Archives of CardCounter.com message forums

These archives of the CardCounter.com message boards are provided as-is for reference. If you want to discuss anything about the posts, please post a message to the BlackjackInfo.com message forums.

Threads 301 to 330

No Hole Card
Posted by Z on 03-Jan-2003 21:22:59 (#2295)

Does anyone know what the effect of no dealer hole card is on house edge when you lose splits and doubles (as opposed to american no hole)?

1D, S17, D9 edge is .15% against (wizardofodds.com)

1D, S17, D9, No Hole Card edge is ???

Thanks,
Z

Re: No Hole Card SEE...
Posted by zengrifter on 03-Jan-2003 22:02:13 (#2296)

From ULTIMATE LIST -
http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/conseq/rules.htm

Re: No Hole Card SEE...
Posted by Z on 03-Jan-2003 23:49:24 (#2298)

Thanks so much! That is an awesome resource!!!

Ed Thorp in Worth Magazine '99
Posted by zengrifter on 04-Jan-2003 00:34:56 (#2299)

Worth's Sept'99 issue ran an article on Thorp which has been posted on the nonBJ board, for those who didn't read it then. zg

Worth Printing
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 04-Jan-2003 09:07:45 (#2300)

I think this is what Wong saw in the Mayor, statting that he was just passing through the bj world on his way to bigger and better things. Thorp applied the same principles to, well, everything he could get his hands and money on.

Somebody set me straight please!
Posted by Z on 04-Jan-2003 11:50:02 (#2301)

Let me apologize in advance to zg because my question arose as a result of online BJ.

I was rather alarmed when I deposited $250 into an online casino last night that offered to match it and later last night I cashed out $865 (having been over $900 at one point). It was alarming because the deviation was so huge and could have easily gone the other way...or could it?

Question:
There is a predetermined amount of action that I needed to play, say $4000. Deviation is a function of n, or the number of hands played. In a case like above I need to make n as large as possible, as to minimize the deviation. So I was betting $5 per hand prepared to play 800 hands. I was up after a short while, and increased my bet (to $10), lowered my n and increased my deviation. Thus the huge deviation at the end.
I am almost certain that I am being stupid. But in a case with a predetermined amount of action and a desire to "break even" (which in online stunts means up 100%), I want to increase my deviation when I am above the break even point, and decrease it when I am below my desired break-even point. I.e. I'd rather be up 5 $10 hands then $2 ones and rather be down 5 $2 hands than $10.

OK!

Does this make any sense?? (I think not but I can't figure out why)
Is it possible to increase upside deviation and decrease downside???

Thanks,
Z

Re: Somebody set me straight please!
Posted by The Mayor on 04-Jan-2003 13:33:15 (#2302)

>I was rather alarmed when I deposited $250 into an online casino last night that offered to match it and later last night I cashed out $865 (having been over $900 at one point).

This is very bad online style. You will quickly get barred from many online casinos. You have to play a little each day, wait a while, then cash out. I hope your name isn't already on one of the lists because of this!

>It was alarming because the deviation was so huge and could have easily gone the other way...or could it?

Yes, you could have lost $800. But let me say, that you experienced a very rare win betting $5 to $10. A win of $800 means you were winning at a rate of almost 20% over 4000 hands. That's the kind of event that you are not likely to see again in your lifetime.

Question:
>There is a predetermined amount of action that I needed to play, say $4000. Deviation is a function of n, or the number of hands played. In a case like above I need to make n as large as possible, as to minimize the deviation. So I was betting $5 per hand prepared to play 800 hands.

Good strategy. For online BJ, you should bet as little as possible. In playing MG sites, I bet $2 or $4, and could get the required action usually in about an hour.

>I was up after a short while, and increased my bet (to $10), lowered my n and increased my deviation. Thus the huge deviation at the end.

No, the huge deviation at the end was not due to your $10 bets. It was due to good luck!

>I am almost certain that I am being stupid. But in a case with a predetermined amount of action and a desire to "break even" (which in online stunts means up 100%), I want to increase my deviation when I am above the break even point, and decrease it when I am below my desired break-even point. I.e. I'd rather be up 5 $10 hands then $2 ones and rather be down 5 $2 hands than $10.

Your strategy, in the long run, will not increase your winnings. Instead, it will decrase the number of big wins, but they will be bigger than otherwise. Thus, you will get fewer big days (but they will be bigger than otherwise), and more mildly losing days. This is a strategy that would depress me. I would rather get my paycheck safely.

SUMMARY: YOU ARE NOT INCREASING YOUR EV, THUS YOUR STRATEGY HAS NO PRACTICAL VALUE. THIS STRATEGY WILL INCREASE THE NUMBER OF DAYS YOU LOSE, BUT THE LOSSES WILL BE SMALLER ON AVERAGE, AND DECREASE THE NUMBER OF DAYS YOU WIN, BUT THE WINS WILL BE LARGER ON AVERAGE.

Great question!

--Mayor

Rob McG has a strategy for this, I beleive...
Posted by zengrifter on 04-Jan-2003 13:58:05 (#2304)

... I think it involves the illusive 'McG's Grind' but better that he explain it. Btw, I like the flux-signature that Z's approach creates. zg(yechh eBJ!)

Re: Rob McG has a strategy for this, I beleive...
Posted by Z on 04-Jan-2003 14:16:01 (#2306)

Btw, I like the flux-signature that Z's approach creates.

What does this mean?

Re: Somebody set me straight please!
Posted by Z on 04-Jan-2003 14:06:57 (#2305)

Thanks Mayor!

I also spoke with a number of friends about this and have thought about it more on my own. It just seems as deceiving as the gambler's ruin problem...
One thing I think you may have misunderstood though, I started with $250, got $250. I was only up at the peak maybe 40 hands of $10 each and my n was only about 500. That does not seem like a once a lifetime event.
I'll refer to the non BJ board to solicit additional advice on online gaming. I hope my career isn't over yet...I just started.

Re: Somebody set me straight please!
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 04-Jan-2003 18:08:55 (#2307)

I am out on the town and responding to this question on my palm pilot, going to see the movie Drum Line.

