Wonging out if delay till next opportunity

[schismist]

I have a question about wonging out. (I'm assuming no backcounting, only wonging out, e.g. No Mid Shoe Entry, or just shrinking balls and wearing out my welcome )

If I'm playing a 6D 80% pen game, at what hi-lo count should I wong out for each number of decks remaining, IF I assume that, when I get up, I'll have to wait a while for a new shoe to start. E.g. there are 5 decks remaining, and the TC is -1. Right at this moment, the expectation of the next hand is negative, but the expectation for the rest of the whole shoe is probably still positive, right? If I have the option of taking a sure $0 by taking a bathroom break for the rest of the shoe and coming back when it starts again, at what point is the expected value of the hands I would be forgoing if I wonged out worth the risk I take on by trying to play out more of the shoe? Let's take a spread of from 1-10 to 1-16.

Finally, in terms of overall profitability, do you think it's better to play all heads up or table hop if each table has one to three other players (but you spread to multiple hands on positive counts when there are others)?

Sorry for the run on sentences and I like cheese. Hope that made sense at ALL.

[EyeHeartHalves]

first, you've learned to act out wonging out. meaning: (to get out...) i have to go to the bathroom, gotta pick up a comp, not feeling lucky, i'm uncomfortable. and (to wait for the shuffle because you don't want to play the last deck of the shoe without any knowlede because you were in the bathroom) "i don't want to interupt these guys; I might change the cards;" etc.

then what i'd suggest is wonging out when "you didn't win (i chose those words carefully) the last hand and the Hi-Lo TC is less than or equal to -1.

your win rate will increase INCREDIBLY and with some practice you'll soon notice that you can get in and out of No-Mid-Shoe-Entry tables pretty quickly and the act will develop eventually.

[mdlbj]

Originally Posted by schismist

I have a question about wonging out. (I'm assuming no backcounting, only wonging out, e.g. No Mid Shoe Entry, or just shrinking balls and wearing out my welcome )

If I'm playing a 6D 80% pen game, at what hi-lo count should I wong out for each number of decks remaining, IF I assume that, when I get up, I'll have to wait a while for a new shoe to start. E.g. there are 5 decks remaining, and the TC is -1. Right at this moment, the expectation of the next hand is negative, but the expectation for the rest of the whole shoe is probably still positive, right? If I have the option of taking a sure $0 by taking a bathroom break for the rest of the shoe and coming back when it starts again, at what point is the expected value of the hands I would be forgoing if I wonged out worth the risk I take on by trying to play out more of the shoe? Let's take a spread of from 1-10 to 1-16.

Finally, in terms of overall profitability, do you think it's better to play all heads up or table hop if each table has one to three other players (but you spread to multiple hands on positive counts when there are others)?

Sorry for the run on sentences and I like cheese. Hope that made sense at ALL.

Thats tough. You should not play with a -1 count for obvious reasons. You can wong out as much as possible or until they say something. Its a no brainer really.

When you have the advantage you should be playing as many hands as your bankroll allows.

[EasyRhino]

Another thing that throws me is impatience. If I'm playing heads up at a table, we're going to go a lot faster than if there are a couple civilians there. So you can "get through" a negative count much faster if you're playing a fast game than if you're watching a slow game.

Problem is, you're basically paying for that luxury by playing in the negative counts. And you [i]know[i] that as soon as the count turns positive, 3 players will glom onto the table.

[Sonny]

Originally Posted by schismist

…IF I assume that, when I get up, I'll have to wait a while for a new shoe to start. E.g. there are 5 decks remaining, and the TC is -1. Right at this moment, the expectation of the next hand is negative, but the expectation for the rest of the whole shoe is probably still positive, right?

That’s a great question. In most cases people will Wong out of a negative table (Table A) and find another table (Table B) to play at. As you said, the value of a –1 shoe with 5 decks left may be slightly positive, but a fresh shoe may be more valuable. In that case you would prefer Table B to Table A.

But in your case things are different. There is no Table B. You will have to wait for the shuffle either way. The optimal departure point depends greatly on how many other opportunities are readily available. The more opportunities you have (or the sooner they become available) the sooner you would abandon a negative shoe. In your case, there are no other opportunities. That means you will be sticking around a bit longer than most players would.

