h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I wonder how often you do this? (Just so you know, I tried it (not really thinking it would work, but I did play my best) and I did lose. This was at a $5 table, by the way, not a $10 table. This was several weeks ago before I bothered to buy the blackjack books by Richard Harvey - a blackjack GENIUS.)

BTW, your article states "On the 50% of the time you'll be winning..." You will NOT win 50% of the time. The odds are in the favor of the house. Why? Well, consider 'busting': when you bust, you lose. If dealer busts, dealer loses. If you BOTH bust, you STILL lose. Think about that. You both 'lose', and the dealer still takes your money. That means you don't win 50% of the time. Furthermore each betting spot on a stable table tends to experience trends - this sounds superstitious and not mathematical, but it IS mathematical (it's proven in Cutting Edge Blackjack)...and the trend at the spot you picked might be one straight down.

Anyway, your betting system is called the Small Martingale. In Blackjack the SMART Way, a book that the only people who make fun of it are those who don't understand it, it says DON'T EVER TRY IT. I'm inclined to agree, especially both after my experience, and its explanation:

"You lose a $5 bet. So, thinking you're very smart, you put $10 down on the next bet... But, you wind up lose that hand. So, with the same philosophy in mind, you put down a $20 bet. Oops! you lose that bet, too... You put down a $40 bet, which, upon losing, leads to an $80 bet. Your heart starts to pound. That's a lot of dough to you. That hand, you draw two 8s and want to split. [KefX's note: You might say "Aha, you shouldn't split or it'd break the system because you bet more", but consider that two 8's give you 16, which is the WORST POSSIBLE HAND, and splitting IS the right decision - would making an inferior move help you win? I think not] Now you have $160 on one bet, and you draw another 8. Split again? You have to!... Now you have $240 on one hand, and your first hand draws a 3. Double? You realize it's the right move, and so, in a sense, you have to! Now you have $320 on the table. On one hand. Lose this, and you might run against a $500 maximum bet limit [KefX's note: my own casino's max at a $5 table is $100] on your next hand. CAN'T HAPPEN? I've SEEN it happen!"

I'm sorry, I'd just trust Richard Harvey more than I'd trust you. Besides, I'd rather play skillfully and be able to figure out what the hole card is, or what a hit card is likely to be, than just win by luck on some cheap betting system (though betting systems are a big part of the game, but real betting systems cause minimum risk, and this system causes pretty much MAXIMUM risk).

Oh, you might be right and have won every time you tried this, and if that's true, great. But I'm afraid I don't believe you.

- KefX

P.S. There ARE certain situations in which case hitting 17 would be your best move. If anybody reads this and wonders what the heck I'm talking about, I'm not surprised. This is likely to occur only at one-deck tables, but consider if all the 2's through 6's in the deck are gone, and the dealer has a 10 showing. You KNOW he has at least 17, because the lowest card he can have in the hole is 7. Therefore, if surrender is not allowed at your casino and you have 17 (or you have already taken a hit card and can't surrender), you will HIT your 17, in the hopes than an ace will save you! It sounds crazy, but the statistics show that it's better to hit than to stand in that situation. Besides, since there are no 2's through 6's, the probability of an getting an ace is considerably higher. It's understandable that you say you should never ever hit 17, though, because most people aren't going to be keeping track of the cards this well.

The problem with this method, put simply, is that when you draw with the dealer you do not win.

-->

The odds of you winning are less than 50%.

-->

In an average run of games, you will make a loss.

I made my original reply up there a couple years ago, and there's some things I'd like to change. First off is that Richard Harvey, who I mentioned above, is full of it. (However, he's still right in that the Martingale is the worst betting system there is.)

But I'll just show why you do not have a 50% chance of winning when you mimic the dealer...

Let's suppose you have 16 against the dealer's six, and, mimicking the dealer, you hit. You draw a ten and bust. The dealer, when his turn comes, flip over the hole card, and wowie zowie, he also had sixteen. He takes a hit, and he busts, too. Do you tie? No! Dealer wins if you busted, period. If you stood on your hand, which is the CORRECT move in this situation, you would have won (though of course the dealer will still win sometimes). The reason blackjack still has a low house edge (0.5%) despite this is that you get paid 3:2 for a blackjack. (This means stay away from any variants where you get paid only 6:5 or even money!)

Now, about the betting system... the problem is your gains are linear, while your losses are exponential. If you win five times in a row at $5 a hand, you win $25. If you lose five times in a row at $5 a hand, you lose $5 + $10 + $20 + $40 + $80 = $155 -- and remember that losing five times in a row is as probable (actually very slightly more probable) than winning five times in a row. And believe me, it's quite possible for an honest dealer to win twenty-two times in a row.

I advise that anybody who wants to gamble with an edge not try betting systems, especially not a betting system like this. It's impossible to get an edge in the long run through a betting system, no matter what game you're playing. This is proven, mathematical fact. Would you jump out the window to argue with the law of gravity? Heck no! So why would you do the equivalent of using a losing betting system to argue with hard math?

Instead, if you want to gamble with an edge, you should count cards at blackjack, or play a game such as poker. (By "poker", I mean poker against other players, not against a dealer or machine.) Neither game is easy to get an edge in -- except it's almost trivial to get an edge in very small stakes poker games online if you know what you're doing, which is how I'm making my money right now.

- Kef

Um... not that I'm well versed in the ways of Casinos and in no way consider myself an authority on loosing/winning money at them, I believe a method similar to this works well on Roulette (assuming you have enough money to continue doubling) where the Red/Black or Odds/Evens do give a 50/50 chance of winning (with the exception of that evil 0)

Having said that, Last time I went to a casino, I DIDN'T have enough money to continue doubling and thus lost the lot!