"I was rather alarmed when I deposited $250 into an online casino last night that offered to match it and later last night I cashed out $865 (having been over $900 at one point). It was alarming because the deviation was so huge and could have easily gone the other way...or could it?"

Well yes, the game could have gobbled up your $5 bets as easily as it was spitting out cyber reds. Was this a Crypto site? Let me know which casino this is, I may have a go at them myself. I'm just about done my last site. $250 in $500 sticky bonus, and up to $975.

"Question:
There is a predetermined amount of action that I needed to play, say $4000. Deviation is a function of n, or the number of hands played. In a case like above I need to make n as large as possible, as to minimize the deviation. So I was betting $5 per hand prepared to play 800 hands. I was up after a short while, and increased my bet (to $10), lowered my n and increased my deviation. Thus the huge deviation at the end."

"I am almost certain that I am being stupid. But in a case with a predetermined amount of action and a desire to "break even" (which in online stunts means up 100%), I want to increase my deviation when I am above the break even point, and decrease it when I am below my desired break-even point. I.e. I'd rather be up 5 $10 hands then $2 ones and rather be down 5 $2 hands than $10.

"OK!

"Does this make any sense?? (I think not but I can't figure out why)
Is it possible to increase upside deviation and decrease downside???

You are making perfect sense to me. This means you should see a doctor SOON! ;> Your diviance is smaller than I thought because of your $10 bets. A few good double downs and splits and you can easily be up 40u. You bet more when you were up and can protect yourself when you are cruising at or below your 100% take point.

Back from movie:

As the Mayor states here, smaller bets are wiser bets. I will normally play perfect basic when above the D&B line and play risk aversive BS when below. I also use other strategies. There is a time factor involved. If you have a stack of casinos to go over, then you might be in a hurry. I play in short spurts and jump from casino to casino like you would in LV.

Two things requested from RMcG...
Posted by zengrifter on 05-Jan-2003 23:45:44 (#2330)

... 1) a thoughtful review of DeepNET's PDA apps, and 2) a careful expalnation of how you use the Oscar-McGarvey Gring progression-betting tactic at eBJ, please. zg

Re: Two things requested from RMcG...
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 06-Jan-2003 13:10:05 (#2337)

1) a thoughtful review of DeepNET's PDA apps

Isn't that a "commercial" product? ;> I gave it a review in my monthly newsletter which I posted at the Card Counters Cafe. I hope to meet up with "Dan Pro" sometime this spring for a playing session and to discuss his apps in great detail. I would like to give him my PDA and watch him make the program "sing."

2) a careful expalnation of how you use the McGarvey Grind progression-betting tactic at eBJ, please. zg

You are right, I really need to do this simply for myself so that I can test it from a second party's stand point. I want a person to be able to sit down with in front of the computer and know exactly what to do next. I do by instinct. It is my brain child, as deformed or perfect as that may make it. I am finding that it reminds me of the story of "The Ugly Duckling" which ended up being a Swan.

And finally I do not want to "polute" the place with a progression of anytype. As for right now, it remains psydo science. Tomorrow it may be the "Fat Boy" that drops on you from above, or a sparkling baby clone created from the components of life itself. Can I combine winning theory components properly within the frame presented by eBJ??

Moohahahahahahahahahaha!!
Moohahahahahahahahahaha!!
Moohahahahahahahahahaha!!

Re: Two things RMcG... **QUESTIONS -
Posted by zengrifter on 06-Jan-2003 23:32:38 (#2351)

**QUESTIONS -

1) a thoughtful review of DeepNET's PDA apps

**Can you provide a link, I missed it, or otherwise post the review here, please? I have been feeling guilty about not successfully instigating the review after I got Dan/DeepNET to provide you with your comp-review copies. Thanx!

2) a careful expalnation of how you use the McGarvey Grind progression-betting tactic at eBJ, please. zg

I do not want to "polute" the place with a progression of anytype. As for right now, it remains psydo science.

**Oh come on - you post about it at cccfae -
-----------
Rob McGarvey Date: Mon Jan 6, 2003 6:23 pm
Message 17839
Subject: Re: Up Up and Away
"...Cashed out $470. $250 my depo, and $220 won by using McGarvey's
Grind..."
------------
**I PROMISE I won't trash it - I enjoy a good progression as much as the next - how/when/why... enquiring minds want to know!

Moohahahahahahahahahaha!!
Moohahahahahahahahahaha!!
Moohahahahahahahahahaha!!

**Full moon? zg

Re: Two things RMcG... **ANSWERS?? -
Posted by zengrifter on 08-Jan-2003 22:42:46 (#2447)

From: "Rob McGarvey
Date: Tue Jan 7, 2003 12:06 pm
Subject: Re: Up Up and Away ZENGRIFTER
CCCafe Message: 17846 of 17848

I responded to your questions at:

http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=2351

Ask the Mayor to email you a copy of it. There must be something in
it he didn't like.

--- "Rob McGarvey wrote:
> Cashed out $470. $250 my depo, and $220 won by using McGarvey's
> Grind. I left $515 in hoping they will allow me to take a whack at
> Major Millions with their $500 and my $15.

This is ...
Posted by zengrifter on 04-Jan-2003 19:42:22 (#2308)

"the flux-signature' (my own artful term) -

"SUMMARY: YOU ARE NOT INCREASING YOUR EV, THUS YOUR STRATEGY HAS NO PRACTICAL VALUE. THIS STRATEGY WILL INCREASE THE NUMBER OF DAYS YOU LOSE, BUT THE LOSSES WILL BE SMALLER ON AVERAGE, AND DECREASE THE NUMBER OF DAYS YOU WIN, BUT THE WINS WILL BE LARGER ON AVERAGE.
"

sort of like a 'sine-wave', perhaps? *NM*
Posted by zengrifter on 04-Jan-2003 21:00:19 (#2309)

Notes from the trenches...
Posted by Syph on 05-Jan-2003 01:42:47 (#2311)

Nice pics, Eliot!

