Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Let's talk casino gambling! (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter soothsayer
- Start date
Sarnoff
Footballguy
Mike E. Smith. Only races when he thinks he's gonna win. Currently the #6 jockey in winnings this year... and the only jockey in the top 20 with less than 300 starts. Everyone who's out-earned him has 400, 600, 700 starts, he's got 278.
If you ever see him in a race where his horse's owner has 2 horses in the race, put it all on him. No way he's picking himself the slower one.
Sarnoff
Footballguy
If you ignore maiden races and claiming races (and maiden claiming races, obv.), it'll cut down on the number you have to think about.
Which is why I was surprised to see a few posters agree that the only way to make money at BJ is to press your bets when winning.
Personally I'm too lazy (or drunk, most often) to keep up with remembering to abide by any sort of progression betting method. I usually just get hammered and bet random amounts with no real rhyme or reason other than "feel", which is pretty ridiculous. It's a lot more fun than trying to stick to a system though IMO, and as far as I know makes no difference mathematically to long-term success.
ETA: (or significant lack there of
)
Last edited by a moderator:
James Daulton
Footballguy
Really though, you should have walked away with $25 or $30k. You were playing online and you either caught a glitch or they intentionally has it loose. I was up $40k on online blackjack and once I got to 25k, I realized the party was over. It is rare to get up that big playing at $500 limits.
Baloney Sandwich
Footballguy
Lately I've enjoyed playing Spanish 21 over Blackjack. Typically it is a better bet than blackjack, especially if the Dealer stands on a soft 17. You need to adjust your play a little bit to account for no 10s in the deck but plenty of favorable rules to make up for it. Also, at a crowded casino the tables are a lot easier to get on than blackjack.
Taking 10's out is huge. I think the odds might be similar, but I seriously doubt it is better. But where the house really wins, is most people play it applying the basic strategy of blackjack, which is far from optimal.
Baloney Sandwich
Footballguy
0.37% house edge when Dealer stands on a soft 17. Your point that people that don't adjust their strategy from standard blackjack is valid though.
VA703
Footballguy
this is what I do. bet the minimum until the count is favorable then increase accordingly
Worm
slimy ninja
Last edited by a moderator:
Worm
slimy ninja
I don't think the point is about that betting system "working". Nothing except counting cards is going to "work".
The point is it's a lot harder to ever have that hot run that builds up your bankroll if you stay at 1 unit bets every hand.
Rick James
Footballguy
Yep. I ran $100 into about $1,800 over the span of a few hours this way playing at a $5 table in Mississippi. Not a lot of money but the point is you've just got to treat the chips as chips, nothing more. At one point I remember winning so many hands in a row that I didn't even count the money I had out there. I would just reach into a large stack of green chips (there were like 8 stacks at this point) and just grab a handful and add them to what was my previous bet. Finally a buddy comes over and gets bug-eyed and says "how much you go out there?!" and I'm half drunk, half asleep and just shrug. I had about $300 out there.
I had so many stacks in front of me the dealer was practically begging me to leave the table. lmao. that was fun.
GTBilly
Footballguy
Rick James
Footballguy
Rick James
Footballguy
No one said it was a "winning strategy". Someone asked what stakes these guys were playing to get on those insane rolls. The answer is pressing your bets and catching a ton of cards.
the only winning strategy is to count cards or not play.
GTBilly
Footballguy
Didn't ask what it should be, already knew that answer. Asked what he was calling a stack.
Thorn
Footballguy
Um, that's exactly what FUJB said, and you agreed with it. You even bolded it.
Last edited by a moderator:
VA703
Footballguy
I'm reluctant to ask because I know your stat knowledge is superior to everyone else in this thread (
), but... What the hell are you talking about?
Rick James
Footballguy
We were talking about the huge swings. "Make money" as in hit them hard for $30k in a session, not "make money" as in beat the casino regularly.Um, that's exactly what FUJB said, and you agreed with it. You even bolded it.
