Blackjack 3rd “loss” Analysis

So in the previous post I showed the frequency of different win-loss-pushes in a row. I demonstrated that there is a 50% drop in likelihood of a 2nd loss in a row and then another 50% drop in likelihood of a 3rd loss and another 50% drop by the 4th loss. After that the chart levels out with any further loss in a row being equally [un] likely. It also demonstrated that it is a bad idea to keep escalating bets beyond 4 due to this because though it is unlikely that one would lose again, at that end of the scale winning and losing are about equal likelihood (aka: no real advantage).

So the chart shows that the optimal inflection point is between the 3rd and 4th loss. So again used two programs to determine how frequently one hits on the 3rd try (after 2 losses in a row). Same rules applied:

Basic Strategy, no deviations.
6 decks
4 shoes

So since the charts got kinda messed up, the first bar is wins on "3rd try" (just had 2 losses in a row) the second bar is you just lost your 3rd hand in a row and the last bar (3) is you got pushed.

The reason I have 2 charts per app is because I was surprised by the difference between Mobilityware and BJAT. These two apps must be using different algorithms to get their "randomness". I will say that I have found MW to be somewhat streaky. Assuming BJAT to be more accurate you can see that on the second pass it "conformed" to the expectations. It is possible that the first run was an example of negative deviation and indeed I was cash negative for most of that run (was also up 12% at one point and I would have cashed out).

In the charts we can see that the win percentage on BJ Apprentice trainer falls on the low side of wins at 44.7 and 48.27% wins respectively. Admittedly I thought that to be pretty low given the previous charts. I cannot say how this would actually play out but you would “break even” in a give and take situation (assumings your gives aren’t doubles). If you’re fortunate, with a few BJ and doubles on your high bet you can come out far ahead.

Mobilityware showed a far more favorable win rate for the player with 57.14% and 57.8% win rate. This is a SERIOUS advantage and if it played out like that in a casino, one could expect to make a lot of money as that is way beyond the casino advantage.

The average between these two is 51.97% (52%) which is still an advantage over the casino.

Now I have not had practice play that resembled anything I saw at the casino. Some better, some worse, which I guess is about right so take these stats with the appropriate grains of salt and remember these stats are for short term play, I have no idea and have no intentions on how this would work out long term.

BlackJack Win-Loss-Push In A Row Stats

When you are not counting cards you are faced with a situation where you need to use some kind of sound statistical model to win money. Even when you are counting cards you are using a statistical model to approximate your chance of winning. As you may or may not know just because the odds are in your favor of winning a particular hand, doesn’t mean that you will actually win them.

I’ve recently acquired the skill of card counting and proceeded to have the longest string of losses than I ever had. The primary reason for this is that I did not understand that at high counts not only are YOUR odds high of getting “pat hands” and “blackjack” increased but so are the odds of the DEALER getting pat hands and blackjacks AND PUSHES.

So I had to go back to the drawing board. One thing I stopped doing as my earnings increased was “grabbing my winnings” when they were there. That is, I no longer was satisfied with a $50-$100 win for a session ($500 bank). I thought I should and could extend these sessions. It seemed to work that way in practice but at the table, ahhh..no.

Also I looked back at what I did when I did not understand or was able of counting. I ran (and still do) progressions. As indicated in a previous post, running progressions, particularly negative one can deplete your bank very quickly. However there are sound reasonings for why people do run progressions and make money off them in the short term.

Let me emphasize that I am talking short term. I read about players sitting for 20 hours or so. I don’t know how much bank they start with but I have NEVER sat at a BlackJack table for more than 6 hours total. I can barely go an hour before I have to pee. So what follows are relevant win-loss push stats that may be useful for those who cannot count but want to use some sort of statistical model for their betting.

Below you will find two charts. These charts are the results of playing 4 consecutive 6 deck shoes with cut card and dealer hitting on soft 17 while playing basic strategy with NO deviations. Essentially a no counting amateur who managed to memorize or follow BS.

