Paradigm Thinking on EBJ vs TBJT

how did you know you were going to get the bad cards in the first place? Man i'd love to isolate an upcoming rush of bad hands so I, too, could min bet through them!

Unfortunately, "past performance is no guarentee of future results"

-hd.

 

Huh?????

Why?

 

That's not "Wonging". A thorough read and understanding of Wong's books will uncover the true meaning of the WORD. No, I'm not going to get into a discussion of the WORD. One must discover it without outside help to appreciate it's true meaning. And yes, life is so full of mysteries.

 

multiple responses again

HD - I can't predict cards either - but when I start getting stiff after stiff - I don't see much point in fighting the dealer - so hopefully can keep my bets low until the cards change - at both tables - I started out betting small - and started out getting stiffs - so just kept betting small until the bad cards stopped - which was many hands later -

Riverman - the reason is probability drift - in a short sequence of trials - you are likely to see deviation towards the dominant probability in more of the sequences than not - since 'not-stiff' is more probable than 'stiff' - in a very short sequence - like the first eight hand 'virtual table' in an ebj game - more than 1/2 of these sequences will have a slightly positive ev for the player - because of the impact of fewer than expected stiffs - the minority of tables will have a more negative ev than normal for the players - but your goal is to win tables - not to maximize ev - so you should play the strategy that is advantageous at most tables - which is more aggressive betting during the first 'virtual table' - at 53% of tournament tables - the first eight hand sequence will have a positive ev for the player - I just cranked through the probability calculations on this - the shift is slight - but any shift is significant -

Toolman - I know what 'Wonging' actually means - but think it works well enough also to describe using his 'bet teensy and ploppy out chips and trust to dumb luck at the end' approach to tournament play - at least - I don't have another term to use for that - so - can't we generalize 'Wonging' to mean any technique or strategy advocated by Wong??

 

OK, that works for me.

 

Fighting the dealer?

RK--I realize you have many peppering you with questions about your posts, but the reason is because of statements like the above, which seems to somehow infer that cards dealt in a given hand have any impact whatsoever on the next hand.

Every hand dealt is a new event, with essentially equal odds of producing any particular result. This is for certain in online UBT tourneys where each hand is a new shuffle. Even for live shoes, unless you are counting, there is no way to use info from past hands dealt to determine next hand results--and even then the information's reliability is tied to other factors such as decks dealt (penetration).

 

voodoo!

Sorry to keep picking on you RK but i just can't sit back when these types of things are being espoused on a forum that reflects winning strategies. What you have said here is the NUTSHELL of what separates pros from amateurs, and an attitude like this MUST be removed from your game before it can ever improve -- Wong strategy or no.

RK, there is NO SUCH THING as 'waiting for the cards to change' -- the fact is, no matter if you've won OR lost 1000 hands in a row, the chances of winning your next hand are EXACTLY THE SAME. Although you may feel the deck is stacked against you at times, this is just not so. You have to find a way to let this line of thought go; not only is it inaccurate, it also flies in the face of any mathematical analysis done on the game. Hacks like John Patrick espouse LOSING systems, and this type of methodology is the same crap.

Look, you're asked to bet BEFORE you get your cards, right? So how do you know if you'll get another stiff or not? Remember, there's no such thing as "the flow of the cards" or "gut feeling" -- you have to throw that kind of thinking out the window if you want to be a better player. Period. All you have is math, man. That's the only relevant info, aside from the psychology of your opponents -- NOT the cards. Cool?

Again, not trying to be a dick here -- but also, not my opinions either: Facts.

-hd.

 

I agree, math is the way to go. Voodoo play will only get you in trouble in the long run. Sure it may work in the short term but for the long term, study the math of the game. Personally, I have to convince my wife that the cards do not have a "feel". But she claims women have a sixth sense and she can "feel" the cards. Wish me luck.

While I got the podium, keep away from progressions for live BJ play. Anyone who touts them is merely lining his pockets by those buying his books filled with worthless and costly information.

Ya, I know this site is about tournaments but I just had to put in my 2 cents.

 

A quickie for toolman

Do you count? I seem to remember a post a while back where you said you didn't. What strategies do you use when playing live BJ?

Cheers

Reachy

 

Nope, don't count. Let's just say I have my ways.

 

Nice tip there Monkeysystem. This never occurred to me before. I have added it to my toolbox. Every little bit counts.

 

One of my posts got lost in the noise between the banned poster, craps tournaments, and whether Wonging can be improved upon, so I re-submit it in case people have thoughts on it.

Comments?