Last edited by a moderator:
It is computer gambling, the deck is program and not every program is random. When one site first went live with blackjack, i played and won virtually every hand for the first several hours, turned $500 into over $40K. The next day i played and lost every hand. I think Otis ran into a similar situation. The odds of the runs being attributed to random chance are extremely remote. There was something in the programing, either intentional or unintentional.I'm reluctant to ask because I know your stat knowledge is superior to everyone else in this thread (
So your proof of online blackjack being rigged or mathematically glitched is that one day you won a lot, and the next day you lost a lot?It is computer gambling, the deck is program and not every program is random. When one site first went live with blackjack, i played and won virtually every hand for the first several hours, turned $500 into over $40K. The next day i played and lost every hand. I think Otis ran into a similar situation. The odds of the runs being attributed to random chance are extremely remote. There was something in the programing, either intentional or unintentional.I'm reluctant to ask because I know your stat knowledge is superior to everyone else in this thread (
GTBilly
Footballguy
If you start out betting one unit every hand, but then "press your bets" so that you're sometimes betting two or three or even four units per hand, you will have larger swings (including larger wins) than if you keep betting only one unit per hand.
But if you bet five units every hand without varying your bet, you'll have even bigger swings (including bigger wins)!
(Assuming a "unit" has the same value in each case, and you play the same number of hands.)
The key to having big swings isn't varying your bet; the key is simply betting a lot of money in total, whether or not you ever vary your bet.
Last edited by a moderator:
And your assumption that an off-shore completely unregulated gaming site is not rigged is based on what, blind faith? I won hundreds of hands in a row and lost hundreds of hands in a row, in something that should be random. The odds of that being random is for all practical purposes zero. If I wasn't married, I would not have stopped that night.So your proof of online blackjack being rigged or mathematically glitched is that one day you won a lot, and the next day you lost a lot?It is computer gambling, the deck is program and not every program is random. When one site first went live with blackjack, i played and won virtually every hand for the first several hours, turned $500 into over $40K. The next day i played and lost every hand. I think Otis ran into a similar situation. The odds of the runs being attributed to random chance are extremely remote. There was something in the programing, either intentional or unintentional.I'm reluctant to ask because I know your stat knowledge is superior to everyone else in this thread (
Thorn
Footballguy
You would think after winning 200-plus hands in a row, it would be really easy to quit after, say, 50 losses in a row.And your assumption that an off-shore completely unregulated gaming site is not rigged is based on what, blind faith? I won hundreds of hands in a row and lost hundreds of hands in a row, in something that should be random. The odds of that being random is for all practical purposes zero. If I wasn't married, I would not have stopped that night.So your proof of online blackjack being rigged or mathematically glitched is that one day you won a lot, and the next day you lost a lot?It is computer gambling, the deck is program and not every program is random. When one site first went live with blackjack, i played and won virtually every hand for the first several hours, turned $500 into over $40K. The next day i played and lost every hand. I think Otis ran into a similar situation. The odds of the runs being attributed to random chance are extremely remote. There was something in the programing, either intentional or unintentional.I'm reluctant to ask because I know your stat knowledge is superior to everyone else in this thread (
Completely unregulated isn't entirely accurate, as many of them are regulated by foreign gaming commissions.And your assumption that an off-shore completely unregulated gaming site is not rigged is based on what, blind faith? I won hundreds of hands in a row and lost hundreds of hands in a row, in something that should be random. The odds of that being random is for all practical purposes zero. If I wasn't married, I would not have stopped that night.So your proof of online blackjack being rigged or mathematically glitched is that one day you won a lot, and the next day you lost a lot?It is computer gambling, the deck is program and not every program is random. When one site first went live with blackjack, i played and won virtually every hand for the first several hours, turned $500 into over $40K. The next day i played and lost every hand. I think Otis ran into a similar situation. The odds of the runs being attributed to random chance are extremely remote. There was something in the programing, either intentional or unintentional.I'm reluctant to ask because I know your stat knowledge is superior to everyone else in this thread (
I'm not saying that there hasn't been online gaming sites that were possibly rigged. But logically it doesn't really make sense for them to cheat. They have a +EV game that can't be beat and basically prints money. Why wouldn't they want it to be as legitimate as possible?