Chart 1 shows the results playing MobilityWare BlackJack 5.5.1 on iPhone IOS 10.2. Chart 2 shows the results playing BlackJack Apprentice Trainer same platform.

What you are seeing are how often “back to back” events occur. Double downs are not considered two hands though one would want to consider the potential monetary impact of a double down loss. Successful splits are counted as double wins. Double loss splits are considered 2 losses in a row and a split split is considered a single loss and single win.

You’ll note that with both apps the odds of winning or losing two hands in a row is around 50%. That is if you’ve lost the first hand the chance of losing the second hand is 50%. You’ll note that winning or losing the third hand halves again the chances. Note that there is a leveling off beginning at 4 hands. There is very little statistical change between win and loss 4 and 8 in a row. This is why if you are playing strictly on win-loss statistics and using a negative progression it is in your interest to stop the bleeding at 4x. At 5x and beyond though the likelihood of losing again is low one has already entered the “damn near impossible” realm and anything goes ( and I have the losses to prove it).

So what does this mean to the basic strategy player with small bank? Well in my opinion, particularly for people playing with small bank (1k and under) you should use the 10-20% rule. When you are up 10-20% of your buy in, bail the table at the next loss and cash out your winnings. Then sit back down and go for another session and repeat. Why do I say this? Well while making these charts I flat betted and was up 100 to 150 on each game and then lost the majority of the winnings. In some cases falling into losing territory (usually on high counts shrug). So there IS money to be made even when flat betting but due to averaging out, the wins that generate that money is going to get wiped out by corresponding losses, you can see that in the chart, there are approximately the same number of wins and losses but losses OUTSTRIP wins in the long term even in this 4 shoe sample. So rather than hand back your winnings to the casino (which you’ll call “leveraging winnings”) cash it out.

That said, knowing these odds, you can (and should) increase your bets per stats. If you’ve lost 4 in a row and continue losing (and you’ve reset your progression right?) you can get to a “large win” if you keep following it. Same rules from counting applies though: Don’t over bet your bank. Keep your cool. One note though. A lot of the damage in negative progressions comes from doubles. You get say 3 losses out and then double on the 4th. If you chase that double by doubling and doubling again as is necessary to level out your bets you run two steps on the chart. I personally say to not chase a double unless it is your first or second loss, consider anything after that a loss to be recovered later if possible.

Also since flat betting can lead to profits, you may want to look at how often you’ve lost or won in a row and throw a larger bet out simply because the stats are in your favor (say, 3rd loss). Don’t blame me for any losses though.

If you count (or have a good eye for tracking when far too many low cards have come out) you can combine these stats and the count to modify your basic strategy play. For instance, on a ridiculously high count if you have a 13 facing a 7, there is a high probability that you will draw a bust card. There is also a high probability that the dealer has a 10 hole card. This means you’re likely to break ahead of the dealer if you draw and still see a 17 OR you’ll stand and the dealer has a 17. But on the chance that the dealer is not sitting on a 17, there is a high probability that the dealer will break on the draw. You might want to let the dealer take the risk rather than yourself.

Another example would be a 15 or 16 against a 7-9 with a high count. Basic strategy says hit the 15 against those and surrender a 16 to a 9. BUT again those high counts mean it’s likely you’ll draw a bust card (usually a 10 value card). Since you’re likely facing a losing situation anyway (stand and lose to a 17=19 or draw for an almost guaranteed bust) why not let the dealer take that risk? But now I’ve strayed into counting territory.

The point here is that Basic (and counting) are long term propositions. A lot of people are not playing for 20 hours straight or even 8 hours straight or going to a casino for an entire weekend. But they want to make money. Money can be made in the short term if you understand what happens short term. If you’re up by 10-20 percent, grab your money! The stats say that if you stay you’ll give it back. And consider this. If you have a disastrous start (something that happened during this test with the BJ apprentice software you have to come back from that before you can profit. So if you’re down 80 and need to get 50 to make your 10% that’s $130 you need to make. That hurts. So look at your down. If you dropped a LOT then you’ve experienced one half of the statistics, the rest will come back (unless you are REALLY unlucky). But when you get back up and you get a little profit, bail and come back. Money management will help you not dig too deep a hole but understand that for a BS player once you’ve gone halfway through your bank (buy in) it’s usually impossible to recoup during that session. It’s probably best to walk away and go home.

