How to Gamble/How not to Gamble

[Ecky]

The problem, in my opinion, with any sort of system, is that it assumes you, and everybody else can consistently beat the bookies using it. If that was true every bookie would be broke. Bookies also have dozens of people whose sole job is to set odds, and if they wanted to they could also utilise these sorts of systems too or at least develop counter strategies to them

That's not how bookmaking works in Australia though. The basic business model they all follow is

1. Suck people in with free bets etc
2. Ban and restrict those who win
3. Keep giving lollies to the losers so they come back for more and get hooked

Setting competitive markets is a secondary consideration - there is little incentive for them to do much more than have people monitoring Betfair and the other bookies and just copying off the consensus odds like sheep.
They find that their money is much better spent on advertising and promotions than to invest in developing more accurate odds. The game is much easier if you are playing against idiots than if you are playing against people who know what they are doing!

Hence it isn't that hard to win in the short term, but it is hard to win in the long term as profitable accounts are usually restricted or banned - that's the easy way out for them.

[Mr Beefy]

The problem, in my opinion, with any sort of system, is that it assumes you, and everybody else can consistently beat the bookies using it. If that was true every bookie would be broke. Bookies also have dozens of people whose sole job is to set odds, and if they wanted to they could also utilise these sorts of systems too or at least develop counter strategies to them

That's not how bookmaking works in Australia though. The basic business model they all follow is

1. Suck people in with free bets etc
2. Ban and restrict those who win
3. Keep giving lollies to the losers so they come back for more and get hooked

Setting competitive markets is a secondary consideration - there is little incentive for them to do much more than have people monitoring Betfair and the other bookies and just copying off the consensus odds like sheep.
They find that their money is much better spent on advertising and promotions than to invest in developing more accurate odds. The game is much easier if you are playing against idiots than if you are playing against people who know what they are doing!

Hence it isn't that hard to win in the short term, but it is hard to win in the long term as profitable accounts are usually restricted or banned - that's the easy way out for them.

[mighty_tiger_79]

to not get banned or restricted by corporates, are you better to just reduce your profit goal or just go all out, clean up and move on?

[bennymacca]

to not get banned or restricted by corporates, are you better to just reduce your profit goal or just go all out, clean up and move on?

If I was actually good at that I would just smash it until I get banned then move bookies. Plenty of choice out there

[mal]

There is a question asked by Stampy in the AFL thread
I used examples of 100% markets
This in theory means punters can back every runner in the field for a $100 return , after Investing $100

EXAMPLE
Lets use soccer win draw win market
$2-00
$4-00
$4-00
You bet $50 @$2=$100 return [50%]
You bet $25 @$4=$100 return [25%]
You bet $25 @$4= $100 return [25%]
$100 Total investment
$100 Return any result
100% market

Without this example Stampy posted this

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*No expert either but even if the market was 100% for the avge punter does that make tipping the Brownlow easier ?
You lose $50 if Pendlebury loses regardless of whether he is $3-50 or $7-50*
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

This is true percentage means little at even staking when the selection/runner LOSES
But it does make a significant difference per collect if it WINS
$1 on at $3-50 = $3-50 return
$1 on at $7-50 = $7-50 return
The difference being $4-00
That in effect gives you a bank of 4 extra $1 bets for future punting

So it aint always how many winners you back , its as much to do as with getting the best available odds

Footnote
I'm not using Stampy as a stooge in discussions
Stampy has given me permission to post on this matter

Stampy , hope this makes cents , I mean sense

[mal]

Stampy , if your still confused here is another example with head to head betting

When someone asks you to toss a coin his $1 for your $1
Take him on
Probability says in each 100 tosses it should be
50 heads
50 tails
Both punters SHOULD break even
But in every 100 tosses this will vary from winning 51 tosses to 49 and so on

SPORTS BETTING
Head To Head

A Bookies market
A $1-90 [52.63%]
B $1-90 [52.63%]
Put $100 on each team the net return is $190
This is what SOME bookies like, both sides being backed for a similar payout
Bookie wins $10 no matter the result

100% market [Like the toss of a coin]
A $2-00 [50%]
B $2-00 ]50%]
Put $100 each on head and tail the net return is $200
No one wins no one loses

Now if Bookies gave the reverse
This is what could happen
A $2-10 [47.62%]
B $2-10 [47.62%]
Put $100 on each team the net return is $210
Punter wins $10 no matter what


Hopefully this gives everyone an example of betting into 100% markets

To get a % formula
its 100 divided by the odds = %

EXAMPLE
$2-80
100 DIVIDED BY $2-80 = 35.71 %

[mighty_tiger_79]

this info really needs to be taught in schools

[Stumps]

Good read cheers for this info
The names stumpsy by the way mel

[mal]

Good read cheers for this info
The names stumpsy by the way mel

Stampy if you read this oops !

[mal]

GAMES OF CHANCE
The House Edge [the % the houses have in their favor]
This is from a publication

1.2 BACCARAT
1.4 CRAPS
1.9 BLACKJACK
2.7 ROULETTE
3.2 TWO UP


BLACKJACK
How does one evaluate the house edge on Blackjack at 1.9% ?
Each person plays differently
Some will take extra cards , when others will sit
Some will split pairs others wont

According to the listings Baccarat is the best game to play at a Casino
But I still think Blackjack might be the best to play ?
At least there is a decision process involved , whereas you can actually make your own luck ?
Or you could be a card counter ....

