I need some new lines

So I guess I'm not the smooth cat that I thought I was. Tonight I played my favorite joint, most PCs and dealers know me and greet me by my name, as well as security(I had gotten into an altercation with a ploppy that lead to the cops coming and arresting his stupid ass) I sat down at a table with a lady dealer that also greeted me by name with a nice smile and played the way I always do. DD game spread 1 to 2hands of 5 units. She's seen me usually play a 1-10 spread, 1 hand, so I figured I'm not in hostile territory. count goes from 0 to 2. She says to me that she can deal one more round, I put out 2 hands of 4 units, and then she changes her mind and says "actually, I'm gonna shuffle" She tells the PC, a nice guy, that she's gonna "wash the cards" and proceeds to pull out all the cards and spreads them around randomly all over the table. Then she goes ahead and shuffles normally. I get in the awkward position of pulling back my two hand, 4 unit bet back to a 1 hand, 1 unit bet.

My questions are, is this "washing excuse" a way of thwarting ace and shuffle trackers? And, does everyone else jump bets to the correct bet amount that correlates to the TC regardless of what you bet the prior round? Sometimes I would say ploppy stuff like, "gotta make up my losses by betting more" and "I'm not afraid of you!" But since this lady whom I thought was more player friendly than casino friendly, was suspicious of my bet jump, I ended up trying to slowly raise my bet regardless of how high the TC jumped tonight. didn't seem that any of my ploppy lines worked. does anyone advocate slowly raising your bet as cover?

Actually, didn't she give you an excuse to pull back your bets by washing the cards. Normally, washing requires all the room on the table including the bet circles.

They usually don't wash the cards except for new decks. It takes too much time that would be better spent taking your money. What she did was in effect a preferential shuffle. Sounds to me like they are giving you a hint. Beware of smiling faces.

I'll usually only change my bet if I win or have another excuse to touch it, like losing or pushing on a split or double. Alot of times a win will be a good excuse to spread to 2 hands for me also. In the BJA, first chapter I believe, Schlessenger talks a little about leaving bets alone and losing out on a little EV vs the longevity gained by being more subtle with changing bets. I found his suggestions to be pretty reasonable and I try to keep it in mind when spreading.

Homeschool

Right, but the awkward part was that I put out my minimum after she shuffled.

I never understood why dropping your bet after a shuffle looked suspicious. Ploppies do it all the time. The card flow has been reset. Who cares if I won the past 5 hands in a row ... the CARDS HAVE BEEN SHUFFLED! Very easy to justify why you're changing your bets, if you feel the need to.

In general, I think betting cover like this is overrated. Unless you're implementing a comprehensive cover strategy (see Ian Andersen's books), I think most of these haphazard cover plays and moves gain 0 longevity.

??? You just gave me a smiling face icon. Are you saying that I should be aware of your smiling face too?:laugh::laugh:

well, that really does suck about her then. I will let it go this time because I think it was a knee jerk reaction. I didn't tip her this time, and she knows that I will tip her, mostly cause she cuts deep. Plus, we had a strange exchange later on, when she came right up to me out of the blue, and said that she wanted to apologize for what she said earlier. That it didn't come out the way she wanted. To which, I have no idea what she was referring to.

But that really is something. I can't believe people have the ability to have that smiling face, know your name kindness, but hiding deep inside is their desire to see you lose your money to them. Guess I'm gonna have to play that game too.

Nothing wrong with that. The momentum was "broken" by the shuffle.

Only time I've seen cards washed, besides when new decks are put into play, is when a player has requested a shuffle mid-shoe and the pit agreed.

BTW, Jack Black, in case you didn't notice, PM sent.

Yea, that's what I thought too. But I don't think there's a way to sim it, so I wanted to be sure. That's really in the first chapter?! I'm gonna have to re read it again. damn good book.

If you want to try to justify your moves to yourself, by saying ploppies do it, go ahead. Ploppies raise their bets too. And sometimes they take insurance, split 10's and stand on 16. But the fact is that these are some of the things they look for when evaluating your play. We know this because we have been told by people who work the other side. Anyone of these plays alone won't do you in, but if they are running a skill check and evaluating from above, which you don't know, making a few of these at the right time will.

As for explaining why you made the move, well you don't get to do that and any comment that you make at the table for that purpose goes on deaf ears when being evaluated from above.

In this case, if I were worried about heat, I would have taken a phone call during the shuffle, left to use the rest room, or move to another table. If you're gone for a few minutes it's less obvious that you're dropping to min.

Yes. Do not ever believe that the dealer is neutral. As is the case with any employee, some of them hate their employers and like seeing us take down the casino, but the vast majority hate us and enjoy seeing us lose.

Why do they hate us? Because we throw around money that they could never afford to, it's that simple.

Do you think that's true in a place where dealers keep their own tips and they are not pooled?

Also, in the case of Vegas, years ago, it was said that many dealers where in fact card players that had gone west and failed to make a living playing cards, so they got a job on the other side of the table. They probably hated to see someone else succeed, where they had failed. Probably not as prevalent today, but there are still some failed, or parttime or want-a-be players on the other side of the table that may wish to see you fail.

Maybe I should add a poll to this. So what do you all prefer? conservative bet jumps, or playing with no mercy? Also, HOW do you bet with no mercy?

I don't think I should be concerned about the eye in the sky where I play. For one thing, I've run into a few amateur counters, who ask each other what the count is in front of the dealer. Happened last night actually. Had another guy ask a dealer about how easy or hard it is to count cards.

I don't like the Schlessinger approach because I really think you give away way too much money. Besides, if they get to the point where they're running a skills check on you anyway, your cover will only go so far. They'll also look to see when you take insurance, how you play certain index plays and when, and if there's any significant betting/count correlation going on. When I play, I play without mercy and I accomplish this by confusing the pit. I interact with other players and the dealer, I speak directly to the pit boss if it seems like they might be aware of my game, I visibly take chips off the table or add more from my pockets, and before they can figure out if I'm a problem or an idiot, I'm off. Aggressive play, short sessions. I often spread 1:40 at 6D games, but I leave before trouble has time to brew.

However, at your local joint, you can't play like this. If you're getting shuffled up on as it is, you may have already been made, at which point you have to determine how much is too much for these guys. Chances are, they know you're a counter, but they don't feel like you're a big enough threat to worry about. If you keep them in that comfort zone, you may have longevity. But I don't think the solution is a very aggressive cover strategy. There are other games in the world. Find the comfort zone threshold for your place an stay within that boundary, but don't give up too much.

No mercy. At least 1-15 (usually spreading to two hands) on shoes, 1-8 double deck, and 1-4 single deck. Bet as optimally as possible. I have enough losses as it is, I don't need to add variance with cover.

If I'm using cover, it's because I'm spreading even more, or I'm doing something other than counting.

Personally I will not use cover play to throw away EV that I have worked hard to achieve. I'd rather use a smaller spread that is equivalent to larger spread with cover play.

Correct me if I am wrong. I believe that no matter what cover you use, as long as you consistently win more than they can tolerate, you will get heat.

This applies only to "high stakes" players. Dealers, at least at the bigger stores around here, certainly make a living wage.