BlackJack Tips for Newbies

So those who know me know I play BlackJack and, yes, I pay my bills with it. I've read a lot of online and offline material as to get a handle on the game so that I minimize my losses and increase (not maximize) my earnings. I have been to a lot of places and there are things that I see people doing things that really the equivalent of putting your money in a pile and setting it alight. So this post is for those folks who are playing Blackjack for more than "the fun".

Now first I'm not going to tell you how to count cards. If you want to do that, there are places to go to read that and books you can buy to learn that. If you are playing one of those video Blackjack games, particularly those with continuous shuffles, card counting will be of limited value. I'm going to tell you what you need to do to come out ahead 80% of the time.

1) Do not be emotional! Emotional play will inevitably make you lose your session bank or worse. It will make you chase losses to extremely high amounts.

2)Stop over-betting your bank! I often see people treat a Blackjack table as if it was a lottery ticket. Blackjack is about statistics and statistical variance. You win in the long run. The short run is very much stacked against you. Just yesterday evening I watched a man lose $400 in 5 minutes better $100 hands because he expected to get BlackJack. I can tell you from experience and my records that the odds of you winning your first 4 hands in a row are virtually zero (has not happened to me since I've been keeping records). The most likely event is a win, loss, win, loss, loss. You can see that this means you will likely end up $100 in the hole if you flat bet $100 per hand.

3)Corollary to over-betting bank. Stop bringing 20 bucks to a $10/minimum table. I made this mistake early on and began my $600 losing streak as negative variance took it's toll on my small wagers. One of the biggest problems with too little bank, particularly the $20 banks is that you cannot take advantage of oppopportunities to double down. And if you learn Basic Strategy you know that there are fare more opportunities to double down that you though and this is where you make your real money. Since you can't double down you have limited opportunities to overcome negative variances. For example as show in item two say you have win, loss,win, loss, loss and say that win2 came off a double. guess what? you're not down anymore and if you win the next hand you're up 20 rather than even. That's a rather large swing.

4) Learn Basic Strategy: Again, if you're only playing for fun, don't worry about it. If you're trying to make money you need to learn basic strategy. And yes you need to learn the entire chart. knowing only most of it will still make you bust when you shouldn't (and if you bust you're out) and miss opportunities to double and split meaning you are leaving money on the table that you need to overcome negative variance.

5) You make money off of neutral and positive variance. You lose money on negative variance: What is variance? Basically it's statistical talk for how far off average a set of data is. For example if you use a coin toss. In a coin toss you have a 50-50 chance for heads or tails. However if you flip a coin 100 times it is unlikely you are going to get an exact 50 50 count. You'll get more heads or more tails. This is variance. In Blackjack you expect to win 43% of your hands outright. Another 8% will be pushes (even money because you and the dealer have the same number). The dealer will win 48% of the time. You will win doubles at a rate of 60%, Splits about 50%. from this you understand that you will LOSE most hands. Thus understanding when to split and double is essential in increasing your winnings to overcome the losses. Understand that just because you *should* win 60% of doubles does not mean that each time you play you will win 60% of doubles OR that you will get many opportunities to double in the first place.

6) Beware losing Streaks. This goes along with the advice to not be emotional. You should understand that you will LOSE at some point. You need to limit your losses. I hear people talk about how they are $1400 down and still playing. Me, with my self imposed betting limits, if I'm down $150 i'm leaving. The time and math or risk required to get that money back is too much for me. If you have small bank and are down that amount of cash, you will be spending a lot of time trying to get that back. So if you find yourself in a hole STOP DIGGING and go home. Now the danger with losing streaks is that depending on your bank and betting strategy you can lose a significant amount of money in a short period of time.

