aslan said:
They are good, they play at a professional level of competence, but have chosen other means to a living, primarily ordinary jobs, but still gain plenty of satisfaction beating the casinos on weekends and vacations. Imagine the combined impact of these thousands of recreational or part-time players! They may well present a greater threat to the casinos in the aggregate than all the full-time professionals put together, and their numbers are growing rapidly with the proliferation of blackjack books and help sites on the internet.
I think you're inflating the effect of those who do not have to play for a living.
One of my close friend is a cycling enthusiast.
He bikes way better than most of his peers in town, and knows as much as a shop owner on how to fix problems with bikes. Incidentally, he's the one who built the bike that I ride to commute. But that's where the story ends.
It's been some time since I picked up guitar and music. During the first couple years I practiced hard. 5-8 hrs per day wasn't so uncommon and all day and night practices weren't unprecedented either. These days I go on months without even touching it, but when I do it only takes no more than a few days to play well. Does that mean that I can play at a professional level? Not even close.
Another dear friend of mine has no income other than playing bass. That's with which he pays his bills. I've met and jammed with other cats in town, but not a single person plays even close to his level, and yes that includes music majors and more experienced players some of whom played 10+ yrs more than him as a hobbyist. He just always knows what needs to be done, not to mention all the networking he gets with those who share the profession.
English is my second language, and I'm bilingual. As such, I've offered a hand in translating between two parties when occasions called for it, and I've been compensated in some of them. If I were to do that for a living, I better do a hell of a better job or I'll starve.
If part-timers stop making profit, big deal. Juice ran dry and they look for their oasis elsewhere.
If recreational players stop having recreation from the game, then that's that.
Does it take more than common sense to realize that those who are left on the Rio Grande are inevitably doing something that make them last?
I'll leave advanced techniques aside, and just consider a straight counting game.
Those who can make the ends meet by the game itself are likely to be playing with bankrolls deeper than most non-pros ever will.
Full-timers are not restricted by geographical and temporal restrictions that follows dayjobs.
Consequently, they can move around as needed and play better games. How much proportion of part-timers live close to bountiful good games?
Lastly, it's so easy to make errors with card counting and just as easy to fail to notice them. Think about it: if you notice it, you would correct it right away. I've just begun to actually comprehend that it takes much to get it down solid; I just don't know how much. So I keep trying.
I don't imagine a vast majority having a partner with whom they practice. Not only practicing alone makes it difficult to tell which is the one roulade you can't sing, preparation of a full checkout for myself takes a little more than twice the time it takes than actually going through the checkout. Real anal-ache.
By all means, I'm not implying that you or anybody in particular for that matter are incompetent nor am I saying that I'm a strong player.
Playing around with a software will get you as far as cue dependent learning will allow you.
All that books can do is to make better judgments. They don't translate directly to procedural memory. As far as I know, we're not living in the Matrix.
Certainly, I have no doubt that some folks play strong games even if they just do this on a side, but a greater threat than all full-timers combined? Not by a long shot.