy to be a big winner in Vegas for the first time!!

 

[NeoNSX]

The REAL trick to gambling is not to win, but not to get hooked.

so what mod are you going to buy with your winnings?

 

[CokerRat]

First, congrats on your winnings. In games like blackjack the odds are 51/49 and the reason the house makes money is volume and the fact that when you're broke, you leave and they keep your money. The trick is to not let it go that long.

Regarding people sitting down and, to use your words, "reducing your advantage and improving the house advantage".... do you really believe that the next card to come up is any less random if some other player is involved?

Aside from counting cards aside and knowing what's left in a small shoe, the odds of cards coming up are absolutely no different regardless of what has just come up. I've seen people get almost violent when the guy at the anchor seat "does something he shouldn't have" and pulls a card and supposedly "helps" the dealer. Obviously the odds of running a long streak in the future are low, but the fact is that what has happened in the past does not change the odds for the future. Its like if you flip a coin and it comes up heads 10x in a row, what are the odds it will come up heads again? The answer is 50%, no more no less.

 

[Brian2by2]

First, congrats on your winnings. In games like blackjack the odds are 51/49 and the reason the house makes money is volume and the fact that when you're broke, you leave and they keep your money. The trick is to not let it go that long.

Regarding people sitting down and, to use your words, "reducing your advantage and improving the house advantage".... do you really believe that the next card to come up is any less random if some other player is involved?

Aside from counting cards aside and knowing what's left in a small shoe, the odds of cards coming up are absolutely no different regardless of what has just come up. I've seen people get almost violent when the guy at the anchor seat "does something he shouldn't have" and pulls a card and supposedly "helps" the dealer. Obviously the odds of running a long streak in the future are low, but the fact is that what has happened in the past does not change the odds for the future. Its like if you flip a coin and it comes up heads 10x in a row, what are the odds it will come up heads again? The answer is 50%, no more no less.

Exactly, but from my experience, there is alot of mental conditioning in the game of BlackJack. When something changes in an enviroment, its easy to blame that change. Most $5 tables in Vegas are continous loops or 7+ deck shoes...you can't count into that. You can come remotely close but with the cut, its almost impossible, so counting is usually out.

Just ask if its ok if you sit down...thats all.

As far as "hitting when you should or shouldn't"....I'm a very very unorthodox player. My philosophy: let the dealer beat me. This is my justification behind staying on 15 & 16.

I have sat down before and watched someone double down on 13, split face cards, and hit on two aces...oh ya, and I once (believe it or not) watched a guy hit 17 when the dealer was showing a FOUR!!

Anyways, I'm looking forward to my next gambling experience. My last two trips (vegas and the bahamas) I walked away with a total of $2800 with an investment of around $100.

 

[4AU4LIFE]

I am going to Vegas in May. I hope to maybe play a few games and win some $$ or just break about even.

 

[coolnsx]

If you go to Vegas and play hard and break even, you've won!

 

[JAM]

I live in NY, and own a home in Vegas ... and I have only spent about $300 in the past few years of going to Vegas every other month. Lost it all anyhow...
On the other side of that is my 21yo brother, who lives in Vegas and goes to school full time. He plays poker almost every weekend and wins about 2k per weekend beating on the tourists ... that's his only income and it seems to be working well for him! The key is knowing the game you play very well, and obviously playing the games that give the house little/no advantage.

 

[NetViper]

I will be in Vegas in 5 days. Please share all your blackjack secrets. I would like to win... just once!!!

 

[effer]

I studied up on Blackjack, and applied the principles of what I learned for the first time this week.

I was able to double my cash from $70 to $140 in a few hours, playing $5 Blackjack tables. This is a big deal because I usually end up losing $10 - $20 every time I visit Vegas.

Congrats for your winning!

I too like blackjack and studied it.

One winning session isn't enough to conclude that you have found the solution of winning consistently... as you already know.

The best way to practice is to play on blackjack simulators that can recreate your casino conditions and rules, then you will have the oportunity to test your abilities and improve them.

Can you summarize your technique?

Just to see from which playing school you are...

