 Ask the Wizard: |
Blackjack - Systems, Strategies, and Money Management |
As a blackjack player, I recognize betting systems don't work in the long run. However, having played a lot of blackjack, streaks (good and bad) do happen. So, I am wondering, without card counting, would tracking simple wins vs. losses, compared with the remaining cards in a 6 or 8-deck shoe, deck be meaningful? In other words, would you be able to obtain a small percentage advantage for the remaining third of the shoe if you knew the win-loss ratio was out of whack? — Alex from Greenwich, CT
I've been wondering this myself for years. In 2004 somebody accepted my betting system challenge, claiming he could beat blackjack without counting. The details are in my page on the Daniel Rainsong challenge. After I posted it, I received a message from a blackjack genius, who goes by the handle "Cacarulo." He challenged me under the same conditions and blackjack rules set forth in the Rainsong challenge.
Knowing how knowledgeable he is about blackjack, I felt that he was probably right, so I declined the challenge. I asked anyway how he would have gone about his strategy, but he wouldn't tell me. I tend to think that he would have bet the minimum most of the time, except if it was late in the shoe, and the ratio of losses to wins was very high since the last shuffle, he would have bet the maximum. The reason is that losing is positively correlated to small cards being played, and winning to large cards. In other words, a benefit of losing is that it tends to make the count better. However, this is a weak correlation. My challenge allowed the player a bet range of 1 to 1,000, which is probably enough to overcome the house edge, but it will be hard to find a real casino okay with a jump in bet size by a factor of 1,000.
The short answer to your question is, no, tracking wins and losses will not help enough to warrant the bother of doing it. February 17, 2009
Do you have a good rule for getting up from the blackjack table for a non-card counter playing basic strategy? Obviously we'd all like to quit while we're ahead, but how far ahead. And is there a time to quit when you're behind? – Scott from Chicago
For recreational gambling, my rule is to get up when you’re not having fun any longer. February 7, 2007
I have a question about a blackjack tournament, where only the largest stack at the end is paid. Assume 1000 players start with 100$ in chips and can bet 5 hands at a time, from 1-10$ per hand. If no one knows anything about the other chipstacks, what chipstack should you be looking for before being satisfied? – Aaron S from Rockford, MI
You didn’t say how many rounds there were. However, I would bet $10 in all five hands every hand, or go bust trying. With 1,000 players and a relatively low max bet you’ll need all the variance you can get.
June 9, 2006I think the seller of blackjackwealth.com
should be blacklisted. I told him that on your page I could
get the same information, given in his "system", for free.
Furthermore the seller denies me a refund, which according
to my experience is very rare among serious sellers,
although he WOULD give me a refund, provided I show him some
gaming log thus proving that I have lost money following his
"guidelines". He even mocks me in his emails, when I've been
asking for refunds. Check out the system that I got access
to for almost $20 and see for yourself. Is that a good
system? Is it worth the money?
Thank you for giving me the login to read this
guide, but of course I can't repeat it here. This product
basically says to go from Internet casino to casino
milking new player bonuses playing blackjack basic
strategy. The basic strategy chart was obviously stolen
from my site. There is some value in his list of bonus
offers, which you don't have to pay for, but that is
about it. Milking Internet casinos for bonuses is a
common knowledge advantage play. Back in 2000 or earlier
it was very lucrative but today it is a tough grind due
to smaller bonuses and increased play requirements. I
don't have a blacklist for this type of thing but am
thinking of adding one. Sorry you wasted your $20 but I
hope this warning will give you some justice.
Nov. 8, 2004
Hi, I read almost everything on your site and all I
can say is WOW and THANKS so much for all the help you bring
to everyone. I have however a question which I think is
interesting and should be added in your FAQ section. You say
there is no betting system that can beat a game of luck. I
am 100% on your side with that as I have tried dozens of
them and with no results. You just can't beat the casino in
the long run. HOWEVER, how come there are professional
players? I mean, there are some people that are called
'Professional blackjack players' who make their living by
gambling. Everyone sees them on television in tournaments
and things like that where they bet thousands and thousands.
How come they make a living out of it if there is no
possible way to win in the long run, it's their job, so it's
necessarily in the long that they are winning. How
come?
You're welcome. It must have taken all day to
read my entire site. You are confusing betting systems,
which are worthless, to legitimate strategies that give
the player an advantage. Two games that can be proven
beatable with good rules and proper strategy are
blackjack and video poker. So I call a system a worthless
method of following trends in games with a house
advantage, and a strategy something like card counting in
blackjack that is mathematically proven to work. Video
poker can be beaten by hunting down the best pay tables
and then following a reliable strategy on which cards to
keep and which to discard. March
6, 2004
Does losing a hand at blackjack increase the
probability that the composition of the deck is in your
favor? More specifically, is your expected return on one
hand ever positive after a given net loss since the last
shuffle?
Without knowing anything else, if you lost the
last hand in blackjack then it is slightly more likely
that more small cards than large just left the deck. This
would make the remaining deck more large card rich and
thus lower the house edge. However I speculate this is an
extremely small effect. Yet it does go to show that if
you must use a betting system one that increases the bet
after a loss is better than one that increases after a
win. I hesitate to put this in writing at all because
again the effect is probably very small and I fear system
sellers will misquote me and imply I endorse any system,
which I DO NOT. Nov. 19,
2003
I've been playing blackjack for quite awhile using
basic strategy, mostly betting an even unit each hand.
