Two person system:

[jack,jackson]

After awhile, playing at the kitchen table with my girlfriend i noticed i wasnt getting double the results i was expecting. I experimented with this for about two months, and only saw about 50% increase in my win rate. Flux? Variation? Yes,no, I dont know? Though my results werent bad for 2, 1:10 [10u]spreads, 2D, sometimes spreading to four hands, sometimes all on two.
But after the weeks wore on i went from all high of about 25,000 back down to about 8,000. I was emotionally drained. Maybe i should of played one min, instead of two. 200 hrs/$40hr/ or 4 units between two people=2 units per hour.[approx.] When i can usually double this playing solo.Maybe i was making mistakes or maybe my time played's off.
Personally i think it was for two reasons. One,insufficient max bet's of hand each? Two, under betting my advantage due to spreading to 4 hands when the system is designed for two? Just not sure! The double action just didnt pan out the way i had hoped. So i went outside and sat down under nice shade tree to think about for awhile, When out of nowhere an apple fell on my head. Then it hit me
Why couldnt one person be using a optimal playing strategy, while another person used a optimal betting strategy, for a mother of pearl of strategys. One controls the bets, the other controls the play of hands.
Is this feasibe? Would it yeild an acceptable difference? Could you devise such a system? Is there one already in existence? Anybody heard of such a two person system? Im curious to hear any feedback or thoughts that you might you have concerning this wild idea of a system

________________

[Sonny]

Originally Posted by jack,jackson

After awhile, playing at the kitchen table with my girlfriend i noticed i wasnt getting double the results i was expecting.

You can’t have two people playing at the same table and not expect the variance to increase. Sure your EV will double, but since you are doubling your bets and still playing to the same bankroll your chances of going broke (or hitting a big losing streak like you did) are much higher. In order for two people to play this way they would have to play at different tables.

Originally Posted by jack,jackson

Why couldnt one person be using a optimal playing strategy, while another person used a optimal betting strategy, for a mother of pearl of strategys. One controls the bets, the other controls the play of hands. Is this feasibe?

Sure, this is feasible.

Originally Posted by jack,jackson

Would it yeild an acceptable difference?

Nope. The difference in playing efficiencies (PE) of card counting systems is pretty small. The system with a great betting correlation (BC) can still have a decent PE, and the best PE you’re going to get from a single-parameter card counting system is 0.70 anyway. In any case, most of your EV will come from betting the money, not playing the hands. You might be better off having your partner keeping a perfect side count for insurance instead.

Originally Posted by jack,jackson

Could you devise such a system?

Sure. One person could use the RPC or Wong Halves system for betting and the other could use Uston’s APC for playing. Alternatively, one person could use the Hi-Opt II (without the side count) for playing and the other could keep a side count of 2/6=+1 A=-2 and add the two together for the betting. This article will give you some more ideas:

http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/sdcnt.htm

Originally Posted by jack,jackson

Anybody heard of such a two person system?

If you use the search function on this website you will probably find lots of tips. Here’s a good place to start:

http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=89

-Sonny-

[zengrifter]

Originally Posted by Sonny

One person could use the RPC or Wong Halves system for betting and the other could use Uston’s APC for playing. Alternatively, one person could use the Hi-Opt II (without the side count) for playing and the other could keep a side count of 2/6=+1 A=-2 and add the two together for the betting.

However, the results but be grossly inferior to the results from two prople at seperate tables playing simple HiLo or Ko systems. zg