 

[LeftLane]

As far as "hitting when you should or shouldn't"....I'm a very very unorthodox player. My philosophy: let the dealer beat me. This is my justification behind staying on 15 & 16.

This a completely incorrect way to play unless the dealer shows a 6 or less. The problem with blackjack is that in order for a system to work over time, everyone at the table has to play correctly. The reason the house wins is because every table at every casino has multiple players who have their own "system", like staying on 15s and 16s, and that benefits the dealer, who always hits up until 17.

You should play like the house plays, and only modify that when the dealer's face card dictates so.

As far as getting upset when the player at third base plays incorrectly, I'm guilty of that. There are very specific odds for each combination of cards, and when the last player disregards those odds, he disrupts the entire table. The best advice is to try to play at a table where everyone is an experienced player and plays correctly. If you are at a table with a bunch of drunks who split a pair of kings for shits and giggles, find another table.

 

[CokerRat]

The reason the house wins is because every table at every casino has multiple players who have their own "system", like staying on 15s and 16s, and that benefits the dealer, who always hits up until 17.

The house wins because the odds for optimally-played blackjack are 51/49 in favor of the house. People playing incorrectly are just contributing more to the take. It is possible to tilt these odds slightly in favor of the player by counting cards in a short shoe. Very few casinos play with a 2-deck shoe and will have other rules in place to keep the odds in favor of the house. They will not lose in the long run.

You should play like the house plays, and only modify that when the dealer's face card dictates so.

Agreed, and also note that it is the player's ability to double-down or split on the right occasions that are the real moneymakers. Without those options, the odds are much more in favor of the house.

There are very specific odds for each combination of cards, and when the last player disregards those odds, he disrupts the entire table.

No. The point of my previous post is that there is no such thing as "disrupting the table". He can play stupidly and screw up his own hand, but it impossible for any other player to affect the odds on your hand or the dealer's hand. Anything else is superstition. Your statement implies that the decision whether to draw a card somehow affects the odds of what comes up as the next card in the shoe and that is simply not true.

As far as "hitting when you should or shouldn't"....I'm a very very unorthodox player. My philosophy: let the dealer beat me. This is my justification behind staying on 15 & 16.

I know what you mean... it took me a while to understand why that's a mistake. It's counterintuitive (to me anyway).

 

[LeftLane]

No. The point of my previous post is that there is no such thing as "disrupting the table". He can play stupidly and screw up his own hand, but it impossible for any other player to affect the odds on your hand or the dealer's hand. Anything else is superstition. Your statement implies that the decision whether to draw a card somehow affects the odds of what comes up as the next card in the shoe and that is simply not true.[/B]

If third base has 13, and the dealer is showing a 4, third base should stay. If he hits and gets a face card, he has taken the dealer's potential bust card and at a minimum gives the dealer another opportunity, while busting himself. Perhaps I'm stating it wrong, but 3rd base has immense sway over the fate of the table by either playing correctly or incorrectly.

 

[NsXMas]

I will be in Vegas in 5 days. Please share all your blackjack secrets. I would like to win... just once!!!

I read a book about playing Blackjack and other casino games a while ago. I don't recall the name right now because I misplaced it somewhere in the office.

I sometimes play Blackjack on the Palm PDA. It's a very simple game and is by no means realistic, but it helps to give me some practice time when I'm travelling.

I also play Hoyle Casino 2004, which has Blackjack as one of the games. This game has a tutorial mode which gives you hints on whether you should hit, stand, split, or double down.

It is a bit ridiculous, but I parlayed $5,000 into $135,000 in the Hoyle Casino game, so it's not totally realistic.

I have also mentally played Blackjack many many times, just observing rather than playing. I've been winning lately in mental counts, so it gave me bravery to invest some cash.

In addition to what it gave me was a sense of how the game is played, more than just understanding the game from a mathmatical angle. I have acquired a sense of intuition about the game. Also, one of the key things in playing is discipline. I always quit when I've lost $20 or $30. I also quit when I double my money. That way you don't go overboard and lose your shirt.