Although, I must add, Slots-a-Fun has some very nice glossy ones of me in full pirate wear.

Bastards!

I'm touring Nevada currently, deciding whether I should continue scrapping it out, or take a brief sojurn to Japan.

(Haven't been laid in over two months...'nuff said!)

I've tightend my play considerably. I will only play single deck, heads up, min 1-10 spread. If another player joins, exiting strategies compensate.

Oddly, I received more back offs parlaying wins (Revere's strategy) than playing textbook Kelly. I suspect it's the novelty of the approach that amuses and delights the pit critters. Or something...

* * *

Dealer: "You have got to have the most sporadic betting of anyone I've ever dealt to."

Pit boss: "It's Canadian betting, very effective."

(I swear, I'm not making this up.)

* * *

I find myself in Reno currently, at some strange bar called "The Stock Exchange". Internet connection is slow, but the place is very noisy. Backed off at the Sundowner earlier today, but I'll give her a whirl again in a few hours. Probably one of the better games downtown.

I hope all is well in the community, and insofar as brutal losses are concerned. Do not, I repeat, do not become disenchanted by a 140 unit loss.

I think I'm pushing 10x that.

But, then again, I'm Syph...and the gods delight in torturng me.

Cheerio!
Syph

(ps Just finished up a 102 hour, 7 day BJ vision quest in X. Didn't receive the vision, did get the money! 1-15 spread, SD, no heat, no cover. Truely liberating.)

(pps Now I must dance.)

Re: Notes from the trenches...
Posted by zengrifter on 05-Jan-2003 12:36:16 (#2315)

(ps Just finished up a 102 hour, 7 day BJ vision quest in X. Didn't receive the vision, did get the money! 1-15 spread, SD, no heat, no cover. Truely liberating.)
------------------

Oh, Grasshopper your no-vision = true-vision. zg

("if you didn't get it, thats OK because there's nothing to get!"
-werner erhardt)
("What is is" - lord buckley)

Ps - the best cheap internet in Reno is @ Kinkos *NM*
Posted by zengrifter on 05-Jan-2003 12:39:27 (#2316)

Pss - check out 'The Alamo'...
Posted by zengrifter on 05-Jan-2003 20:50:46 (#2323)

...truckstop in Sparks: 1D,DAS,LS... go slow at first. zg

(syph, i leave soon, drop me a line)

Nice to hear from you!
Posted by The Mayor on 05-Jan-2003 14:05:53 (#2318)

I am glad to hear you are still playing, lo these many months later, and from the sound of it, successfully.

Take care, and I look forward to meeting you again someday soon,

--Mayor

Progressive Conservatives Rule
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 05-Jan-2003 15:39:33 (#2319)

Dealer: "You have got to have the most sporadic betting of anyone I've ever dealt to."
Pit boss: "It's Canadian betting, very effective."
(I swear, I'm not making this up.)

Keep at it brother. Take as many dead presidents as you can!! ;>

Re: Progressive Conservatives Rule
Posted by SammyBoy on 06-Jan-2003 14:35:28 (#2341)

WOW! Where do you find heads up single deck? Spreading 1 to 10?!? Damn! The single deck tables I play are always crowded, at anytime.

Re: Progressive Conservatives Rule
Posted by zengrifter on 06-Jan-2003 15:54:31 (#2342)

Just a few select nNv venues, still act-dependent. zg

check out rail city to.... *NM*
Posted by hammer on 05-Jan-2003 21:12:54 (#2325)

Syph, e-mail me if you are still in Reno *NM*
Posted by Alexander Mundy on 06-Jan-2003 11:01:17 (#2332)

Blair Hull - The House That Blackjack Built
Posted by zengrifter on 05-Jan-2003 02:05:59 (#2313)

Recommended by Hammer and reposted on the nonBJ board, Hull will run for USSenate in '04

Blair Hull - The House That Blackjack Built
How card whiz Blair Hull parlayed a $25,000 casino stake into a trading empire worth more than $500 million.

"...Hull, 59, a rangy, gray-haired sort whose clear hazel eyes set off his rosy cheeks, readily acknowledges that the blackjack pits served as his finishing school. �Blackjack represented my business and entrepreneurial training,� he says...."

see nonBJ board

Re: The House That Blackjack Built
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 05-Jan-2003 08:56:58 (#2314)

Here's a look at another house that blackjack built. I hope one day to have a smaller chunck of that big wad that body rides, and to have a roof! ;>

http://webhome.idirect.com/~blakjack/noroof.jpg

I18 with surrender
Posted by dude on 05-Jan-2003 13:49:49 (#2317)

How can I find the basic (I18 or likewise) strategy variations for a game that allows late surrender? For example, two of the most important I18 variations are 16 v. 10 at 0 and 15 v. 10 at 4. However, what if the basic strategy for your game says to late surrender on on 16 v. 9, 10 and A, and to surrender 15 v. 10? How do you use the I18 properly there?

Thanks.

Re: I18 with surrender
Posted by The Mayor on 05-Jan-2003 19:34:43 (#2320)

These come up all the time ... huge count, you're dealt A,2 vs. the dealer's T. Natuarally you don't surrender. You're dealt a 3, then a T, for a holding of A,2,3,T. Count says to stand. So, yes, both the I-18 and the LSR come in to play, and are not redundant.

--Mayor

Re: I18 with surrender MAYOR ADD...
Posted by zengrifter on 05-Jan-2003 20:46:37 (#2322)

...4-5 LS i#S to the site's indices, why don't you? zg

I'm a bit lazy right now
Posted by The Mayor on 05-Jan-2003 23:43:48 (#2329)

But it is a great idea. Adding LSR to the board numbers would be a worthwhile addition. LSR is a great tool for the advantage player.

--Mayor

Re: I18 with surrender-surrender always prevails
Posted by walkingdood on 05-Jan-2003 20:09:39 (#2321)

over stand at 16v10 & 15v10. See BJA 2d ed. at 73.