I have done the math and discovered that the most likely number of losing streaks is between 1-5. If you are in an extreme negative variance you will see losing streaks of 6-8. If you are EXTREMELY unlucky (by statistical means) in that losing streak will be lost doubles. If you find yourself in such a streak and your bank is being hit, it is likely a sign for you to cash out and go home. If your bank can survive that kind of loss then keep going. Just understand that you've just doubled or tripled the time you need to make any goal you had because you have to make up that bank. And here's the kicker, the longer you play the more likely it is that you will hit negative variance. I've had situations where I was between 100-200 down and even 3 or 4 times and walked away after 3 hours with $10 (ten dollars up from original outlay).

This is the danger of the Martingale system. In short in the martingale system you double your bet after each loss. Yes I tried this and I have had spectacular wins and near total losses. But lets look at the math, most times you won't go past 4 losses in a row so based on a $10 bet you have losses of, 10, 30,70, 150, recovery back to original +10. Now so long as you don't have any mishaps this system can work. Particularly if you have a modest win goal and get out when you make it. But what happens if one of your 40% losses in doubles hits? Back to the math:

10, double loss and double that bet, 50, 100, 300 Oh now in 4 hands you've lost 300. And if you are a low max table (typically $500) you've also hit the betting limit which means you've now lost 200 assuming you win the next hand. All for $10. Now it doesn't look to good.

Say you really get unlucky with a 7-8 hand losing streak. Compare a flat bet:

10,20,30,40,50, 60, 70, 80 lost 80 bucks is not nice but far easier to recover from than -$300. Now martingale:
10,30,70, 150, 310, 630, 1270... Get the point?

So how do you moderate these losses? Again without counting cards and throwing out large bets when the odds are in your favor you should do the following (do not blame me for your losses!). Pick your minimum bet. most places do not go below $5. There are places where you can bet less than that but I consider that a waste of valuable time. so you should bring back that is 100x minimum bet. that's $500 for a $5 minimum.

. Next, do not bet more than 4x minimum. that's $20. Do not violate this rule unless you are willing to lose more money.

At each loss, add $5 until you hit $20 and follow basic strategy.

If you hit $20 and still lose (that's 4 losses in a row, which is on the further side of average) you go back to your minus bet and consider those losses gone. Accept it and move along. I cannot stress this enough. ACCEPT your losses as statistically inevitable. Don't get upset. Don't hit the table, cuss and all that. Stay level headed. Start the sequence over again. it is UNLIKELY that you'll go 8 losses straight but it COULD happen. Accept that and consider leaving for the day.

The one thing that will hurt you is losses on splits and doubles. If you lose streak with those on your higher amounts (15-20) you should seriously consider going home.

7) Lastly, Set a win goal. Personally I like the 40% rule. That is don't plan on winning more than 40% of your session bank. I actually go for less than that (I have my own goals). Once met, cash out and go home. If you are taking a trip where you will be at a casino all day, then this is a good time to do something else for at least an hour. put your earnings in a pocket called "do not spend" and return back to your original bank. bet your bank, not your winnings. You only leverage your winnings DURING a session.

Now I'm sure there are experts that will dispute what I have written here. I'm not going to disagree with them. I'm only writing what is working for me. What works for you and other people may be different. No problem. If it works for you then do it!

End Of Apple Man...But Where's Dr Dre?

BuzzFeed:

But the effervescent demo of Apple Music by the charismatic Bozoma Saint John — a black woman who looked and acted nothing like the typical Apple Men onstage before her and who in her opening remarks mentioned being a mother — felt like a breath of fresh air signaling that perhaps the winds are changing. There were other signals too. In the video segment cheering on developers using Apple’s Swift programming language, the video ended with a black woman joyfully expounding how awesome coding was — certainly not the stereotype of a coder, and not totally reflective of the crowd there watching the video. At another Apple event in March, another black female Apple executive, Lisa Jackson, took the stage to talk about Apple’s environmental efforts.