 

ok guys

you're right - you can't predict the next hand based on previous hands - just because you lose 10 in a row - doesn't mean you will lose the 11th hand - that was ploppy talk in my post there - and you are right to slam me on it - I wouldn't advise anyone to play a hand based on what they got the previous hand - or on the idea that a 'streak' will continue -

I rarely play 'start out with very small bets and wait until the end game to put out chips' - I have started using some progressions in my game - and will sometimes bet pretty agressively - especially if I see other players reducing their bets because the players have had a losing streak - that's an opportunity to go higher - and hopefully open up some gap - while risking fewer chips - since they are betting low - I will sometimes - and more often recently - go for the chip lead or at least a major improvement in my position - by using a two or three step short progression during the middle hands - especially if I see other players reducing bets after they have lost a few hands - the move carries more bang for the risk with other players betting small -

I do start out with small bets when I start the table on the button - or just in front of it - fairly often - however - and then move to larger bets after the button passes me - and if I start out getting stiffs and losing and everyone else is losing also - and the other players are losing larger bets than I am - I will sometimes maintain the small bets longer than normal - sometimes much longer - I will change betting strategy or adjust my strategy to the results of the previous play - I am not saying based on hand outcomes or 'streaks' - but what has changed with relative chip counts and other players bets - cards do streak - you can't predict them - but as long as I am benefiting from the smaller bets - and the other players' bets aren't threatening me - I see little need to raise my bets - or if I do raise them - I will still underbet the other players - just by less than a very small bet would - letting them take the higher risk - a long losing streak in the early hands can take out a lot of players - and they do occur - and I am willing to let that happen while I bet small - that's what starting with minimum bets is all about anyway - betting small and letting other players bomb out - when that approach stops benefitting me - then another change in betting strategy is warranted - I should not have put that in language of 'the cards changing' and 'fighting the dealer' etc. - even if it sometimes feels like that is what you are doing - that was bad language - there is no 'psychic' power that lets you know a losing or winning streak will continue - but I do adjust or change my betting strategy during a table according to what has happened with the previous play - taking into consideration the changes in chip counts and how others are betting - I may become more aggressive or less - or maintain a small bet approach longer than usual - at those tables I was talking about - I did maintain a 'traditional' small bet/min bet strategy far longer than I normally would consider - because everyone was losing - and I was benefitting from that approach - as everyone as losing in the early and mid hands - when other players started threatening my chip lead - then I switched to a more aggresssive betting strategy - so I found myself 'playing' a 'Wong' strategy - even though I almost never do so - as a reaction to what happened at the tables - and adjusting my game accordingly -

Hollywood - just keep picking on me - maybe someday you will say something valuable and improve my game - you were right in your post - I should not have posted something that made it sound as if it made sense to 'follow streaks' or base one's play on what the previous hands have been - I really don't do that in my play - and Monkeysystem is right - when people do change their bets to 'follow streaks' that is an opportunity to take advantage of - but sometimes things come out in the wrong words - when I lose 10 hands in a row - it sure feels like I am 'fighting the dealer' - and when you start winning after a long losing streak - it does seem like 'the cards have changed' - I just found myself at those tables - betting a typical (as I understand it) Wong strategy of streams of minimum bets followed by very aggressive play at the end - because of the adjustments I was making as a result of how the earlier hands turned out - with a very negative table and everyone losing - and my benefitting by keeping my bets way down - then making some plays at the end - not my usual style -

 

Luck vs Skill

Hi Everyone,

I just read an interesting article about the importance of luck in skill based games by Richard Garfield the creator of Magic: The Gathering a very popular collectible card game. In the article he defines luck as the uncertainty in outcome. If better players always win against weaker opponents then there is no luck and the more stronger players lose to weaker ones the more luck is in the game. He also states that games with a lot of luck usually appeal to a wider audience. His reasoning is that enlightened players, skilled or not will appreciate luck in their games because:

1. They can play challenging games with a much broader audience.
2. Skilled players can experiment and try off the wall strategies because with luck the game is more forgiving and no one is expected to win every time.

The tradeoff is that highly skilled players must manage to swallow their pride and settle for winning a majority of the time versus all the time.

Luck vs. Skill
Next he goes on to examine the question of what is a good amount of luck relative to skill for a game. He argues that how much luck there is in a game has little to due with how much skill there is. A game can have a lot of both. His first example is poker where he states an amateur could win a hand perhaps even a session against a world champion. However once you start putting together many sessions you have no hope of winning. He asserts that repeated play will eradicate the luck from almost any game and if there is any skill level difference between opponents over time the more skilled will win the majority regardless of luck. Another example he gives is randochess were a die is rolled (high roll wins) to break stalemate games. He argues that randochess clearly has more luck than chess yet probably just as much skill since all strategies developed for chess apply equally to randochess. He points out that a game shouldn’t be trivialized merely on the basis of luck and that these games can provide rich experiences and be hard to master. In fact he argues games with large amounts of luck can be more difficult to master since a player can more easily win with bad moves or lose with good moves which can slow down the learning process.

