How high can my bet get?

[onemoretry]

   In the case above, the average loss ($329.11) per 4000 hand session was a result of flat betting (5x25c or $1.25 per hand) throughout each of the one hundred 4000-hand sessions. If we multiply this loss figure by 5, to get 20000 hands, we arrive at a loss of about $1650 for flat betting $1.25 total per hand and if no NRFs or quad ducks are hit. Now 2.5 times $1650 is about $4113.88 (5x329.11x2.5) which is somewhat higher than your estimate OMT.
I originally offered a $1750 estimate for the loss over 20000 hands with five credit flat betting. But, when I saw the work you had done on the question, I adopted your $339.11 number per 4000 hands as it seems to be a more refined estimate.

Unfortunately, my mind went a little blank at that point, and i failed to recognize that there would be five 4000 hand sessions, not four. Your $4100+ number is likely a lot closer to reality. But, keep in mind that the 2.5 factor I came up with to account for progressive bets may not be very accurate, either.

[asteroid]

It's a great estimate for a pen and napkin calculation and you didn't have to do an hour of simulation work to get it. [QUOTE=asteroid]   In the case above, the average loss ($329.11) per 4000 hand session was a result of flat betting (5x25c or $1.25 per hand) throughout each of the one hundred 4000-hand sessions. If we multiply this loss figure by 5, to get 20000 hands, we arrive at a loss of about $1650 for flat betting $1.25 total per hand and if no NRFs or quad ducks are hit. Now 2.5 times $1650 is about $4113.88 (5x329.11x2.5) which is somewhat higher than your estimate OMT.
I originally offered a $1750 estimate for the loss over 20000 hands with five credit flat betting. But, when I saw the work you had done on the question, I adopted your $339.11 number per 4000 hands as it seems to be a more refined estimate.

Unfortunately, my mind went a little blank at that point, and i failed to recognize that there would be five 4000 hand sessions, not four. Your $4100+ number is likely a lot closer to reality. But, keep in mind that the 2.5 factor I came up with to account for progressive bets may not be very accurate, either.[/QUOTE]

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=olds442jetaway] I have only tried this short term and it has worked well, but am
thinking in an awfully cold cycle, my bets may get higher than the
machine allows.[/quote]Personally, I think you would do just as well to bet $100 a point until all your money is gone.  At least you wouldn't have to suffer through the pain of watching it drain away slowly.  Betting bigger when you lose is called "chasing your losses".  This leads to bigger and bigger losses until you finally go totally broke.When you are in a slump, which you obviously are, the best thing to do is to bet smaller or better yet take a sabbatical for a while.   What's lost is lost and it ain't coming back!   I like you personally and I don't want to see you hurt yourself.  Still, it's your money not mine.

[FAA]

Olds harks back to 18th century France with this variation of le systeme Martingdale! French fried bankroll usually ensued. Fascinating discussion regardless. Proceed with extreme caution.

[olds442jetaway]

Thanks so much gang for the fantastic work on this subject. And Phil I appreciate your advice so if in fact I do not hit the deuces in more than 5 or 6 sessions, there is no point in chasing the deuces beyond that. I actually think this is doable for me. The reason being, the machines I play allow up to 25 quarters, halves, or dollars bet. I have never gone more than about 20k hands without hitting deuces and I play a lot of deuces. If that holds, it sounds like my bet will be between 5 and 10 dollars a hand when the quad deuces hit.

[billryan]

About six years ago, I was playing BJ with a guy who many consider the best in the world. Playing an eight deck shoe with 2/3 penetration, he lost every hand in the shoe and I lost all but one. The odds of a dealer winning every hand in a shoe against even a BS player are several million to one, as I recall. The chances of going 35,000 hands without Four Deuces are much less.
Math is fickle. Spit in its face and she will exact her revenge.

[Vman96]

If you play until one of the following occurs while adjusting your bet to always break even or win with a deuces hit:
Hit a Royal
Hit four Deuces
Play 20,000 hands
or Max out the machine bet at $25 per hand

Tweaking my sim code to follow these rules you have about an 8.66% chance to take the $5000 "walk of shame". In other words, be in a bad scenario where the max bet on the machine won't catch you up if you hit 4 deuces (a max $5000 payout).

Also it's interesting to note it's pretty difficult to complete the full 20,000 hands under these rules. You'll usually cap out the bet first.

[Suzy2424]

Interesting facts Thanks all

[olds442jetaway]

Thanks also vman. That is exactly what I was looking for. It looks like every 8 trips or so I would blow 5k and maybe even before max bet. Not so good. I may just wait on this plan for awhile. I was just lucky for a few sessions using it. Of course there is always the possibility of nailing a royal when the bet gets really high for a whopping payout. I never count on hitting them anymore. But see my post today under rec play. Thanks again.