Re: I18 + F4
Posted by V-man on 05-Jan-2003 21:49:25 (#2326)

Beside the I18 ie the 18 palying indices, Don also add the 4 surrender indices called 'Fabulous 4'. These are 14 vs 10, 15 vs 9, 15 vs 10 and 15 vs A with indices 3, 2, 0 and 1 respectively. Note that these indices are not the same set where BS suggest surrender (except 15 vs 10)

Re: I18 + F4
Posted by The Mayor on 06-Jan-2003 11:17:21 (#2334)

Yes, you use the indices for the 4 you mentioned, but you still surrender 16 Vs. T, A. That is a basic strategy play for which no index is necessary.

The SECRET History of Counting
Posted by zengrifter on 05-Jan-2003 23:09:17 (#2327)

Manny Kimmel, George Broughton, Joe Bernstein, Betty Brown, Junior Gettings, Jess Marcum, and Mel Horowitz, among others, figure prominently in the little-known SECRET history of BJ card-counting.
--------------------------
How BJ Card-Counting REALLY Started
by Peter Ruchman
--------------------------
part1 - http://www.casinogaming.com/columnists/blackjack/050700.html
part2 - http://www.casinogaming.com/columnists/blackjack/051400.html
part3 - http://www.casinogaming.com/columnists/blackjack/052100.html

Re: The SECRET History of Counting
Posted by Slowhand on 05-Jan-2003 23:27:48 (#2328)

ZG,
Thanks for the links. This was an excellent story.
Slowhand

bjack-hall of fame results soon.
Posted by hammer on 06-Jan-2003 01:29:18 (#2331)

On January 3, 2003, at a double-secret location in Las Vegas, some 60 of the world's top professional blackjack players will gather at Max Rubin's annual Blackjack Ball and elect the seven initial inductees into the Blackjack Hall of Fame.

Along with the invited guests at the Ball and a small number of blackjack dignitaries unable to attend the event, the public will be allowed to vote exclusively via this online Las Vegas Advisor ballot.

Please review all 21 initial nominees carefully (along with the discussion forums) and cast your seven (and only seven) votes.

We will keep a running tally of the seven vote leaders throughout the voting period and then post the seven winners on January 4th, 2003.

The final tally of all the public's votes will count as a single ballot at the Ball.

After the first seven winners are inducted, membership into the Blackjack Hall of Fame will be limited to two new members annually until the total reaches 21. Thereafter, only one new member will be chosen each year.

Barona Valley Ranch Resort and Casino in San Diego sponsors the Blackjack Ball and the Blackjack Hall of Fame. Members of the Blackjack Hall of Fame receive an RFB pass at Barona-for life-to not play blackjack there.

To place your votes, select up to seven of the checkboxes and click the 'Place Your Votes' graphic at the bottom of the page.

Ian Andersen One of the most successful solo players of all time. Wrote "Burning the tables in Las Vegas" and "Turning the tables on Las Vegas." Techniques apply mostly to high stakes solo players. Famous, but some claim that he's a mythological character. 116 4.34%
Andy Anderson He did all the work and made Griffin Detective Agency what it is today. Now runs Biometrica. Busted more counters than anyone in the world. Detractors claim he's a self-serving weasel who put innocent schmoes in the book to make himself look good. The pros hate his guts. Supporters tried stuffing the ballot on Dec. 28. 14 0.52%
Benny Binion Legendary owner of Horseshoe casino. Took unlimited bets on single deck blackjack. Took unlimited liberties with professionals in the back room. 78 2.92%
Julian Braun Wrote the ground breaking "How to Play Winning Blackjack." Wasn't a player during his writing days. Still isn't. He's dead. 92 3.44%
Alan Brown World Class player who took a casino beating, took �em to court, won big and changed the way advantage players were treated by casinos forever. Overly aggressive at times, "Bulldozer" never perfected the art of camouflage play and drew a lot of heat. 14 0.52%
Johnny Chang MIT's most legendary player. 20 year All Pro career. Thinks "Tipping" is a town in China. Perhaps the most unconvincing cross-dresser ever. 29 1.08%
Richard Dougherty The Hyland Team's premier player. Perhaps the most fearless advantage player ever. A consistent six figure winner for decades, he�s been barred 100�s of times. Likes to torture dumb animals (pit bosses, Griffin Nazis and surveillance twits). 33 1.23%
Al Francesco The �Godfather� of team blackjack, he invented team play (and turned out Ken Uston) and other advantage plays. Still active. Arguably the greatest player who ever lived. He's pushing seventy. He�s still sharp, but he better get voted in before he goes to the big game in the sky. 217 8.12%
Peter Griffin Wrote �The Theory of Blackjack.� The only mathematical mind in the game on Thorp's level. He only played high stakes with other people�s bankrolls. 265 9.91%
Four Horsemen Baldwin, Canty, McDermott and Maisel. The military men who used nothing but pocket calculators to devise the first basic strategy and bring strategy variations to light. Their theories had zero practical applications the real world of blackjack. 39 1.46%
Lance Humble Invented the "Hi-Opt" counts used extensively in the ' 70s and ' 80s. His pen name is "Humble," but he isn't. Named his book "The World's Greatest Blackjack Book." It isn't even close. 25 0.94%
Tommy Hyland Most successful team owner/manager in history, an all-pro solo player and the classiest guy in the craft. His appearances on national television have exposed him to 100�s of casino execs. 187 7.00%
Mike Michalek Part of Hyland�s brain trust, he�s generally credited with inventing shuffle tracking. A consistent winner for 20 years running. Unknown to all but the very elite in the game. Went to high school in Detroit with Anthony Curtis. 45 1.68%
Bradley Peterson Two-time winner of the Blackjack Ball, solo and team player, travels the world, lives a James Bond lifestyle, but gets more girls. Plays for all the right reasons. World Championship Title�s are all he�s done to set himself apart from the rest of the world�s top active pros. 40 1.50%
Lawrence Revere Wrote �Playing Blackjack as a Business� and played extensively in the ' 70s. A renowned cheat who robbed the casinos, his partners and his students. 62 2.32%
Max Rubin Author of �Comp City.� Founder and host of Blackjack Ball and Hall of Fame. Knows the player and casino sides of blackjack better than anyone in the game. Unclear on the concept. Thinks losing $1 to get a $10 comp is winning. Consults for a casino. 68 2.54%
Arnold Snyder Author/Publisher of Blackjack Forum Magazine, the premier BJ trade publication for over 20 years Notorious nickel player known to go postal. 265 9.91%
Keith Taft Invented computer play. His devices liberated millions from Vegas and A.C. casinos. Perhaps the most innovative blackjack player of all time. Rarely comes out of hiding these days. 27 1.01%
Dr. Edward Thorp Wrote �Beat the Dealer.� Played extensively. Changed the world of blackjack forever. None. He�s a lock to make the Hall. 386 14.44%
Ken Uston Wrote �Million Dollar Blackjack.� The most famous blackjack player in history. Responsible for legions of newcomers taking up professional play. Traded team secrets for fame and hurt a lot of pioneer's careers. 288 10.77%
Stanford Wong Most prolific writer of professional blackjack books ever. Newsletter and Web Site are the pro�s most used reference guides. World�s foremost expert on tournament play. Often spotted in Leon Redbone fashion wear, he reportedly gives up good games to the undeserving masses. 383 14.33%