Ideally you would want to sit out all negative hands, but that would look way to obvious (and would probably annoy the ploppies). Since you are Wonging out for the rest of the shoe you want to wait until the TC gets so low that it seems “unrecoverable.” That point will depend on the number of decks and the penetration. I would guess that it is somewhere around the shoe’s midpoint or slightly thereafter. The precise TC I don’t know. I would have to check Blackjack Attack to find Schlesinger’s methodology.

-Sonny-

[schismist]

Thanks, everyone. I like your responses. Basically, I'm trying to make sure I keep an eye on my hands per hour. I would disagree with mdlbj that you never want to play in negative counts if you can avoid it.

In my situation, there is actually table B, but sometimes it's not as appetizing. Ususally there are 5 tables at my limits ($5 or $10 mins). The $5 tables are usually crowded, and the $10 are heads up or just one or two other players. If I'm at the $10 table heads-up, the count is -1 and 5 decks remain, and I spy at the $5 table that there are five other players and 5 decks remain, maybe it is better to keep playing heads-up.

BTW, I'm in WA and they don't re-shuffle when the table empties . I'm not really going for anything exact here, just trying to get a feel for when I have to quit, when it's borderline, and when I shouldn't quit, you know?

[Mimosine]

Originally Posted by EasyRhino

Another thing that throws me is impatience. If I'm playing heads up at a table, we're going to go a lot faster than if there are a couple civilians there. So you can "get through" a negative count much faster if you're playing a fast game than if you're watching a slow game.

Problem is, you're basically paying for that luxury by playing in the negative counts. And you [i]know[i] that as soon as the count turns positive, 3 players will glom onto the table.

at some places they shuffle up if everyone leaves the table..... i've used this successfully at a few heads up games.... when the count tanked --- AND i was getting clobbered, i'd say "i gotta go take a piss" or "i'm getting clobbered, i'm going to take a break"

i was at one place, playing with a "colleague" and the count tanked, we both looked at each other, stood up and took 2 steps away from the table. the dealer smiled, shuffled and we got back to business. you should be really careful of heat when doing this, we had none that particular day and i won 30 units rather fast with this advanced wonging strategy.

maybe "advanced wongery" is my name for this...

[eps6724]

Originally Posted by schismist

I would disagree with mdlbj that you never want to play in negative counts if you can avoid it.

I think it comes more from the fact that no-one has been able to accurately pick how FAR the count will drop, which would be favorable for us. (I.e. if I knew there were 42 10's, 9 aces, 20 6's and 4 3's coming in the next-say 75 cards to be dealt, you can bet your boots I'm staying in, no matter WHERE the count goes! I think there is a name of figuring out where these clumps are...hummm...)

Yea, I know, extreme situation-I was just being 'illustrating'. Without knowing THAT, not playing when the count goes negative (not necessarily 'down') keeps us from sitting through the crap that must come out. as it goes back UP, when it once again begins to drop-in our favor.

[21forme]

Schlesinger discusses this in BJA 3rd ed. He basically says if the count doesn't turn positive within a couple of decks (for a shoe game) get outta there and start counting another table.

[mdlbj]

Playing a negative count is a loosing proposition. Why would one play at all if they are playing with a disadvantage? Where are you playing? Tulalip? Dont tell me Muckleshoot Or Emerald Queen. If I remember Muckleshoot has no Mid shoe entry yet, Tulalip does allow it or did. Hit Goldie's up in Seattle, you can get away with murder there but only if you can stomach watching kids from the UW spend their tuition money on gambling.


When I was in LV last weekend, I back counted a table to a -9 running count. There were two patrons at the table, both bought in for 2500 and were flat betting green. It was pretty obvious what they were waiting for and I really wanted to ask them what makes you want to sit through this misery. But I walked away and laughed about it. Sure their bankroll could have supported it but, in principle, and in practice I wong or leave at a -1 count regardless of BR.

There is absolutely no reason at all with the time and effort one puts into learning to be a skilled player to wast it away when you are at an disadvantage.

If you can, next time you play, ask your self what the EV is when you sit at a table.

Good Luck!

P.S

Game selection is key as well. I know there are a few good tables in Washington, you just have to do a little research.