_
I get questions about Oscar's Grind from time to time, usually from people who want to suggest that there is a more than coincidental similarity between Oscar's variation on the money management theme and my own.
The two methods are as alike as an apple and an orange (both grew on a tree, both are spherical and have pips, both taste good and...that's about it).
I have always enjoyed the story of the origins of the Grind, which legend has it was created by a crusty old geezer who played just craps and used a stubby pencil to record the result of each roll in a battered notebook. Too many adjectives!
I'm more inclined to believe that like card counting, Oscar's creation is encouraged by the casinos because most people mess it up, and when they do, they lose more money than they probably would otherwise.
The idea as I recall it from Tom Ainslie's book How to Win in a Casino is to freeze the bet after a loss, add one unit after any mid-series win, and revert to a minimum bet after recovering prior losses for the series, plus one unit.
If the next bet in a series would exceed 20 units, it's Game Over and back to a minimum wager, and that's the part that makes me suspect that "Oscar" was actually a casino employee with evil intent!
A 1-20 spread has zero chance of winning in the long term, with or without following the OG rules. That's an absolute factual fact. With the loss limit removed, "Oscar" does marginally better than a random bettor on a winning streak and can stay ahead for a good long while with a decent bankroll.
Against the BST blackjack data set, for example, OG earned about 5.0% of target betting's win to date while racking up more than 50% of my method's overall action. That translates to a greater risk with a far lesser reward.
Mr. Ainslie's description of Oscar's Grind makes no provision for a win progression, which seems to me strangely short-sighted unless there is an ulterior professional motive. Incorporating +1u after an opening win, continuing until a loss, then freezing the bet per the standard rules and playing on until the loss is recovered +1u, pumps OG's win by more than 30% while increasing the action by less than 10%. Why not do it?
OG is a progressive betting method, of course, so it wins more often than not. It's just not a very good progressive betting method!
A simple Martingale does much better, my version of a Martingale is more effective than the original, and target betting knocks them all into the proverbial cocked hat (one of these days, I must look that one up!).
Now seems as good a time as any to revisit the topic of which games to tackle with target betting.
Blackjack is by far the preferred option because of its low net house edge and the extra profit opportunities offered by double-downs and splits and 3-2 payoffs for naturals (never play at a layout offering 6-5, unless you are stuck at the last blackjack layout on earth).
Field betting at craps is a great place to start a series and take a break from blackjack, because of the x2 payoffs for 2 and 12 that are still x2 and x3 in some casinos. The negative odds are more than 5x blackjack's with x2x2, so you should never let the bets get too high before bailing out for a safer game.
Baccarat is the #2 option, but you should never, ever bet on Banker. That so-called "5 percent" commission is one of the great lies of gambling because it can easily swallow all your winnings and leave you in the hole in spite of your best efforts. I'll be posting more about that one of these days, with the help of the baccarat data sets from Lee Jones and Lorenzo Rodriguez (all 300,000+ of 'em!).
Roulette is a wonderfully streaky game best played (in my opinion) with the "wobble" method of picking black or red, odd or even, or whatever - never "inside" bets. Wobble is from WBL which in turn means Win Before Last, or as the French have it, avant derniere (or is it the other way around? I can never be sure!).
The big problem with roulette, of course, is its 5.26% house edge. So, again, kick off a new series (or several) at roulette if you must, but always back off before the NB gets out of hand, and take your LTD/NB numbers to a more player-friendly game.
Just don't rely on old Oscar, may he RIP. Mr. Ainslie claims to have paid for several gambling trips to the Bahamas with that method. Guess he's just a lucky cuss...?
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.
_
Showing posts with label craps. Show all posts
Showing posts with label craps. Show all posts
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Saturday, March 14, 2009
You may be playing blackjack, baccarat, craps or roulette. But for the house, disinformation is the name of the game.
_
The way the "gambling experience" is packaged in America's casinos today, the image is that betting (and losing) is a fun form of recreation made even more pleasurable by luxury suites, five-star restaurants, and non-gambling activities suitable for all the family.
It's not to be taken seriously, for sure. Lose only what you can afford, play and bet the way the casino expects you to, and you will be treated as a responsible adult who is in control of all that happens on an exciting, rejuvenating getaway to (wherever).
Of course, you are not really in control at all. Step out of line by just an inch or two, and you are on your way to becoming an entry in the industry's famous Black Book as a player who has the gall, the unbridled temerity, to try to win.
I am not talking about the Nevada Black Book, which like the black box always sought after a plane crash, is not black at all (see the link above) but the database each casino maintains and fills with personal information and facial recognition parameters about people who are bad for business.
Most of them are cheats and swindlers, but many are card counters and other players who are honest sticklers for good conduct and fair play but have learned enough about table games to be able to beat the odds time and time again.