Top Seven Nominees
Posted by zengrifter on 06-Jan-2003 11:10:10 (#2333)

Top Seven Nominees

DR. EDWARD THORP 15%
STANFORD WONG 15%
KEN USTON 11%
PETER GRIFFIN 10%
ARNOLD SNYDER 10%
AL FRANCESCO 9%
TOMMY HYLAND 7%

One snub
Posted by Theef on 06-Jan-2003 11:53:22 (#2335)

Is there a reason why Don Schlesinger shouldn't be on the list?

21
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 06-Jan-2003 13:11:25 (#2338)

He's the perfect 21! ;>

Re: 21
Posted by Learning to count on 06-Jan-2003 13:41:01 (#2339)

It was surprising to see gy like Griffin, Binion,etc. listed.Since when did they do anything positive for Advantage Play. I think Schlesinger, Fuchs & Vancura should have been added. Hell with the logic displayed in the picks they should have John Patrick in there for being the worlds best BJ con artist. Just my humble, "with a buck you can get a cup of coffe and maybe a danish", oppinion. LTC

Re: 21
Posted by Bob Turner on 07-Jan-2003 00:26:17 (#2354)

It was surprising to see gy like Griffin, Binion,etc. listed.Since when did they do anything positive for Advantage Play.

Well, let's see, Griffin only wrote "The Theory of Blackjack". Guess you're right.

Re: 21
Posted by Learning to count on 07-Jan-2003 16:58:38 (#2385)

OOPS! My Mistake I was referring to the local lv agency which goes out of its way to ID counters. Sorry!

Re: 21
Posted by Learning to count on 07-Jan-2003 17:08:22 (#2387)

counter intelligence information via subscription service and delivers this information in the Griffin Books, Bulletins, andAdditional Casino Activity reports.The Griffin On-Line Database (GOLD) providescasinos with complete and instant access to known cheater and counter information directly through the Internet.Griffin investigators can assist your gaming organization in the identification of subjects via a direct camera link from your floor using the Griffin 2000 system.Griffin maintains a large Jackpot Winners Databank that assists gaming operations to recognize potential fraudulent activity.Many casinos find great value in having Griffin Investigators randomly walking their properties and noting any players known to employ cheating or counting methods.Griffin can also deliver a variety of Specialized Investigations. These operations are tailored to meet your unique needs.

This is what I meant!

Re: two snub DON WHO? *NM*
Posted by zengrifter on 06-Jan-2003 23:35:14 (#2352)

No Snub
Posted by Bob Turner on 07-Jan-2003 00:19:49 (#2353)

There is a good reason. Perhaps those in the know are more enlighted than a guy who makes up funny names for "unbeatable" games such as yourself.

Re: No Snub
Posted by Theef on 07-Jan-2003 15:18:50 (#2378)

You WISH I would enter into a flame war. Instead, I'll just point out that the list contains members with far worse flaws than Don Schlesinger. If you disagree, please actually state your reasons. After all, I have on my bookshelf the Second Edition of a strong reason why he SHOULD be on the list. Or haven't those "in the know" found his work educational?

Re: No Snub
Posted by Learning to count on 07-Jan-2003 17:03:04 (#2386)

Theef is right Schlesinger has had a definite impact on advantage play. Even if he is arogant and only believes he is right all the time.

Re: No Snub
Posted by Bob Turner on 07-Jan-2003 18:18:36 (#2392)

I'll just point out that the list contains members with far worse flaws than Don Schlesinger.

Please list those with "far worse flaws" than a guy who never had an original thought in his life. I'll give you one, Binion. Every other candidate has a significant reason for being on there above Schlesinger.

"Often wrong but never in doubt" would be the spot-on way to describe your posting style. You took great pleasure in belittling those on the old progression page yet spout nonsense yourself. Best to show a little humility in areas you know little about, and Theef, you've got a lot to learn.

Re: No Snub THEEF...
Posted by zengrifter on 07-Jan-2003 18:28:55 (#2394)

...give us an example of your 'spouting nonsense! zg

Here You Go...
Posted by Bob Turner on 07-Jan-2003 18:39:13 (#2396)

BJ21.com: Main Free Message Board

You must be some kind of genius

Posted By: Theef <the_theef@hotmail.com> on 25 January 02, 7:36 a.m. in response to: Theef, You

Are Wrong (A Real Player)

Theef, you're level of obnoxiousness is quite annoying. I've noticed you're real big on

taking on the easiest targets in an effort to show everyone how smart you are. The

reality is you're a low level cardcounter with minimal skills.

Like I'm going to take advice from A Real Player on how to avoid being obnoxious and

annoying. And anyway, I only make my targets SEEM easy. And I'm not out to show people

how smart I am. I'm out to show people how stupid THEY are. And you're the easiest target

yet.