Benefits of Luck in game design
Finally he states three main benefits of using luck in game design.
1. Range of competition – the more luck there is in a game, the more easily skilled and unskilled players can play together. In a game without luck the skilled player will win every competition giving the skilled player no challenge and the amateur no chance at victory. Games with low luck place the demand that players of similar skill level always compete against each other.
2. Ego Crutch – He poses a question of why skillful players frequently criticize luck in games? It is probably because the luck in the game can marginalize their skill to some extent. When skilled players play the better game and still lose they might blame fate. Conversely when they win a game with a lot of luck their opponents might credit their good fortune and not their brilliant strategies.
3. Variety of Game Play – Luck often broadens the type of strategies that people can use providing for a richer game play experience.


Having played in both traditional TBJ and online EBJ I believe that EBJ format has both more luck and more skill. With EBJ a player might have to make 4 next to last BR decisions and 4 last hand BR decisions versus 1 and 1 for TBJ per round. A typical tournament might be 4 rounds so in EBJ a player might have to make 32 BR decisions versus 8 for a TBJ. This gives the skilled player more opportunities to make meaningful decisions. Now this compressed tournament format comes at a price however for the skilled player and that is the increased volatility in ones bankroll due to the fact that fewer hands are played before elimination. This greater volatility can be defined as luck. Let’s look at the standard error of the mean for a 20 round TBJ and EBJ. In a TBJ 19 hands will be played before a last hand BR decision and with EBJ 7 hands. Now the expectation for 6 deck, DAS, h17 is about .9950 for basic strategy and the standard error of the mean = std. deviation / SQRT(N) where N is the number of hands played. So if we look at just a simple case of just flat betting where std. deviation ~ 1.2 we have the following:

TBJ (19 rounds) std error = 1.2 / SQRT(19) = 0.2753
EBJ (7 rounds) = std. error = 1.2/SQRT(7) = 0.4536

Now we our interested in what will be the range in our expectation before going into elimination for 99% (2.57 std.) of the population.

TBJ: Upper limit = 0.9950 + 2.57 * std. error = 1.7025
Lower limit = 0.9950 -2.57 * std. error = 0.2875

EBJ: Upper limit = 0.9950 + 2.57 * std. error = 2.1606
Lower limit = 0.9950 - 2.57 * std. error = -0.1706

You can see that even with just flat betting there is greater volatility in our bankroll as well as our opponents before we have to make an important last hand BR decision. My hope is that EBJ will make all forms of tournament blackjack more popular with the masses so the casinos will have to open tournament blackjack rooms where players can play Sit N Go’s and mini tournaments 24/7 just like they did for poker.

 

back to the premise

So as I understand it your betting style is fluid and adaptable to the circumstances?

How does this differ from when you play TBJT - or does it?

That was a great post. With regard to the luck versus skill debate it was discussed at great length and much gusto I might add in September 2006. Here's the link in case you're inclined:

http://www.blackjacktournaments.com/bb/showthread.php?t=2207&highlight=luck+skill

I just wanted to try and keep THIS thread from drifting too much into those shark infested waters!

I did have one question for you because yo have mentioned it and shown the math concerning this point also. TBJT = 20 hands (in your example) yet you ASSUME EBJ to have 8 hands.

This, in my opinion, is the most critical mis-assumption that people have concerning EBJ and TBJT. EH1 and EH2 should NOT be played in the same manner that the final hand is played in TBJT.

I see too many times people jockeying for BR1 or BR2 when in essence all you gotta do is NOT be BRL. plain and simple. Don't shoot for the stars! Why? Well all too often it leaves people crippled should they loose. Just my thought on the subject

 

It would be great to see BJ rooms.... EBJ offers the only chance at that at present...as I see it.

WSOBJ has a big prize, big production, and yet its hard to find a show to watch or a tournament to enter....and Im an highly interested person....what are thinking????

The average person is becoming interested in poker because they sturate the game on tv! Tournaments are rerun over and over...big payouts are shown being awarded to a lucky internet qualifier...and the average Joe is saying to himself ...hummmm...maybe that could be me....how can I become involved???

No one is doing that in a meaningful way for BJ tournaments...except for Russ Hamilton... and I sure hope his effort takes off!!

EBJ is frankly being handicaped by the big network! CBS has a big audience but they arent invested in this area...they dont show reruns of this show...ESPN on the other hand reruns poker over and over and the interested group watches over and over.

I agree with your analysis of luck vs skill and I strongly agree that a game that gives the masses a chance is critical to this taking off....once that happens then every form of tournament BJ will grow....just as Omaha and other less popular forms of Poker have taken off on the heels of Holdem.

