Spotting Trends

[Koseao]

I guess my first question is, do casinos have people who look for card counters based on their betting increases and decreases? Which leads me to my next part of the question. Each counting system has a different moment when you up your bet based on the count and when to lower it back down. Assuming that Hi-lo is most popular (or so it seems in the readings I have read) are the casinos most versed on the count of hi-lo and then can track who is betting off that? Like when someone is betting higher when the count is high? Are there even people who do that kind of job for the casino, locate where the count would be at a given table? Basically I am asking, all in all, if the casinos know hi-lo are you more apt to get by if you're using another method because your rate of increase/decrease wont follow theirs?

And I am so very sorry if you got lost in the dribble that was my mixed up thought

[sabre]

Regardless of what counting system you use ... the large bets are hitting the felt in the same situation, and there's a good chance that a ton of Aces and Faces are going to splatter all over the table when that happens. So if a casino decides that they need to more closely evaluate your past or current play, the specific counting system you're using probably isn't going to matter too much.

[Bojack1]

Originally Posted by Koseao

I guess my first question is, do casinos have people who look for card counters based on their betting increases and decreases? Which leads me to my next part of the question. Each counting system has a different moment when you up your bet based on the count and when to lower it back down. Assuming that Hi-lo is most popular (or so it seems in the readings I have read) are the casinos most versed on the count of hi-lo and then can track who is betting off that? Like when someone is betting higher when the count is high? Are there even people who do that kind of job for the casino, locate where the count would be at a given table? Basically I am asking, all in all, if the casinos know hi-lo are you more apt to get by if you're using another method because your rate of increase/decrease wont follow theirs?

And I am so very sorry if you got lost in the dribble that was my mixed up thought

Your title of this thread answers part of your question. Regardless of count, there will be similar trends of betting movement. Although not exact, if observed, any count will be able to identify when there is an advantage or not and if you have more money out in coorelation with this. The pivots may not be the same, or when you recognize the advantage, but if there definitive moves in it, just about any count will justify it to a degree.

That being said, I would not worry about people assigned to detect it. Especially for someone that is an unknown. Playing smart, and with lower stakes makes it very easy to play this game undetected for a while. There are a few "counter catchers" out there I suppose, but for the most part its totally up to the player whether or not a backoff is going to happen. And they will happen if you play long enough, so don't worry to much about them. I do take issue with the badge of honor a lot of players assign to their backoffs though. You can't stop it from happening forever, but pride should be taken in having fewer instances, not more. Playing with advantage is good, playing with one undetected is great.

[Koseao]

I feel like I should be handing out Hallmark 'Thank You' cards. Thank you, you explained it very well especially because I am not too sure if I even made any sense when it came out. Thanks for easing a new player's mind

[Renzey]

Originally Posted by Koseao

Each counting system has a different moment when you up your bet based on the count and when to lower it back down. Assuming that Hi-lo is most popular, are the casinos most versed on the count of hi-lo? If so, are you more apt to get by undetected if you're using another method because your rate of increase/decrease wont follow theirs?

All bonafide counting systems go to extended lengths to see that the bets get raised, and topped out at very similar points of current high card/low card density.

In shoe games, there won't be much betting variation at all from count system to count system because of the great number of cards that have been mixed together, bringing about a more balanced mixture of card ranks -- proportionally speaking. In double deck play however, a simple count such as Hi-Opt I (single level covering only 8 ranks of cards) will have a significant opportunity to find a given situation quite different from say, the Halves count (three level covering 12 ranks).
For example, if the first round of dealt cards consisted of 2-5-7-8-2-5-7-8, Hi-Opt I would compute to a true count of +1.1 true -- where Halves would find the true count to be +2.7 true. Note that with a six deck shoe, the respective true counts would merely be +0.3 true and +0.8 true.

This is a hand-picked rather extreme example, but it illustrates how/why more comprehensive counts find more betting opportunities. Overall though, the bet sizes indicated by most any count will pretty much mirror the bet sizes indicated by another. That said, some unbalanced counts such as KO do need to be RC adjusted to make up for the +1.5 to +2.0 true counts it misses early in the shoe.

[SleightOfHand]

Originally Posted by Renzey

All bonafide counting systems go to extended lengths to see that the bets get raised, and topped out at very similar points of current high card/low card density.

In shoe games, there won't be much betting variation at all from count system to count system because of the great number of cards that have been mixed together, bringing about a more balanced mixture of card ranks -- proportionally speaking. In double deck play however, a simple count such as Hi-Opt I (single level covering only 8 ranks of cards) will have a significant opportunity to find a given situation quite different from say, the Halves count (three level covering 12 ranks).
For example, if the first round of dealt cards consisted of 2-5-7-8-2-5-7-8, Hi-Opt I would compute to a true count of +1.1 true -- where Halves would find the true count to be +2.7 true. Note that with a six deck shoe, the respective true counts would merely be +0.3 true and +0.8 true.

This is a hand-picked rather extreme example, but it illustrates how/why more comprehensive counts find more betting opportunities. Overall though, the bet sizes indicated by most any count will pretty much mirror the bet sizes indicated by another. That said, some unbalanced counts such as KO do need to be RC adjusted to make up for the +1.5 to +2.0 true counts it misses early in the shoe.

Here's another one. If the cards came out 5-10-10-8-3-10-10-10, Hi-Lo would say this is a ~-1.5 TC for DD, but because of the excess aces still in play, the deck advantage is still in favor of the player. The answer? JSTAT count!!! Ignore this, I couldn't resist

[zengrifter]

Originally Posted by SleightOfHand

Here's another one. If the cards came out 5-10-10-8-3-10-10-10, Hi-Lo would say this is a ~-1.5 TC for DD, but because of the excess aces still in play, the deck advantage is still in favor of the player. The answer? JSTAT count!!! Ignore this, I couldn't resist

So even an INFERIOR COUNT like JSTAT's can make an occaisional
superior decision... But a blind squirrel still won't find as many acorns. zg

[Renzey]

Originally Posted by SleightOfHand

Here's another one. If the cards came out 5-10-10-8-3-10-10-10, Hi-Lo would say this is a ~-1.5 TC for DD, but because of the excess aces still in play, the deck advantage is still in favor of the player. The answer? JSTAT count!!! Ignore this, I couldn't resist

Ran two quick sims: 2 decks, H17, DAS. Removed five 10's, one 5, one 3 and one 8. Shuffled after every hand to keep deck composition the same throughout both sims. Basic strategy EV was -1.17%: Omega II EV was -0.98%.