Let It Deride, Casino Snore, Damaged 21, Caribbean Dud, and Re Tard Poker all have a

higher house edge than blackjack.

Of course, all of these games can be beaten by the astute advantage player with edges

far greater than ever found on a bj table. So while you're busy thinking up funny

names i'll be taking the money.

Ha! I used to think of you as that guy who held no opinions and only spoke up to attack Don

every two weeks. Now you've firmly entrenched yourself in the Frank Stanton voodoo

crackpot category. I never realized that "real players" played Let It Ride or Three Card Poker.

How can you get any advantage at all, let alone one that surpasses anything at a blackjack

table? The rest of us fake players want to know. Although somehow I doubt you'll provide any

specifics.

Re: Here You Go...
Posted by zengrifter on 07-Jan-2003 19:00:59 (#2401)

I never realized that "real players" played Let It Ride or Three Card Poker.
How can you get any advantage at all, let alone one that surpasses anything at a blackjack table? The rest of us fake players want to know. Although somehow I doubt you'll provide any specifics.
--------------------------

Thats where some of the bigger and more expert money gets played, right? zg

All Part of The Package...
Posted by Bob Turner on 07-Jan-2003 19:34:08 (#2407)

Thats where some of the bigger and more expert money gets played, right? zg

Are you suggesting it doesn't?

Re: No Snub
Posted by P.S. on 07-Jan-2003 18:52:41 (#2398)

The most glaring omission of the inductees was that of Keith Taft. perhaps the greatest innovater ever in the blackjack world. Taft created "Thor", a shuffle tracking computer which liberated millions from casinos worldwide.

Now I know this will ruffle some newbie feathers but the most undeserving of the nominees to make it was definitely drug addicted, self serving Ken Uston.

Re: No Snub
Posted by The Mayor on 07-Jan-2003 22:00:18 (#2415)

In fact, Uston was a lifetime losing player when acting as the BP.

Re: No Snub
Posted by zengrifter on 07-Jan-2003 23:09:00 (#2421)

In fact, Uston was a lifetime losing player when acting as the BP.
--------------

I hadn't heard that... but then it would reflect on the spotters, true? zg

P.S.
Posted by Bob Turner on 07-Jan-2003 18:53:14 (#2399)

Now I know this will ruffle some newbie feathers but the most undeserving of the nominees to make it was definitely drug addicted, self serving Ken Uston.

A board is as strong as its members
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 07-Jan-2003 15:28:37 (#2379)

If the members of a board refuse to engage in flame wars and insults -- there will be no flame wars or insults.

If the members of a board refuse to respond to trolls -- the trolls will troll elsewhere.

Now, how useful are 11 vs T and 11 vs 9 @ -4 indices?

Re: bjack-hall of fame results soon.
Posted by Learning to count on 07-Jan-2003 19:19:37 (#2402)

I dont know Theef; I dont know Mr. Turner; but I do know that a lot of hot air has been dispenced over something that is over with. I am a regular here and it is becoming angry in here. Peace.

Re: bjack-hall of fame results soon.
Posted by Bob Turner on 07-Jan-2003 19:30:17 (#2405)

I am a regular here and it is becoming angry in here.

Not anger son, just reality. Were Frank Stanton allowed to come here and start posting about "The Flaw", you would see anger by the regulars here, especially The Mayor. And why? Because the theory is unsound. Likewise, the theory that Don Schlesinger is some kind of hero in the upper echelons of the advantage player community is also "flawed".

Peace to you too.

Re: bjack-hall of fame results soon.
Posted by Learning to count on 07-Jan-2003 20:02:42 (#2410)

I am a regular here and it is becoming angry in here.

Peace to you too.

Point understood Mr. Turner. Even though I am a begginer and I see your resolve on this issue. I dont mean any type of criticism but your anger with Theef is heated and it does reminds me of the responses on BJ21.com that Mr. Stanton recieved when he proposed his logic of why John Patrick, who was his mentor, was Blackjack truth. If Theef is that obtrusive and angers you then ignore him. I like this site and I am here because of all the desention there. I do agree that any nonsense such as voodoo philosphy and If I may say "PROGRESSIONS" appears here it should and will be zapped. That is the rule of law here. I commend your veracity for truth sir but I just feel the anger gets thick sometimes and the quality of the site will be hurt. Please do not percieve me as attacking. I respect debate. LTC

Lol...
Posted by Cyrano on 07-Jan-2003 20:14:10 (#2411)

After the first 3 posts, this thread became completely worthless. Does it really matter if Don isn't a first-ballot shoe-in? He'll get another chance at a later time anyways. Do we really need this to feed more egos? Besides, many a great film/actor/player/song/painting--practically anything you can think of has been snubbed at one time or another.

Speaking of trolls, I think that troll in LOTR The Two Towers should be nominated for an Oscar for best actor. Guess another great acting talent will be snubbed.. ;-)

Re: Lol...
Posted by Learning to count on 07-Jan-2003 20:41:16 (#2414)

BY the way I saw the two towers on IMAX! WHew! The battle scene at the keep was incredible. Tolkien must be grinning ear to ear! I agree the troll should get something... a drink, a biscuit, raw trout headsm in a cream sauce, an oscar maybe! :)

Re: Lol...
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 07-Jan-2003 22:08:26 (#2416)

It's all about opinions. Possibly a group of people, but just an opinion. I'm sure if you ask Don he doesn't give a hogs hoot about any type of recognition. It reflects back on the people with the opinions more than it does on the inducties or those left out in the first sweep.

Keeping a side count
Posted by dude on 06-Jan-2003 11:59:36 (#2336)

I am counting hi/lo with I18 and Fab4, and I want to keep a seperate count for 7s so I can play a super sevens game. I know many think that's a worthless pursuit and a waste of effort, but I just want to know how I can properly keep that count. What kind of strategies or devices do people use to count one card on the side while maintaining an accurate main count?