I'm not going to shit on the Black women I'm just going to point out that among the Apple Men, Dr. Dre, who's company was swallowed up by Apple hasn't been seen. Don't worry though, we all know about The Rape Over:

Yet Another Gran Coup from BMW

So it looks like the 2 series is going Gran Coupe on us. Seen on rt. 17 North in Bergen County, likely on the way to BMWNA headquarters. Plate is from Georgia. How do I know it's a Gran Coupe, 4 doors when I passed.

Insulting Idris

I am not one of those persons that think that simply because a black person is present that they should get an award or even be nominated for one. Heck I don't even think that just because a black person makes a movie that it should be lauded. I think the bar for any movie being nominated for any award should be is it well done. Same goes for the actors work. Did they "do their thing" or not. In keeping with that, the fact that Idris or anybody else in Beasts of No Nation was nominated for best anything is a huge problem to me.

I've said before that I didn't think that Idris should have been in Thor. Matter of fact I think any non-white characters tossed into a Norse mythos is an insult that wouldn't fly if it were done in the reverse. There is nothing wrong with white ethnic mythos' not having black (or any other race) characters just as there is nothing wrong with Chinese mythos' not having non-Chinese characters. And yes, I'm kinda bothered that Mike Tyson is in the latest Ip Man movie. No offense to Tyson but reaaallllly?

I'm not even joining the "Straight Outta Compton" crowd. I saw it. I wasn't much interested in NWA when they first hit the scene and I'm STILL not particularly interested in NWA. But if Cadillac Records couldn't land a nomination, then "Straight" wasn't either. "Beasts" was no "Straight". It was better than straight and tackled a serious problem. Heck, I think it would make for a good lesson on the pitfalls of charismatic leadership and poor governance. Idris played the rebel leader to the hilt. Agu performed excellently as well. In fact when I realized "Beasts" had no nomination, I seriously wondered if it was even watched by anyone on the committee. I haven't seen The Revenant. But from the previews I've seen it is a winter Beasts, in a different country, with a different (read: white) cast. You have people in the wilderness, fighting others and the elements. Yet "Revenant" has nominations and "Beasts" does not.

But this is nothing strange to many of us. We do the work, others get the raises, promotions and recognition.

Star Wars: The Feminists F**K Up

So I had high hopes for the new Star Wars movie. I avoided any reviews of the movie in order to avoid spoilers. I thought that with the impressive gains in CGI I would be in for epic scenes. I got that. But that was all I got. The rest had me leaving the theatre highly annoyed and glad I paid matinee money.

I knew that there would be some propagandizing when JJ Abrams gave that interview talking about all the white men in the movie and how he purposely went to diversify the Star Wars universe. I have no problem with diversifying a cast so long as it does not detract from the primary business at hand: Telling a coherent and believable story with due exceptions needed for a work of fiction. What happened in Star Wars was that it turned a great epic from the 70's into a propaganda film straight out the feminist re-education camps called "women's studies" and that is on top of EPIC and I mean EPIC fails in concepts. Lets begin.

Finn:

We meet Finn at the beginning of the movie where his fellow trooper (and by his emotional response possibly lover) is killed by the rebel ace pilot. THEN we find out near the climatic battle that Fin was an ex-sanitation worker (who somehow knows about the defense systems...) So when did the Empire/First Order promote sanitation workers to Storm Trooper? Perhaps this explains why Storm Troopers are such poor shots. And am I the only one wondering why and where all the clones went? They paid a whole lot for the clones of Jango Fett. Are we to believe that they all died between episode 3 and 4?

Finn is also in the JJ world where the women are just as bad-ass, well actually MORE badass (we'll get to that) than the men. I mean this guy reported to an Amazon type, special silver uniform female officer. Yet when he gets to Jaku his first instinct is to try and protect Rey and has a look of surprise when she kicks ass? Maybe it's only First Order women who can fend for themselves. This is the real first clue that you've entered the Feminism zone. There will be no "female in need of rescuing" here. Never mind that such rescuing was the major story ark of the original. Nope, the robot needs rescuing.