The disinformation campaign sponsored by the casino business maintains that the house advantage is as powerful as the law of gravity, exerting a gentle but firm pull on all the chips in play until eventually they come home to the dealer's tray.
The message is that you can't beat house games in the end, but trying is so much fun and perhaps once in a great while you will get lucky, take home more money than you started with, then bring it back to lose it the way the natural order of things has ordained.
Mythematicians will tell you that of all the silly methods devised to upset gambling's laws, progressive betting is the silliest.
What is truly silly is that most people believe it to be true.
In fact, progressive betting is the only way to win consistently, and the casinos have known that since the dawn of betting.
"Consistently" is the key word here. It is possible to win, and it happens to thousands of people every day. But you have to get lucky to do it, assuming you don't have a plan. And as everyone knows, luck never lasts.
Mythemaniacs reserve their most acid scorn for a method known as double-up or the Small Martingale: double your bet after every loss until a win recovers all prior losses plus one unit, then start over.
The method works most of the time, thriving on the simple fact that losing is a progressive process, and so doubling after a loss keeps precise pace with it until a single win interrupts the losing streak.
This blog contains charts and screen shots relating to hundreds of thousands of real-play outcomes along with confirmation that target betting beats them all.
Ironically, so does double-up!
But the big problem with the Martingale is not that it does not work, or that it demands bets that are too high. The problem is that casinos won't let anyone play it.
If you doubt it, try it.
You will win a few series, and then the house's Martingale Machine will move into action.
While drunks and other fools lose money all around you without a comforting word from anyone on the casino's pit roster, you will be singled out for especially solicitous attention.
You will be politely advised that doubling up is a really bad idea, sure to eventually rob you of your bankroll.
Do you seriously imagine that the casino staff is concerned for the safety of your bankroll? It's the house's they are worried about!
Other players are quite likely to reinforce the message. After all, how smart can it be to bet hundreds or thousands of dollars just to win $5, or the value of your opening bet?
Actually, when you place a big fat bet several rounds into a losing streak, you are not aiming to win $5. Your objective is to recover all the bets you lost, plus a profit.
The size of the surplus doesn't matter. What counts is that in a single bet, you are "out of the hole" and ready for another contest against the seemingly all-powerful but actually very vulnerable house edge.
Ah, say the experts, you will be in big trouble soon enough because eventually you will lose so many bets in a row that you will bump up against the table limit. After that, a win will not cover all your past losses and you, silly fool, will be stuck in the hole forever...and it serves you right.
As it happens, x2 bettors are at work in busy casinos all the time. They avoid attention by betting, at most, three losing wagers at any one layout before moving on in search of that inevitable single win.
And if they do fall foul of any one table's bet limit, no problem - they take their money to a layout where their next wager is allowed, knowing that moving can have no negative impact on their chances of eventual success.
They especially like blackjack and field bets at craps, because there's an outside chance that the win they need will turn out to be a natural, or a multiple pay-off for dice roll of 2 or 12. That's when the gravy really flows!
More and more, casinos are combating Martingalers by barring entry to blackjack tables between shuffles: a nuisance, but not a fatal blow.
The campaign to keep as many punters as possible in ignorance of the true math of gambling is critical to the casino industry's bottom line.
The house makes a lot less money (usually none at all) from players who know the numbers and play them with precision. Those people are a threat to the whole house of cards, and should be thought of as cheats.
In Nevada, a casino can "86" a player for any reason it sees fit. In New Jersey, winning is not an allowable reason for revoking betting privileges. In the hundreds of casinos in between, there is little or no regulation, but you can be sure that if you make a habit of winning "too often" you will feel some serious heat wherever you are.
That's why it is important for a strategy player to maintain a low profile, be at all times courteous and friendly to pit personnel and other punters, and learn how to camouflage what he is doing.
Here's a summary of target betting's performance against 201,000 baccarat outcomes.
It mirrors its wins against tens of thousands of rounds played against Ken Smith's BST blackjack application.
More detail will follow, but you should know that I did not generate these outcomes or have any control over them. The data set was provided by Lee Jones, a baccarat systems promoter who assured me they were extracted from two bet-by-bet books of "real shoes" compiled by Zumma Publishing.
All that matters is that I did not alter or massage the data in any way.
(Click on the image to enlarge it)
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.
_
The way the "gambling experience" is packaged in America's casinos today, the image is that betting (and losing) is a fun form of recreation made even more pleasurable by luxury suites, five-star restaurants, and non-gambling activities suitable for all the family.
It's not to be taken seriously, for sure. Lose only what you can afford, play and bet the way the casino expects you to, and you will be treated as a responsible adult who is in control of all that happens on an exciting, rejuvenating getaway to (wherever).
