I really think you need to run it without the ties, so that a majority of the hands are losses. From a betting standpoint there is no difference between LLLLLTLLLL and
LLLLLLLLL

effectively they are both 9 consecutive losses

If you lose 5 in a row, stand up, take a break cool down for a bit then come back to the table. You wont lose the next 5.

It isn't very rare to have 10 hands losing streak.

Played 3000 hands the weekend before and had

1x 9+ hands losing

1x 11+ hands losing

6x 11+ hands not winning

Sure, but LLLL-WLL-LLLL is also effectively 9 consecutive losses then.

I'm thinking OP is trying to calculate the "Martingale system."

Bet 1- $5 - lose.
Bet 2 -$10- lose.
Bet 3- $20- lose.
Bet 4- $40- lose.
Bet 5- $80- lose.
Bet 6- $160- lose.
Bet 7- $320- lose.
Bet 8- $640- lose.
Bet 9- $1280- lose.
Bet 10- $2460- win/ not really thou. Because table max was $1500, and casino not let you place $2460 bet.

You lose much more then 50%, I forget how to calculate it but remember you get paid extra on BJs, can double down in +EV spots etc..

I'm just guessing here but I think the chance to lose a hand is at least 55%

If you play optimal blackjack strategy, the house has a 52-48 edge
(not taking into account pushes, becuase why would you anyways, if you lose 5 hands, then push 1, then lose another 5, you've lost 10 in a row essentially fwiw).
Wtf at whoever said you're over 50 to win? That's idiotic.

But yeah just do .52 ^ 10

= 0.14455 %

Are there no casino's that allow you to bet more than £1,500?

If so, then that system can work.

I lost 9 in a row on 100 min table betting min and seeing 1 ten. Then upped my bet to 500 lost 4 more then bet 1 k lost then 1100 and got dealt 20 vs dealer bj. Fml I did not quit playing but can honestly say I'm longterm up in bj overall for 1k> less wins. Every time I go for big payout playing higher I always get crushed. But I can sit and rape 15 and 25 tables all day

Tell them what ur doing I will put money on it they will let u bet more then Table max.

No.

Playing perfect basic strategy against common standard rules you will win about 42% of the hands dealt. That also remains constant with card counting except at rare extreme counts, but you just win more from bet scaling when counting. The dealer will always win 49% of hands, and the other 9% is pushes. (rounded numbers)

So if we ignore pushes, then on any given hand our chance to lose the hand is about 49/(49+42)=54%. Getting 10 in a row (counting only win/loss hands) at 54% is pretty common. If we play 1000 hands the chance to see a streak of 10 losses is about 62%. We go past 50/50 at about 700 hands.

The house edge is not based on hands won, it's based on money won (lost) and you put more on the table on splits and doubles.

epic troll bump

Thanks.

What is the longest amount of hands people have had on BJ without winning?

If I remember correctly, you lose 48%, you win 43%, and you push 9%. So you're at a.pretty big disadvantage based on that. All.of the times you double and split, getting more money on the table when you have the best of it, closes the gap. That plus the bj bonus every 21 hands makes it a near break even game, depending on the rules.

I never counted hands -- or factored in compound wagers -- but I do remember one trip that landed somewhere around negative five SD's that really tested my meddle. Took six months -- two winning progressions -- just to get back to even. Then we went on for the win -- about six months late. It does happen. It sucks. Prepare for it. As long as you can proportion down, and you're not lying to yourself about your win rate, it all works out in time.

This isn't exactly true. There are a number of index plays that effect win % (some improve it, some decrease it slightly but increase ev) at far less than extreme counts, particularly if you don't leave on slightly negative counts. The close enough for horseshoes estimates aren't going to change but the last sentence there isn't right.

A particular index affects one specific hand, but has very little effect on the overall hand winrate. It varies less than +/- 1 percent except at rare counts. I'll find the table showing the actual data.

Edit:
http://www.blackjackincolor.com/truecount5.htm

Chart is using Hi-Lo max indexes (over 100).

"There is a common misconception that you win many more hands at higher counts. Unfortunately this is not true. This chart displays the percentage of hands won, lost and pushed at each count. The win percentage, in red, does slightly increase. However, it only increases from 41.6% of hands at a true count of -18, to 42.7% at TC zero to about 44% at TC +18."

If we just look at -10 to +10 the line is virtually flat at 42.x%. Counts outside that range almost never happen. Over +10 the win rate starts going up slightly to 44% at +18. TC +18 never happens.

http://www.blackjackincolor.com/truecount1.htm

The ratio of losses and pushes shifts a little more than the wins line, with positive counts causing more pushes (but not significantly more wins). The loss line for count -10 to +10 is about 9.5%-11%. So a total range of +/- less than 1% still.

The actual numbers are also somewhere on Wizard of Odds.

I agree with all of this. Was being a bit of a nit the last few words of it particularly "just" just seemed a little off/potentially somewhat mis-leading to me.

I understand now and agree.

People are assuming that you are guaranteed to make it to the tenth hand which is clearly not true

I've won 10 in a row before, so it's possible. Dunno exact percentages though.

The last time I played BJ I lost 42 hands in a row,no pushes, lost.
Never will play again,that was over ten years ago.
The dealer still remembers me.He is now in management and I saw him last year,he calls me "Lucky".

No idea, but my last time in AC I sat down with $300 on a $25 table, and lost 12 consecutive hands. So very possible.

Those are the ones you remember -- quick and dirty accounting.

No doubt...I actually think I've ran pretty close to expectation over the past 10 years.