Re: Keeping a side count
Posted by SammyBoy on 07-Jan-2003 14:54:38 (#2375)

Dude,

I've heard other people mentioning using letters, maybe that is the way to do it? The alphabet would work well for a 6 deck game, although I guess that conversion gets tough when you have to convert the letter to a number ( A=1, B=2,..., Z=26).

Starting Off on The Right Foot!
Posted by SammyBoy on 06-Jan-2003 14:29:45 (#2340)

My first session of 03 was a prosperous one, +30 units in about 2 hours. Good cards to everyone else!

Re: Starting Off on The Right Foot!
Posted by The Mayor on 06-Jan-2003 17:23:53 (#2343)

Ah... that right foot!

May the rest of your year be 15 units/hour!

--Mayor

Ya Putyer Right Foot In...
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 06-Jan-2003 22:15:55 (#2347)

Don't forget to use the left foot to count Aces with and you'll be laffin! ;>

Re: Questions
Posted by BradRod on 06-Jan-2003 22:28:04 (#2348)

congrats. i hope it keeps up.

may i ask where you play and what the conditions are there? what system do you use?

thanks

brad

Re: Questions
Posted by SammyBoy on 07-Jan-2003 08:52:05 (#2358)

Hi Brad,

I play only Single or Double deck and use Hi-Lo. I play mostly in the South and I'd have to say the conditions are favorable. I've found a single deck game that has the same rules as their 6 deck games (S17, DAS, DA2).

Double Deck Fridays BlackJack Tournament
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 07-Jan-2003 09:17:14 (#2360)

Double Deck Fridays BlackJack Tournament
President Casino Broadwater Resort, Biloxi, MS
Fridays
Registration: $25-$50
Call 800-843-7737 for more information

Re: Starting Off on The Right Foot!
Posted by SammyBoy on 07-Jan-2003 11:26:24 (#2363)

According to thewizardofodds.com - the basic strategy player has a +.1412% advantage over the house in the game I'm playing. My feelings are that they will not continue to offer this game very long. So my dilemma is this: do I play as often as I can while it lasts; or play it safe. I've been there 5 times in the last 42 days, which is probably too much as it is. I'm up 82.5 units, but I'm hoping that they would think I'm up only about. My basic unit is $10.

I've played this place with no heat at all. The PC's do not even watch the game, in fact there is more heat at the double deck games with higher minimums. If I do get caught it will be because of either a sharp dealer or the eye. I think my saving grace is that I've played this place as a big losing basic strategy ploppy for about a six month period before learning to count.

All advice/suggestions is much appreciated. Thanks.

Re: Starting Off on The Right Foot!
Posted by Cyrano on 07-Jan-2003 11:38:36 (#2365)

Do you overplay now and risk getting barred or do you still play minimal and risk the game going sour? Tough call. I'd err on the side of caution and risk the conditions going bad. Perhaps it's all the barring stories and how the PC's all have memories that'll rival the staunchest elephant, but it really seems getting barred and becoming unwelcomed is hell for the counter. Even IF the game sours, there's different degrees. You can still have playable BJ conditions with worse rules, but you can't have any playable conditions if you can't play.

Of course, if the place looks like a dump that can't afford much surveillance, AND all the PC's look incompetant, I'd say push your luck a little. Who knows? Even if you're backed off or barred, you might just be able to waltz in in a month or two.

**************
According to thewizardofodds.com - the basic strategy player has a +.1412% advantage over the house in the game I'm playing. My feelings are that they will not continue to offer this game very long. So my dilemma is this: do I play as often as I can while it lasts; or play it safe. I've been there 5 times in the last 42 days, which is probably too much as it is. I'm up 82.5 units, but I'm hoping that they would think I'm up only about. My basic unit is $10.

All advice/suggestions is much appreciated. Thanks

Re: Starting Off on The Right Foot!
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 07-Jan-2003 11:59:16 (#2367)

I don't think you are over playing them right now. If you were a ploppy once, you can pretend to be one now. If you want to start betting more because of your wins, or because of the fact you know you have the edge, then you will have to have a reason that will fly in front of the pit. Your Aunt died and left you "a little something." Heck it is working for Joe Millionaire right now! grin You can chase your losses and buck your wins into plus counts making it look like a progression.

BUT MOST OF ALL; DO NOT TELL ANYONE WHERE THIS GAME IS. They will kill it for you and leave a very bad taste in your mouth.

Jump in with BOTH feet!

More hours with same exposure.
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 07-Jan-2003 12:45:46 (#2368)

5 times in the last 42 days? That is about once per week.

Try figuring out who works when (when do you work? is a nice chit-chat question while you smooze with the pit crew).

If you hit the day shift once a week, and hit the swing shift once a week, and then hit the graveyard shift once a week - that is three times a week worth of hours, but an individual pit boss has only seen you the normal one time a week. They also probably have a weekend shift versus weekday crews, so you could probably squeeze in a few more visits per week if you knew when to show up on weekends and when to show up mid-week.

I wouldn't purposely try to burn out anything. You never know, you could be burning out something that might have lasted forever.

Re: Starting Off on The Right Foot!
Posted by SammyBoy on 08-Jan-2003 17:42:47 (#2444)

My second session of the year was not as successful as the first. I got killed at single deck (No DAS, S17, D10, not my usual place) down 70 units at one point. Moved to the double deck table and was able to get most of it back. finished the night -8.5 units. Their DD (DAS, RSA, DA2) is a better game than their SD, but when I first checked it out the pen looked very poor. I later learned that it is very dealer dependent as it was much better later in the night.

One thing I need to get better at is recognizing when I'm tired and need to take a break. I was tired and hungry while playing Single Deck and should have quit. After I did finally take a break and ate something, I felt much better. I know I made a couple of mistakes and actually lost the count a few times ( which is tough to do in single deck with only 3 or 4 rounds of cards dealt).

After eating and taking a break my concentration was much better.