So if you're going to Vegas in a few days, the best thing I can suggest is to go to your local bookstore and look up books on the various games. Don't bother reading real complex books since you don't have time. Read beginner books with simple strategy guides and it will serve you better for now.

The best thing you can do, which is what I do, is to "mentally" play Blackjack before you sink any money into it.

That's why I'll go to a table, sit and observe the ebb and flow of the game for at least 10 minutes, before I sit down to play. If you mentally track if you're losing "virtual" money or winning, it will give you an edge when you actually throw money into it.

Also, personally, I always look to play the single dealer only. I find that when I'm playing with other players, they either really stink or they pressure other people to make stupid mistakes, as many see the game as a very social game. I go to play, not to socialize. And when I'm playing the dealer one on one, I can reduce the disruption from other players, and have a laser focus on the game at hand.

Good luck!

 

[NsXMas]

If third base has 13, and the dealer is showing a 4, third base should stay. If he hits and gets a face card, he has taken the dealer's potential bust card and at a minimum gives the dealer another opportunity, while busting himself. Perhaps I'm stating it wrong, but 3rd base has immense sway over the fate of the table by either playing correctly or incorrectly.

I agree with your assessment.

Realistically, other players should have no effect on your game. However, statistically, when I play many "mental" games, as well as the actual games I've played, I find that I win nearly double the hands as compared to when other players are in the fray. I don't know what it is, but something definitely causes my winning percentage to go down when I'm playing with other people, especially people who stink or are terrified of hitting.

I was playing a couple of hands with these two macho players, who were talking up a storm. But when it came time to show, one of the guys stood on "12" and "13" when the dealer had 5, 6, 7, 10!! Needless to say he lost his stash. I was just astounded. I also lost money when he was playing as well. Fortunately I gained it all back when he left since he was broke.

 

[CokerRat]

If third base has 13, and the dealer is showing a 4, third base should stay. If he hits and gets a face card, he has taken the dealer's potential bust card and at a minimum gives the dealer another opportunity, while busting himself. Perhaps I'm stating it wrong, but 3rd base has immense sway over the fate of the table by either playing correctly or incorrectly.

If I may analyze, there are two errors in this logic:

1. The heart of your example is that an incorrect decision by one player improved the odds of the dealer beating the rest of the table. The evidence in your example is the that since changing the order of cards did affect an outcome, that the odds must have changed. Not so. This is similar to trying to bet on the winner after the race has run; odds and statistics don't work that way. It is pointless to look backward and say the odds of the winner winning are 100%. More on this later.

2. I suspect the underlying assumption for the above is that it is unlikely to draw two face-cards in a row (assuming multiple decks, 4/13 x 4/13 = 9% chance). This is true before any card is drawn. However, it is not true after you draw the first card and see it's a face card; then the odds for the second card are back to single-card odds (eg. ace = 1/13, deuce = 1/13, three = 1/13 and so on).

This stems from a common trip-up in logic. The correct view is to forget the past and only look at the odds of future events happening. Refer back to the analogy of flipping a coin 10 times and it coming up 10 heads in a row. The common fallacy is to think "the odds of a coin coming up heads 11 times in a row is 0.5^11 = 0.000488, or 1 in 2048. That's very unlikely so the coin will likely come up tails next". That is incorrect. The last 10 flips have already happened; that is history now. The odds of the next flip coming up heads are still 0.50 or 1 in 2.

So back to your example, look at it this way: When 3rd base is considering taking a card, there are two cards sitting at the front of the shoe (call them card A and card B). Even though they are obviously already set, they are still random to us because we don't know what they are. Proof: theoretically nobody should object if we were to swap the order, even though it DOES change the physical order and that you'll get card B instead of card A. But the only time a person would ever object is AFTER they find out what the cards are -- this is looking back and saying we would'a-could'a-should'a picked the winner which has nothing to do with what the odds were. In any case, the point is probabilities of what card A and card B are do not change regardless of whether 3rd base chooses to take card A or give it to the dealer. It's still completely random. Odds of a face card are still 4 in 13, whether 3rd base made a good decision or a bad decision for his own hand.

Sorry to ramble so long. Does that explain it decently?

