Blackjack Betting Strategies

[RenoPlayer]

Currently I'm reading about horse racing wagering. One of the ideas that it puts forth is that winning and losing occur more normally in streaks (both minor and major) than they do in an alternating manner (WLWLWLWLW). Because of this the author advocates increasing bets upon a win and going back to the minimum with a loss.

Strictly from viewing and participating in blackjack games, it would seem there is some validity to the idea of groupings of wins and losses. Sometimes I can do nothing right and sometimes I can do nothing wrong.

Is there any experience in chasing wins and cutting losses as a method for sizing bets?

RP

[Steve Bourie]

Originally Posted by RenoPlayer

Currently I'm reading about horse racing wagering. One of the ideas that it puts forth is that winning and losing occur more normally in streaks (both minor and major) than they do in an alternating manner (WLWLWLWLW). Because of this the author advocates increasing bets upon a win and going back to the minimum with a loss.

Strictly from viewing and participating in blackjack games, it would seem there is some validity to the idea of groupings of wins and losses. Sometimes I can do nothing right and sometimes I can do nothing wrong.

Is there any experience in chasing wins and cutting losses as a method for sizing bets?

RP

It seems that you are talking about a progressive betting system.

A progrssive betting system, where you bet more after a win, does nothing to lessen the casino's mathematical advantage over a player.

The only thing that will happen is you will have more volatility in your game with wider swings in your bankroll.

[Punter]

For a longer explanation on this topic see BJ 21.com. Go to the website and look in the left hand vertical column for "Advantage Play". Then scroll down to progressions. Bootlegger sums up betting systems in an easy read. Good cards!

[RenoPlayer]

I know that if you sit down with a pencil and figure out just what would happen with all the runs of wins and losses - AND you are playing a 50% game, you'll wind up breaking even.

Many years back (probably in the late 70's) my wife and I would wander from table to table and casino to casino, playing untill we lost twice in a row and using some sort of progression when winning. Memory says that this was fun and no unprofitable but didn't allow us to sit down for very long at any one place.

More recently I have begun to wonder if winning hands could be used to predict remaining deck composition. Logically it seems that a winning hand should normally make the deck more negative (winning hands usually have 10's) and that losing hands should make it more positive (losing hands have more small cards). If this were true, then it would point to "losing" progressions rather than "winning" progressions.

And, I truly don't think progressions work over time.

RP