About the only thing Finn is good for in this film is to get Ace Pilot off the First Order ship. He's next to useless in combat. He can't fly a ship. He is a poor medic, knows nothing about tools or anything mechanical. Was there anyone in the original Star Wars that was that useless? Finn apparently exists to:

1) Be black.
2) White Knight for Rey who can clearly "take care of herself".
3) Rescue Ace Fighter.
Should Finn not reappear in later installments, I will not be sad.

Before I get to Rey, let me get to the Death Planet.

In the original we could imagine a death star. It was a novel concept but at least it was self-powered. I'll admit that the idea that it had enough fire power to destroy an entire planet was far fetched but it worked. In this movie we get the Death Planet. OK. How does this planet get it's power? It sucks up suns.

Really.

On this basis alone you'd think that every planet in the known universe would be against the First Order. In order to power the Death Planet a sun must be destroyed and therefore every living thing on an inhabitable planet in that solar system and the alteration of the orbits of various stellar entities. At least the death star only destroyed a single planet. And these guys are calling for "order"!

Not only that, but the Death Planet apparently just floats up close to a sun with absolutely no impact on the environment and sucks up what seems to be solar flares it causes.

Smh

And does this is in about 15-20 minutes.

Smh

I suppose solar panels were too much to ask for. Hey at least it was green energy!

Rey:

Rey is the badass with the Samori hairdo. She is apparently very nice with a Bo (staff). She's SO bad ass that unlike Luke and Anakin, she's been on her own on Tatooine..I mean Jaku all by herself! Not only do girls not need rescuing, they DONT NEED PARENTS or ANY FAMILY OR FRIENDS!

After rescuing Finn the ex-sanitation worker turned storm trooper, she gets onto the Millennium Falcon which she has not only never flown before and apparently hasn't flown anything other than her land speeder, but not only flies this thing first try but is doing aerial acrobatics! On her first go! Mind you we never saw how Luke Skywalker learned to fly an X-Wing so we could forgive this but this is the first hour of the film! At least Anakin had years of flying and in his space flight debut he was basically lucky when he destroyed the ship.

Not only that though, Rey knows the ins and outs of the Falcon. A ship she's never been on. No really. Diagrams? Rey don't need no stinking diagrams! She's been crawling inside of downed imperial ships!

But the worst part was her fight with Kylo. Lets get this straight. Kylo is no Darth Vader but he has been trained for many years in lightsaber use and in the force. He knows force grip (which according to lore comes after mastery of push and pull) and what appears to be level 3 mind control (in video game parlance). Level one would be the ability to distract.

Remember that Luke and Anakin, both very strong in the Force didn't master any of these powers until way into the trilogies. Rey however can manipulate minds immediately! How? Why? Because vagina apparently.

Back to this fight though. Rey beats Kylo in her very first time using a light saber! Lets understand how much of an epic fail this is:

At the beginning of the movie. Kylo stops blaster fire in mid flight while simultaneously holding Ace Fighter still. He continues to keep blaster shot still while having conversations and giving orders. Only when he leaves does he stop holding the blast. And let us recall that Kylo trained with Luke Skywalker and his new dark master. Yet he cannot defeat Rey who has no knowledge of Force usage (other than "you will release me") and has never used a blade before. I can tell you that one who has mastered the Bo (staff) does not know how to use a blade. Two different types of weapons.

It took almost everything I had in me to not yell out "bullshit" when this scene ended. That's how bad this was. Was it shot well? Yes. But the story was shit. Total shit. At least the original Star Wars had luke learn to use the Force and to develop his skills. He was constantly told by Yoda and Kenobi that he was not prepared to take on Vader. Anakin lost limb to Dooku.

Here's the worst part though. This film made millions and will likely make billions. This is going to be used to "prove" that the story is "good" and therefore we will get more of this nonsense. I suppose the good thing is that now that Rey has met Luke and can get trained, the unbelievable fights will make more sense. I guess the good thing is that we don't have Jar-Jar and Mitochondria, I mean Midichlorians to deal with.