The little arguments here are normal chatter just as someone might discuss old school bikes vs new style choppers....but the really important thing is that the masses need to have a reason to enter this discussion.

maybe Russ should drop CBS and head to A & E ....they made stars out of the Tuttles for building bikes and slaming doors...they are keeping that tired old man at Playboy in the news as they are opening clubs in Vegas right now.

They might be ripe for a weekly game show .....EBJ that offers prizes, trips, and fame and fortune...

Honestly the show in its present form, while a great start, doesnt quite do it for me....the show hasnt grabbed me yet (and Im really interested)... Its certainly the right idea though ...its close.

WSOBJ fails for many of the same reasons....but mostly because they signed up with the obscure GSN. Who watches that? ESPN would have been a better choise for either I think or even A & E or Spike....or run it over and over like the infomercials...

Its not being seen....plain and simple! And it needs to be seen and then it will be played...

 

Quantum1000

Post of the Month!!!!

Ken?

-hd.

 

Post of the month

I agree with HD, great post quantum1000.

Many great posts in this thread. Thanks for all the good info.

My $0.02:
Professional EBJ is a completely different game then amateur EBJ.

In BJ the dealer wins more often than the player in all formats. Therefore, the more a player bets the more they lose.

It's always better to be in the lead for the final hand. And always better to act last.

To me EBJ is like a series of 8 handed games, where 6 advance, 5 advance, and then 4, for the last 5 hands.

EBJ introduces various new challenges. Therefore EBJ requires additional skills, which have all been discussed here. But the short handed series of games also increases the luck factor. Like somebody earlier said, "more skill and more luck."

I hope EBJ and TBJT both flourish. More is better!

Hope to see you all in Aruba!
tgun

 

strategy and luck

fgk42 -

my approach to both types of bj - traditional tbj and ebj (good idea maybe to think of them as different 'types' of bj?) - is that you ALWAYS must have a long term strategy in place - to guide your betting decisions on EVERY hand - that strategy may be to minimum bet - ala Wong - or to conservatively bet (underbet) meaning to bet below the middle of your opponents' betting range - or or to aggressively bet (overbet) meaning to bet above the middle - or - you are running a long progression - or making a move through the use of a short progression - a bet not made in accord with a long term strategy is a wasted and misused - and probably bad - bet -

but you also need to evaluate your STRATEGIC position after every hand - what are the relative and absolute chip counts - where is your BR position - how are your opponents betting - and then move/adapt/change/evolve your long term strategy to give you an optimal chance to win/advance - you also do need to analyze your potential strategies in terms of 'what if' - you probably know or at least have an idea of - the actual probabilities of short and long term winning/losing streaks in bj - these are available on the web - and you should be thinking - what if I fiollow this strategy and we hit a losing streak for the players? - what if we hit a winning streak for the players? - etc. - note: I AM NOT SAYING "PLAY STREAKS" - I am saying be aware that streaks happen - and can impact your strategy adversely or favorably - as alternating wins and losses will - and you need to take these probabilities into account - in other words - take EVERYTHING into account - and evolve your play accordingly -

you also need to be opportunistic - as - I believe it was Monkeysystem - pointed out - if the players are losing hands - and the others start reducing bets - that's an opportunity - change your strategy and make a move -

a real difference between ebj and tbj I think - is that you are forced into end game strategies very quickly - because of the elimination hands - particularly the first one - which is like the escape turn jam in greyhound racing - all the dogs just crash together - because there are too many bunched up too close - some don't survive - I think this limits you in terms of adopting long term strategies - and adapting strategies -

it amazes me to see posters say things like - in tbj you spend 75% of the hands on cruise control - why would you pass up 75% of the opportunities for skillful play? - it is in the early and middle hands of a tbj table where you can develop strategic play - take advantage of your strategic skills - and determine your BR position going into the final hands - these early hands are just as important as the late hands -

quantum1000 - I'll give you a 'good post' as well - I think there is a 'betting skill' - which can be used in any game - even one of pure chance - if you played Hollywood Dave or Ken Smith at coin toss - they would whup you because they are skilled at betting - regardless of the underlying probabilities - some games also give opportunities for skilled play - which is an additional edge for a skilled player - ebj does take skill - betting skills certainly apply - I just think there are reduced opportunities to use playing and strategic skills in ebj - but it does take skill -

but are you really saying that 'skilled players' like games with a bigger 'luck' component in them? that's what it sounds like -

I would assume that skilled players would want games with the maximum possible skill component - but that would be chess - you want a game where the skill component is strong enough to overcome the effects of random chance so you can win more often than the average player and do so often enough to make money -