Occasionally I will increase the bet because I "feel" like I
am going to win the next one. I would think that just about
all recreational players bet on feel once in a while at
least. I was reading through some of your past Ask the
Wizard columns and saw your calculation of the probability
of a string of losses in the August 4, 2002 Column. You know
those emotional thoughts that pop in head while gambling
(well maybe not your head), "I'm due for a win!"
That column seemed to put the mathematics to that
"feeling" a player can get. In that columns' example of a
player losing 8 consecutive hands of blackjack the odds were
(.5251^8 or about 1 in 173). My question though is what does
that really mean? Is it that when I sit down at the table, 1
out of my next 173 playing sessions I can expect to have an
8 hand losing streak? Or does it mean that on any given loss
it is a 1 in 173 chance that it was the first of 8 losses
coming my way?
I know, I know, its some sort of divine intervention
betting system I am talking about and no betting system
affects the house edge. I'm still curious though. Besides
every once in awhile throwing down a bigger bet just adds to
the excitement and for some reason it seems logical that if
you have lost a string of hands you are "due" for a win. -
Steve from Phoenix, AZ
I have no problem with increasing your bet when
you get a lucky feeling. What is important is that you
play your cards right. Unless you are counting cards you
have the free will to bet as much as you want. As I
always say all betting systems are equally worthless so
flying by the seat of your pants is just as good as flat
betting over the long term. When I said the probability
of losing 8 hands in a row is 1 in 173 I meant that
starting with the next hand the probability of losing 8
in a row is 1 in 173. The chances of 8 losses in a row
over a session are greater the longer the session. I hope
this answers your question.
March 21, 2003
As you state on your site the house edge in blackjack
is very low. Maybe you should increase your bet when the
dealer gets 4 or 5 cards, because the cards would likely be
small and the next hand would be large card rich? - Tim
Skarecky from Gurnee, Illinois
This is an oversimplified method of counting
cards. Better yet survey all the cards on the table. If
you see a lot of small cards, especially fives and sixes,
and few large cards, especially aces, then raise your
bet. If you see the opposite then lower your bet. The
fewer the decks the better this will work. Better yet use
an actual count system like the ace/five.
Feb. 20, 2003
What do you think about the strategy of add 50% after
second winnings in blackjack, ex, 2-2-5-7-11-15-22-33.... -
KYK from Hong Kong
As I have said many times, in the long run all
betting systems are equally worthless.
Aug. 31, 2002
I play the negative system in black jack meaning I
double every time I lose until I Win. I wanted to what the
odds are of losing 4,5,6,7,8,9 hands in a row? How many
hands should I expect to play till I lost 8 hands which is
my stopping point? - Jay from New Haven, Connecticut
The name for this system is the Martingale.
Ignoring ties the probability of a new loss for a hand of
blackjack is 52.51%. So the probability of losing 8 in a
row is .52518 = 1 in 173.
Aug. 4, 2002
Have you ever heard of the Ken Fuchs progression. If
so, would you please e-mail me or post the details on your
site. - John Forney from Baltimore, USA
I'm not familiar with it. Ken Fuchs co-wrote
Knock-Out Blackjack so he can't be all bad. However I
just hear the word progression and I'm immediately
skeptical. June 13,
2001
Q: Any tips on money management in blackjack? - I
usually double after a win, go back to my original bet after
3 wins (or any loss), and play the game according to the
book. I usually do pretty well, but it's slow and steady and
not very exciting. Any tips? - Jackblack from New Jersey.
I don't put a lot of emphasis on betting systems. In the
long run you will lose the same percentage of money bet no
matter what system you use. So my advice is use a system
that maximizes the fun of the game. If you use anything more
exciting you will need to increase your betting spread which
is more risky. It is up to you to find a balance between fun
and risk. April 2,
2000
Q: What is the value of the blackjack system called
"Mastering the Flow?" It's marketed via an infomercial, and
the website is www.changetheodds.com.
It claims not to be a counting system, yet the vague
description of the system that the website gives makes it
sound like counting to me. The claims are pretty out-there:
"Win every time" etc. I count cards (using the KO
PREFERRED), and understand that this new "system" has to be
either a simplistic count strategy, or a scam. Would you
look into it for us, the gullible public? - Michael Graves,
Henderson Nevada
A: I had a look at the web site and also found that
little he says about the theory behind his system makes it
sound like card counting. However I'm deeply skeptical of
anything that claims to "blow old fashioned card counting
away." I think we can file this under "If it sounds too good
to be true is probably is." April
2, 2000
Q: Great site! I am interested in your thoughts on
card clumping. The theories I have read seem to have some
merit in regard to the method dealers now use to pick up
cards (naturals first, then breaks, and finally standing
hands), and then insufficient shuffling of 8-deck shoes to
fully mathematically randomize. This would seem to lead to a
reduced probability of dealer busting, thus breaking down
the Basic Strategy odds. Keep up the great work! - Bob
Jepson of Hooksett, New Hampshire
A: Again I am not an expert on topics related to bias in
the way cards are collected and shuffled. I am sure there is
a lot of truth to what you said in your question, however I
am not convinced the impact on the return of the game is
anything more than minute. This topic is seldom addressed
among blackjack experts, which I think speaks for itself. I
do think it makes for an interesting tangential study, and I
do not wish to minimize the efforts of those studying it,
but in my opinion the average player does not need to be
concerned about the card clumping effect.
Mar. 25, 2000
©1998-2006 Wizard Of Odds Consulting, Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy/Terms
Contact
Advertise
About Us
Links
| 