I think many people suffer bad beats online and are quick to claim that it is rigged, but forget about how often it happens in real life as well.
Seems extremely unlikely that you literally lost several hundred hands in a row. Given your self proclaimed advanced knowledge of statistics one would think after 50 straight losses you might have realized that something wasn't right.
This was back in 2005 or 2006, so my memory has lasped. It was a $5-$50 table betting the max on each hand. To get up over $40,000 in a couple hours was a ridiculous win-rate. Don't recall if it was actually100% win or lose rate, but it had to be above 90 percent. That is a net +800 hands wins. The next day in about an hour, I had a net -300 hands loses. It was too crazy to be random.Completely unregulated isn't entirely accurate, as many of them are regulated by foreign gaming commissions.And your assumption that an off-shore completely unregulated gaming site is not rigged is based on what, blind faith? I won hundreds of hands in a row and lost hundreds of hands in a row, in something that should be random. The odds of that being random is for all practical purposes zero. If I wasn't married, I would not have stopped that night.So your proof of online blackjack being rigged or mathematically glitched is that one day you won a lot, and the next day you lost a lot?It is computer gambling, the deck is program and not every program is random. When one site first went live with blackjack, i played and won virtually every hand for the first several hours, turned $500 into over $40K. The next day i played and lost every hand. I think Otis ran into a similar situation. The odds of the runs being attributed to random chance are extremely remote. There was something in the programing, either intentional or unintentional.I'm reluctant to ask because I know your stat knowledge is superior to everyone else in this thread (
I'm not saying that there hasn't been online gaming sites that were possibly rigged. But logically it doesn't really make sense for them to cheat. They have a +EV game that can't be beat and basically prints money. Why wouldn't they want it to be as legitimate as possible?
I think many people suffer bad beats online and are quick to claim that it is rigged, but forget about how often it happens in real life as well.
Seems extremely unlikely that you literally lost several hundred hands in a row. Given your self proclaimed advanced knowledge of statistics one would think after 50 straight losses you might have realized that something wasn't right.
Raider Nation
Devil's Advocate
I once won 878 hands in a row. SICK run.
And then instead of playing again the very next day, the shark move is to wait two days before playing again. Duh.
Short Corner
Footballguy
Why would anyone play on an unregulated gaming site?jon_mx said:And your assumption that an off-shore completely unregulated gaming site is not rigged is based on what, blind faith? I won hundreds of hands in a row and lost hundreds of hands in a row, in something that should be random. The odds of that being random is for all practical purposes zero. If I wasn't married, I would not have stopped that night.UniAlias said:So your proof of online blackjack being rigged or mathematically glitched is that one day you won a lot, and the next day you lost a lot?jon_mx said:It is computer gambling, the deck is program and not every program is random. When one site first went live with blackjack, i played and won virtually every hand for the first several hours, turned $500 into over $40K. The next day i played and lost every hand. I think Otis ran into a similar situation. The odds of the runs being attributed to random chance are extremely remote. There was something in the programing, either intentional or unintentional.UniAlias said:I'm reluctant to ask because I know your stat knowledge is superior to everyone else in this thread (jon_mx said:
The site was UltimateBet, which is famous for fraud. It was the first night they went live with blackjack, prior to that it was just a poker site. I believe I was playing two hands at once, never losing both hands. It was a consistent climb upwards to $40K. I stop only because my wife was screaming at me to go to bed and unaware of my online gaming activities.
Raider Nation
Devil's Advocate
So how much of that did they send you?
