| Casinos Online-Internet Gambling | Bank roll fluctuations in Blackjack | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Probability and the 50 50 Bet Jacks or Better Video Poker By the Time Progressives Hit Before You Can Expect to Win? All-or-Nothing Gambles Percentages are Fact, not Opinion (Baccarat) Winners May Need Advice Know What You Can and Can't Control in the Casino $10 bets at double-zero roulette Law, Luck, and the Leningrad Elephant Blackjack Hands Gambling Advice Nickel Slots Simpler is better Spreading money around the craps table Best dealers upcard for Blackjack players Picking numbers and RNGs Results after quitting the game Witless winners Bankrolls Bankrolls 2 Betting Progressions Bank roll fluctuations in Blackjack Game Show Comparisons Quick Fixes |
Place Betting at Craps Self Help Quiz Quitting While Ahead Betting on Don't Come in Craps House Edge vs. Betting Strategies Anticipating Bankroll Savings Rules to Estimate Chances of Success Even Fighting Edge Beating the Odds to Overcome Edge Strategy for Craps Fans Gambling Books Intuition in Games Betting at Craps How Often Should You Get What You Expect? Can Casinos Predict Jackpots? Gambling Theories, History, and Other Lies Overestimating Your Chances of a Hit Give Lay Bets at Craps a Look-See |
PLAYING IT SMART by ALAN KRIGMAN Playing Multiple Spots Reduces Blackjack Bankroll Fluctuations Betting buffs are often befuddled because they never learned the real lesson of Goldilocks. They gorge greedily on games and playing strategies too hot or too cold for their tastes, when out in plain sight is a bowl of porridge that would be just right. To an extent, the size and speed of bankroll ups and downs under ordinary and extraordinary circumstances are inherent in the structure of a game. Slots are usually more volatile than tables. And, in either case, games featuring extreme payouts fluctuate more wildly than those offering conservative returns. At the tables, solid citizens can not only select games whose mercuriality fits their fancies, but also induce or moderate the swings by choosing appropriate playing styles. Progressing and regressing bets is one way. There are others. At blackjack, for example, the number of positions a person plays impacts volatility. This is quite aside from the contentious question of switching numbers of spots to change the flow of the cards. To envision the effect, imagine a coin-matching game. Two players, $1 per round. Match and you win, mismatch and you lose. Your bankroll goes up or down by $1 after each and every flip. You could reduce volatility by betting $0.50 on each of two coins against an opponent. Chances are 25 percent to win both, 25 percent to lose both, and 50 percent to push by winning one and losing the other. Your bankroll would still rise or fall by $1 when money was exchanged but there'd be only half as many such transactions. You could also bet $1 on each of two coins, getting jumps of $2 each. Relative to single-coin games, volatility would exceed that involving $1 bets because of greater size but be less than that entailing $2 wagers because of lower frequency. Blackjack differs from coin tossing because chances aren't 50-50, and individual hands can push as well as win or lose, be split or doubled in various ways, or win 3-to-2 on naturals. Playing two spots therefore goes beyond just winning or losing both, or staying even. Further, the chances on two spots aren't totally independent -- they're related through the dealer's cards. Both hands get stronger when the dealer is weak, and conversely. To picture the effect from a session perspective, say you're at a $5 table with two other patrons. Your tablemates each bet on one spot. You're willing to go up to three hours, shooting for a $150 profit. Playing one position, three hours will get you about 300 rounds; two positions should get you roughly 250 rounds per spot. Assume you buy-in for $300 and follow basic strategy. Here are four betting options: $10 on one spot, $5 each on two spots, $20 on one spot, and $10 each on two spots. The accompanying chart shows the chances of not going belly-up before the end of three hours, and that you'll get at least $150 ahead at some point before falling $300 behind, for each of the four choices. Session volatility for some 1- and 2-spot bets, three hours of play on $300 stake
| |||||||||||||||||||