 

[nkb]

If third base has 13, and the dealer is showing a 4, third base should stay. If he hits and gets a face card, he has taken the dealer's potential bust card and at a minimum gives the dealer another opportunity, while busting himself. Perhaps I'm stating it wrong, but 3rd base has immense sway over the fate of the table by either playing correctly or incorrectly.

CokerRat beat me to it.

LeftLane, that is terrible logic. You are only taking the scenario where 3rd base took a potential bust card away from the dealer.

But, what about if 3rd base has 13, dealer shows 4, the player hits and gets a 6 or a 7? And the next card, which the dealer takes, is a 10? In this case, 3rd base took away a winning card from the dealer, and made him take a bust card.

You can't take only the negative scenarios into account.

 

[NCC-1701D]

I agree with cokerRat...

there is no "wrong" choice when you are the last person at the table.....

if a person had 9 and decided to wave it...the table would get mad if they lost.but if the dealer busted..they don't seem to say anything..

people always get angry at the person on the end when they don't hit when "they should of hit" or visa versa..

but when the person at the end sacrifices their money to get the dealer to bust. I have never seen the other people at the table give back what the person on the end lost...

 

[sabashioyaki]

one of the guys stood on "12" and "13" when the dealer had 5, 6, 7, 10!! Needless to say he lost his stash. I was just astounded.

Don't tell me you hit on "12" and "13" when the dealer has a 5 or 6, that's just like giving your money to the casino. Most of your blackjack logic has no basis in statistical facts. What other players do simply has no effect on your hand.

 

[NsXMas]

Don't tell me you hit on "12" and "13" when the dealer has a 5 or 6, that's just like giving your money to the casino. Most of your blackjack logic has no basis in statistical facts. What other players do simply has no effect on your hand.

You're right. My point was the guy was standing when the dealer had 7's, or 8's, all the way through the 10's showing. I think he was really mentally afraid of busting, even when there were plenty of small cards that were coming out.

Technically what other players do have no effect on your hand, but I think mentally there is.

 

[Sig]

A recent experience that shows why it's ok to be upset when someone, especially 3rd base plays their hand entirely wrong.

In Vegas this past weekend at MGM Grand, I lost a $400 hand due to poor 3rd base play. The deal gave me a two card total of 11 and the dealer shows a 6, mmmmm my favorite! I double down for a total of $400 on the table. I draw a 9 and am feeling pretty good with 20.

I had three players to my left and they all had hands to stay on vs. the the dealers 6. Third base had 13, also a no-brainer stay hand vs. 16. The 3rd base player had sat down about 10 hands previous and did not receive any deals that would test if he knew how to play or not. Well, as this story indicates, this player asks for a hit(in more ways than one ). The dealer gave the usual, "Are you sure?" that they give when someone is making the wrong move. Without hesitation or listening to the grumbles from the players at the table, he says yes. A face card lands and he busts. This player had the minimum bet of $25 at risk. The whole table gasps except me because I was in shock.

The dealer turns his bottom card and shows a face card for a 16 total. He goes to the shoe for his next card and pulls a 5. 21 total. I couldn't say anything, all I did was turn my head and look over at the guy. I think someone asked him to leave the table, but I am not sure since I had tuned out.

So the reason you play properly is that each hand has mathematical odds. If you ignore the proper play and lose, it is on you for ignoring the odds. On the other hand, if you make the proper plays and the dealer makes his hand..... then the cards beat the odds. When I say this I am not referring to advanced techniques, but I believe it is fair to expect people to know how to play against a dealer 6. Especially, when you sit on 3rd base and big money is at play on the table. And if you are learning the game and don't know the proper play..... ask! Every player at the table will tell you the standard play, as will most dealers.

 

[LeftLane]

Yeah, what he said!

 

[KGP]

The dummies need to wear a sign on their fore-head letting everyone know that they are apt to hit a 13 while the dealer has a 6 showing, and that they are far more comfortable playing indian poker than blackjack.

 

[2mph]

A recent experience that shows why it's ok to be upset when someone, especially 3rd base plays their hand entirely wrong.