Of course, you are not really in control at all. Step out of line by just an inch or two, and you are on your way to becoming an entry in the industry's famous Black Book as a player who has the gall, the unbridled temerity, to try to win.
I am not talking about the Nevada Black Book, which like the black box always sought after a plane crash, is not black at all (see the link above) but the database each casino maintains and fills with personal information and facial recognition parameters about people who are bad for business.
Most of them are cheats and swindlers, but many are card counters and other players who are honest sticklers for good conduct and fair play but have learned enough about table games to be able to beat the odds time and time again.
The disinformation campaign sponsored by the casino business maintains that the house advantage is as powerful as the law of gravity, exerting a gentle but firm pull on all the chips in play until eventually they come home to the dealer's tray.
The message is that you can't beat house games in the end, but trying is so much fun and perhaps once in a great while you will get lucky, take home more money than you started with, then bring it back to lose it the way the natural order of things has ordained.
Mythematicians will tell you that of all the silly methods devised to upset gambling's laws, progressive betting is the silliest.
What is truly silly is that most people believe it to be true.
In fact, progressive betting is the only way to win consistently, and the casinos have known that since the dawn of betting.
"Consistently" is the key word here. It is possible to win, and it happens to thousands of people every day. But you have to get lucky to do it, assuming you don't have a plan. And as everyone knows, luck never lasts.
Mythemaniacs reserve their most acid scorn for a method known as double-up or the Small Martingale: double your bet after every loss until a win recovers all prior losses plus one unit, then start over.
The method works most of the time, thriving on the simple fact that losing is a progressive process, and so doubling after a loss keeps precise pace with it until a single win interrupts the losing streak.
This blog contains charts and screen shots relating to hundreds of thousands of real-play outcomes along with confirmation that target betting beats them all.
Ironically, so does double-up!
But the big problem with the Martingale is not that it does not work, or that it demands bets that are too high. The problem is that casinos won't let anyone play it.
If you doubt it, try it.
You will win a few series, and then the house's Martingale Machine will move into action.
While drunks and other fools lose money all around you without a comforting word from anyone on the casino's pit roster, you will be singled out for especially solicitous attention.
You will be politely advised that doubling up is a really bad idea, sure to eventually rob you of your bankroll.
Do you seriously imagine that the casino staff is concerned for the safety of your bankroll? It's the house's they are worried about!
Other players are quite likely to reinforce the message. After all, how smart can it be to bet hundreds or thousands of dollars just to win $5, or the value of your opening bet?
Actually, when you place a big fat bet several rounds into a losing streak, you are not aiming to win $5. Your objective is to recover all the bets you lost, plus a profit.
The size of the surplus doesn't matter. What counts is that in a single bet, you are "out of the hole" and ready for another contest against the seemingly all-powerful but actually very vulnerable house edge.
Ah, say the experts, you will be in big trouble soon enough because eventually you will lose so many bets in a row that you will bump up against the table limit. After that, a win will not cover all your past losses and you, silly fool, will be stuck in the hole forever...and it serves you right.
As it happens, x2 bettors are at work in busy casinos all the time. They avoid attention by betting, at most, three losing wagers at any one layout before moving on in search of that inevitable single win.
And if they do fall foul of any one table's bet limit, no problem - they take their money to a layout where their next wager is allowed, knowing that moving can have no negative impact on their chances of eventual success.
They especially like blackjack and field bets at craps, because there's an outside chance that the win they need will turn out to be a natural, or a multiple pay-off for dice roll of 2 or 12. That's when the gravy really flows!
More and more, casinos are combating Martingalers by barring entry to blackjack tables between shuffles: a nuisance, but not a fatal blow.
The campaign to keep as many punters as possible in ignorance of the true math of gambling is critical to the casino industry's bottom line.
The house makes a lot less money (usually none at all) from players who know the numbers and play them with precision. Those people are a threat to the whole house of cards, and should be thought of as cheats.
In Nevada, a casino can "86" a player for any reason it sees fit. In New Jersey, winning is not an allowable reason for revoking betting privileges. In the hundreds of casinos in between, there is little or no regulation, but you can be sure that if you make a habit of winning "too often" you will feel some serious heat wherever you are.
That's why it is important for a strategy player to maintain a low profile, be at all times courteous and friendly to pit personnel and other punters, and learn how to camouflage what he is doing.
Here's a summary of target betting's performance against 201,000 baccarat outcomes.
It mirrors its wins against tens of thousands of rounds played against Ken Smith's BST blackjack application.
More detail will follow, but you should know that I did not generate these outcomes or have any control over them. The data set was provided by Lee Jones, a baccarat systems promoter who assured me they were extracted from two bet-by-bet books of "real shoes" compiled by Zumma Publishing.
All that matters is that I did not alter or massage the data in any way.
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.
_
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)