I managed to get $8K over the next couple of months. It was a process and limited to $4k. Lost most of the rest in high stakes poker over the next several months.
Arizona Ron
Footballguy
Clowns need to learn to move in a casino.
Rule of thumb, always times the table minimum by 40.
If it's a $5 min, don't sit down unless you have $200+ to play. $10 min, bring $400+ etc.
My biggest pet peeve is the person that buys in at a $5 table for $3,000 and plays $5 hands. You dumb ####, you're still getting rated as a $5 player. Oh maybe you're "washing money?", you dumb #### you just dimed yourself.
Rule of thumb, always times the table minimum by 40.
If it's a $5 min, don't sit down unless you have $200+ to play. $10 min, bring $400+ etc.
My biggest pet peeve is the person that buys in at a $5 table for $3,000 and plays $5 hands. You dumb ####, you're still getting rated as a $5 player. Oh maybe you're "washing money?", you dumb #### you just dimed yourself.
NIU Kicker
Footballguy
The NIU Kicker guide to winning 3 card poker.
Go on a cruise.
Go to casino when no real poker game is taking place.
Sit down with $100. Bet $5 and $5 and play every hand better then Q-7
Get drunk
** most important **
Out of the 1000 hands you ever play make sure you get your 2 st8 flushes during the 25 or so hands when you say f it and play $25-$25.
Seriously - uncanny how lucky I was. Paid for two cruses this way.
Go on a cruise.
Go to casino when no real poker game is taking place.
Sit down with $100. Bet $5 and $5 and play every hand better then Q-7
Get drunk
** most important **
Out of the 1000 hands you ever play make sure you get your 2 st8 flushes during the 25 or so hands when you say f it and play $25-$25.
Seriously - uncanny how lucky I was. Paid for two cruses this way.
Otis
Footballguy
I don't know what any of this means.Clowns need to learn to move in a casino.
Rule of thumb, always times the table minimum by 40.
If it's a $5 min, don't sit down unless you have $200+ to play. $10 min, bring $400+ etc.
My biggest pet peeve is the person that buys in at a $5 table for $3,000 and plays $5 hands. You dumb ####, you're still getting rated as a $5 player. Oh maybe you're "washing money?", you dumb #### you just dimed yourself.
Arizona Ron
Footballguy
Because you're a mark.I don't know what any of this means.Clowns need to learn to move in a casino.
Rule of thumb, always times the table minimum by 40.
If it's a $5 min, don't sit down unless you have $200+ to play. $10 min, bring $400+ etc.
My biggest pet peeve is the person that buys in at a $5 table for $3,000 and plays $5 hands. You dumb ####, you're still getting rated as a $5 player. Oh maybe you're "washing money?", you dumb #### you just dimed yourself.
Raider Nation
Devil's Advocate
Any of you using Dan Pronovost's "Speed Count" system? I was reading about it in one of Frank Scoblete's books. It's supposed to be a quicker (hence the name) and easier BJ card-counting system than the Hi-Lo. It's based on tracking small cards and number of completed hands. Maybe it's just me, but when I was rapid-dealing hands on BJ software, it wasn't easier at all to keep track of. The Hi-Lo was much easier (again, for me) to track. Guess that's a good thing, because he says the Hi-Lo is more dependable anyway.
Related question: do I want a 6-deck shoe with poor penetration (Mohegan) or an 8-deck shoe with slightly better penetration (Foxwoods)?
Mohegan stands on S17 and Foxwoods hits a S17, if it matters.
Related question: do I want a 6-deck shoe with poor penetration (Mohegan) or an 8-deck shoe with slightly better penetration (Foxwoods)?
Mohegan stands on S17 and Foxwoods hits a S17, if it matters.
Raider Nation
Devil's Advocate
Baloney Sandwich
Footballguy
If there is only a slight difference in penetration than I would lean towards Mohegan.
Similar threads