In Vegas this past weekend at MGM Grand, I lost a $400 hand due to poor 3rd base play. The deal gave me a two card total of 11 and the dealer shows a 6, mmmmm my favorite! I double down for a total of $400 on the table. I draw a 9 and am feeling pretty good with 20.

I had three players to my left and they all had hands to stay on vs. the the dealers 6. Third base had 13, also a no-brainer stay hand vs. 16. The 3rd base player had sat down about 10 hands previous and did not receive any deals that would test if he knew how to play or not. Well, as this story indicates, this player asks for a hit(in more ways than one ). The dealer gave the usual, "Are you sure?" that they give when someone is making the wrong move. Without hesitation or listening to the grumbles from the players at the table, he says yes. A face card lands and he busts. This player had the minimum bet of $25 at risk. The whole table gasps except me because I was in shock.

The dealer turns his bottom card and shows a face card for a 16 total. He goes to the shoe for his next card and pulls a 5. 21 total. I couldn't say anything, all I did was turn my head and look over at the guy. I think someone asked him to leave the table, but I am not sure since I had tuned out.

So the reason you play properly is that each hand has mathematical odds. If you ignore the proper play and lose, it is on you for ignoring the odds. On the other hand, if you make the proper plays and the dealer makes his hand..... then the cards beat the odds. When I say this I am not referring to advanced techniques, but I believe it is fair to expect people to know how to play against a dealer 6. Especially, when you sit on 3rd base and big money is at play on the table. And if you are learning the game and don't know the proper play..... ask! Every player at the table will tell you the standard play, as will most dealers.

As the number of decks in a shoe increases, the "next card" gains more "randomness", since card-counting becomes less of an issue. Assuming we are considering a shoe with acceptable "randomness" (6 decks), we can also assume there exists an even probability distribution among all cards (1/52). Although 3rd-base made a poor decision for himself, it is fallacious to say that 3rd-base effected the outcome for you. 3rd-base's card had probability 1/52, just as your card had probability 1/52. 3rd-base cannot effect the outcome for you.

 

[Sig]

As the number of decks in a shoe increases, the "next card" gains more "randomness", since card-counting becomes less of an issue. Assuming we are considering a shoe with acceptable "randomness" (6 decks), we can also assume there exists an even probability distribution among all cards (1/52). Although 3rd-base made a poor decision for himself, it is fallacious to say that 3rd-base effected the outcome for you. 3rd-base's card had probability 1/52, just as your card had probability 1/52. 3rd-base cannot effect the outcome for you.

"Fallacious", you get 25 cents for using that word in a sentence

Sorry to bust your theorethical bubble, but this sap ceratinly did impact the outcome, not just for me but the whole table. There were only two players at that time at my table that would not have been considered strong players. Each of us had our own systems for count accrual and despite our differences... we all had the cards sitting at an extremely rich point going into that deal, hence the relatively big money at play by most of the table. The level of richness was far beyond the point that true randomness would be had for at least 2 more hands. To back this point, the next 8 cards dealt after the dealers 5, were all 9's or higher. There were two professional players with me at the time and they were more upset than anyone else at the table. The more I think about it, I think this guy was a casino plant!

I do appreciate a good vocab word now and again, so thanks for that.

 

[LeftLane]

As the number of decks in a shoe increases, the "next card" gains more "randomness", since card-counting becomes less of an issue. Assuming we are considering a shoe with acceptable "randomness" (6 decks), we can also assume there exists an even probability distribution among all cards (1/52). Although 3rd-base made a poor decision for himself, it is fallacious to say that 3rd-base effected the outcome for you. 3rd-base's card had probability 1/52, just as your card had probability 1/52. 3rd-base cannot effect the outcome for you.

Actually, there are 16/52 cards that have a value of ten in one deck, so the odds of pulling a face card versus any other individual number is much higher. Just because it is random does not mean that probabilities don't still apply. Also, if I would have won, but instead I lost as a result of what 3rd base does, then it does indeed affect my outcome, even though there was no way to accurately predict that outcome. I still leave the table with less money because someone didn't follow the probabilities.