I could keep on posting new examples of target betting demolishing a house edge far greater than negative expectation, but there are people out there who will not believe it until they do it themselves.
And that is how it should be.
What I have been working hard to demonstrate here is that my method's consistent success is not a fluke, it is just common sense and arithmetic at work.
The basics of target betting have been around for more than three decades and available on the Internet since 1997, but still I get warnings that my ideas won't work "next time."
How many next times do there have to be, I wonder?
I once had an interesting conversation with the publisher of a now-defunct gambling magazine who summarily dismissed all my claims for target betting, but added: "Even very smart people who ought to know better wish in their hearts that the house advantage could be beaten. And if you show them something new in a casino and start winning real money as they watch, they are very easily impressed."
His point was that personal experience is a more powerful influence than prejudice or theory, adding that the keenest academic minds can be dulled by the thrill of an easy win.
So anyone contributing to this unending series of trials should fight any temptation to rush to judgment, even if their judgment is that target betting is the only way to win.
My publisher friend said that for his part, he would remain officially unconvinced if I showed him solid wins against millions of verifiable outcomes, and he hinted that I had come to the wrong place for support.
And of course he was right.
Most of his advertising came from casinos, and his sponsors would be seriously unamused if he started teaching his readers how to threaten the gambling industry's billions in profits.
I had naively assumed that his magazine put its readers first and would be glad to make gambling more pleasurable for them. But without casino ads, there would be no publication, and sometimes self-interest trumps the greater good (ask any politician!).
Here's the latest BST session, the last for a while (winning is fun, but less fun when there's no real money to take to the cashier's cage!). Hopefully one of these days, I will be posting results that other people have obtained.
A few more words about spread limits...
Given BST's $1,000 table limit against the current batch of blackjack outcomes to date (2,418 bets), with no target betting rules applied, a by-the-book player would have squeaked out a win of $5,388/$642,815 (+0.84%) with an average bet value (ABV) of $266 and 604 bets of $1,000+.
With only target betting's LTD+ rule added, the win would have been $13,553/$1.04m (+1.31%), ABV $428, 943 x $1,000+.
Bump the table limit to $25,000, add the full array of target betting rules, and you get an overall win of $44,635/$786,000 (+5.68%), ABV $325, 131 x $1,000+.
The notion that tight spreads and a low green ceiling constitute a smarter way to bet is exposed for what it truly is: mythematics, devised by the gambling industry for the gambling industry, with player protection not even a passing consideration.
An important reminder: The only person likely to make money out of this blog is you, Dear Reader. There's nothing to buy, ever, and your soul is safe (from me, at least). Test my ideas and use them or don't. It's up to you.
_
No comments:
Post a Comment