[bennymacca]

There are so many different things they go into it. It is likely way higher than 1.9

The continuous shufflers combined with 8 decks also makes it pretty much impossible to card count.

[mal]

BLACKJACK
I had a very simple staking method that netted me good wins when I travelled the world in the 1980s
I would bet $5 as the minimum bet
If It won I bet $10 every bet until I lost a hand
Then revert back to the minimum $5 bet
I relied on hit streaks against lose streaks
Simple method won all over the world
I even beat the Monte Carlo Casino on 3 separate visits

These were the first times I had ever played Blackjack
Ironically I used this staking method when the Adelaide Casino opened
No such success
I did keep records of Casino wins and losses , did finish in front by a smidge
But I'm nobody's fool I had good luck not good judgement

Years later I tried another staking method
I didnt want to sit and bet all night, I wanted all or nothing
It was then I started on my new staking method
FOREPLAY hands
II would start with $5 and double up for 4 shots , and then bet 50 % until I lost
The method was
$5
$10
$20
$40
$20 per hand until I lost

I had a couple of amazing nights
I would only play 4 losing cycles
if I lost my $20 I would pack it in for the night

One night I turned $20 [my last bet as was minus $15]
I boosted it up to $500+
I could not lose
People were cheering me on
I made noise
I had a lady sit on my lap , my Mrs was across the table, laughing at me !
A mate of mine staked the same plan, he cleaned up as well

Once against got a good lead
But could not hit another cycle for about a half a dozen nights , so gave it away


WHAT WAS I DOING THAT WORKED
I had not realised it at the time
But I was streak betting
If I could hit on streaks I was a winner
If i was on a losing streak I was losing minimum
If I hit a hit streak I was betting more than norMAL

THE LAST WORD
This is something I always do at Casinos
MY last bet has to be a loser
When I've decided to stop , I've played at least one more hand
And if I win I play one more
As soon as I lose I stop
I can lose the $5 but might win x ?

Does anyone believe in steak betting ?

[bennymacca]

Mal, you have fallen for the gamblers fallacy mate!!

Unless you are card counting your streak betting is no better off than any other method.

Go read that wiki article again

[mal]

Mal, you have fallen for the gamblers fallacy mate!!

Unless you are card counting your streak betting is no better off than any other method.

Go read that wiki article again

I realise that BM
I was lucky
I came to my senses despite early successes

These days I know that in the long term the house edge will defeat me
Whether I'm a good or bad streaker !

[bennymacca]

Yeah fair enough!

My opinion of these games is they are great entertainment and if you can afford to lose x amount of dollars in the name of entertainment then go ahead. I mean I don't blink when I spend $100 at the footy for ticket plus beers. But people frown on you firing off that same amount in a sports bet or blackjack table.

Obviously the issue is problem gambling, and I think pokie machines are the worst for that. Much more assistance should be given to problem gamblers.

[Ecky]

BLACKJACK
How does one evaluate the house edge on Blackjack at 1.9% ?
Each person plays differently
Some will take extra cards , when others will sit
Some will split pairs others wont

According to the listings Baccarat is the best game to play at a Casino
But I still think Blackjack might be the best to play ?
At least there is a decision process involved , whereas you can actually make your own luck ?
Or you could be a card counter ....

If you stick to the basic optimal blackjack strategy (which you can find on many websites) then I'm fairly sure the house edge is a bit lower than 1.9%. Years ago I calculated all the probabilities and worked out the percentages in a spreadsheet but I haven't looked at it for ages now. With a basic form of card counting you can reduce that edge to zero fairly easily, even with the 8 decks that they use.

So it is a very cheap form of entertainment if you know the basics of how to play. I believe in theory it is possible to make money by using more sophisticated card counting techniques, but for this you need to concentrate hard without any stuffups and play for many hours to be confident of making a profit, and then hope that you aren't banned by the casino. So in terms of expected payout per hour for the amount of effort put in, you are almost certainly better off getting a real job!

[Ron Burgundy]

How good is blackjack!

[bennymacca]

I believe in theory it is possible to make money by using more sophisticated card counting techniques, but for this you need to concentrate hard without any stuffups and play for many hours to be confident of making a profit, and then hope that you aren't banned by the casino.

how do you card count with an auto shuffler? they feed the discards back in once they get roughly a full deck, so it is near on impossible to have a count lopsided enough that you could get a significant advantage.

blackjack plus is even worse (not sure if adelaide have it but crown do)

they only pay 6/5 on blackjack, though it pays out immediately even if dealer gets blackjack.

also,

IF THE DEALER GETS 22 IT IS A PUSH!!!

stupidest rule ever

[mighty_tiger_79]

Pontoon anyone? ?

[bennymacca]

Pontoon anyone? ?

Just as bad.

I would estimate these games having an edge of at least 5%, maybe even higher, even with perfect strategy