playing at a crowded table

[Diver]

I recently had an opportunity to check out Barona with its nice DD rules-- H17, DS, LS- but the penetration was bad (52-62 dealt) and worse, all tables were filled or nearly filled (5-6 spots played) even in the late morning and early evening. BJA projects $40-$63won/100 hands at my 1-6 spread. I came away with just $50 for two sessions of a combined 3.5 hours playing $25 min. I'm not sure of how many hands per hour I saw, but figuring 6 minutes per DD and three hands per player average, that would be well below 100 hands per hour. I went down through losing some big bets when a table just opened and only three of us were playing. Then it filled and I was stuck either taking the hit or grinding it out which I elected to do. My question is whether anyone finds these conditions endurable under an "only game in town" criterion or simply a waste as it seems to me. I was lucky that in the last two hours, I saw far more positive counts than negative, so I was able to get away without a loss. And as an amusing aside, regardless of what people say about the effect of bad players, it's tough when another player hits a hard 17 against a dealer five, allowing the dealer to avoid a bust when I had a split with $125 on each. I later considered that NOT blowing up might have been a mistake. I told the guy who did call the goofy old lady on it that I was too crushed to have any energy for going off on her .

[EasyRhino]

Barona seems to like to manage their tables to fullness. It's annoying. And finding good DD penetration in San Diego is tough in general.

Where crowded tables (especially DD, especially poorly penetrated) really hurt you is if you're employing any sort of cover (limiting the amount you increase or decrease your bets). Because the count is going to jump a lot each round due to all the cards being used, and worse yet, you're not going to get in that many rounds.

http://www.blackjackincolor.com/cardcountingcover3.htm

However, if you're not worried about cover, then playing at a full table isn't so bad, as long as you can put up with the crushing boredom.

edit: oh yeah, I tried simming Barona's game, and I got less optimistic results regarding win rate than you did. Maybe half as big if you're talking $25-$150.

[Diver]

Originally Posted by EasyRhino

Where crowded tables (especially DD, especially poorly penetrated) really hurt you is if you're employing any sort of cover (limiting the amount you increase or decrease your bets). Because the count is going to jump a lot each round due to all the cards being used, and worse yet, you're not going to get in that many rounds.

However, if you're not worried about cover, then playing at a full table isn't so bad, as long as you can put up with the crushing boredom.

My cover, other than displaying uncertainty about some aspects of table etiquette, involved adding some red chips following wins (and an occasional loss) during negative counts (KO). I'd often be parlaying my bet in a positive shift and would jump an additional one unit if the count warranted it, which was rare. Seemed to work and possibly in part because the count rarely called for three units until the third round. I also noticed the dealers never called out on anything other than the first time a player pushed out a black, so I never received even that attention. And you're right, it is tedious; but since I'm an aspiring AP and I need all the experience I can get, I wind up playing games that aren't optimal but will do so as long as there's a modest advantage. Thanks for your comments.