Re: Starting Off on The Right Foot!
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 08-Jan-2003 19:24:55 (#2445)

After I eat I'm ready for a nap. I usually go down for about 30 min max and I'm ready to play again. When I get up I score a coffee, usually at the table since I will be paying for it at the cash bar, I'd rather tip the waitress instead. Good for morale etc. Sometimes a bathroom break is perfect to wake yourself up. Get the blood flowing with a fast walk. Nice come back by the way. I usually do better with 2 deck than one, but have not put in as much LV time as I wish. Check my pic in front of the Riv in my profile, one of my fave double deckers.

Re: Starting Off on The Right Foot!
Posted by SammyBoy on 12-Jan-2003 14:27:35 (#2537)

Session 3 of 2003 was another quick money maker. 30 units in an hour, it was pretty awesome. The dealer was busting often and the counts were mostly positive. This will be my last report on my progress this year unless things start getting ugly. Good cards to all!

House Edge and BS questions
Posted by NewbieCC on 06-Jan-2003 17:46:17 (#2344)

At the risk of raising the ire of zg, these questions arose from looking into on-line bj play. They are legitimate questions based on blackjack theory, so hopefully, I am safe. :-) (just kidding with you, zg)

QUESTION 1: House edge
For Microgaming casinos, single hand games have the following rules, as per the Wizard of Odds web site:
- One deck
- Dealer stands on soft 17
- Double on 9 to 11 only
- No doubling after splitting
- No resplitting
- Player may draw to split aces
- No surrender
- Full no peek (player loses total amount bet against dealer blackjack)
- Insurance not resolved until end of hand

The Wizard of Odds Site says that the edge is -0.13

Well, this didn't sound right to me so I did the following math pulling numbers from bjmath.com:

+0.040 Single Deck
-0.110 European Hole Card Rules
-0.131 DD on 9,10,11 only
-0.017 NDAS,SPL1

Which gives me -0.218. Who is right?

QUESTION 2: 7,7 vs. T
The Basic Strategy chart offered on the Wizard of Odds says to stand on this hand. The close call calculator on bjstats.com confirmed this play. This seems odd to me. Aces and 2-7 will improve your hand, that is 26 cards left in the deck. While the remaining 23 cards (8-10) will bust you. So if you take a hit, you are slightly more likely to improve your hand. With the dealers 10 upcard, if he draws an Ace or a 7-10, you lose. This represents 29 cards left in the deck. The other 20 cards will require that he take a third card, but this does not mean that he will lose the hand, either. It seems to be a margianl hand anyway, but I am curious what swings it into STAND territory?

As an aside, I am primarily interested in advantage play, but I don't have much of a bank roll right now and I've got a lot of practicing to do before I hit the tables for real. It seems that a little on-line play might help to build up the bank roll a bit and satistfy my cravings as I sharpen my counting skills.

Best,
NewbieCC

Re: House Edge and BS questions
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 06-Jan-2003 22:13:06 (#2346)

I calc it at -.22 and will stick with that # as it is on the "safe" side. If his # is right all the more power to us. Using a few play departures takes a chunk out of that # too.

2 7's are gone so you are less likely to get another 7 to give you 21, that is the reason for standing with 7,7 v 10.

Playing online will not really help sharpen your counting skills but it will settle that craving for ca$h. In fact, you may never want to play a real game afterwards.

Re: House Edge and BS questions
Posted by zengrifter on 06-Jan-2003 23:12:51 (#2349)

I think Wizard is right BECAUSE the right to draw to split Aces is probably worth .008 thereabouts, though I couldn't find its correct value right off.

As for the 77v10, its like 16v10 a close play, but I hate to stand on 77, makes it impossible to push or otherwise make 777. -zenpatrick

Re: House Edge and BS questions
Posted by NewbieCC on 07-Jan-2003 10:18:18 (#2362)

>I think Wizard is right BECAUSE the right to draw to split Aces is probably
>worth .008 thereabouts, though I couldn't find its correct value right off.

Ahh, I see. I misunderstood the rule about drawing to split Aces. So this means when you split aces, you can take more that one card?

>As for the 77v10, its like 16v10 a close play, but I hate to stand on 77,
>makes it impossible to push or otherwise make 777. -zenpatrick

I agree with you. I understand what Rob McG is saying about it being 1/2 as likely to get 777, but that doesn't seem like enough of a reason to push this 14 total into Stand territory. I guess this is one of those close calls that we need a computer simulation to tell us the answer, and once we get it, we still don't really believe it!

Thanks for the info.

Best,
NewbieCC

Request for Alienated
Posted by Bob Turner on 07-Jan-2003 00:37:07 (#2355)

Alienated, it would be in the best interests of the advantage player community if you would refrain from posting on bj21.com. Not only is that site riddled with casino spies, but 99% of that crowd doesn't appreciate it. If you must post, why not do it here?

The Allied and the Axis...
Posted by zengrifter on 07-Jan-2003 02:18:38 (#2357)

...of the BJ web-discussion universe -

BJ21 = The EU
AdvPlayer = NAFTA
Cardcounter.com = Switzerland
LVA = Sanctuary of a deposed Bishop
Bjmath = Stanford Research Inst.
Bj.rec = South Africa
Bjrnet = Bankrupt Argentina
CCCafe = Yahoo BJ Disneyland

Re: Request for Alienated
Posted by The Mayor on 07-Jan-2003 09:51:14 (#2361)

FYI, there are casino "spies" here too. This site is routinely visited by major casinos. The Stratosphere is the most common visitor. I am sure individuals working for detective agencies are also visiting, and I also have pointed out in a previous post at least one poster here who worked for the casinos (but didn't openly state as much).

--Mayor

Re: Request for Alienated
Posted by Message for the Strat! on 07-Jan-2003 13:36:02 (#2372)

Dont worry boys your games stink and you sweat so much you get the players wet.

That eight deck shoe with dbl on 9 10 11 is so sweet I made lots of money on it. It is the best game in town. Next summer when I and the boys get to Vegas with our Harvard Card Counting Team we will exploit it and try and bankrupt the Strat! I love counting eight deck shoes with slow dealers.

And the two deck games with the incredible pen. Whew! I died they went to within two cards to the end of the first deck. WOWO! ;) Learning to Lose at the tower! LTC
PS I pray that a thousand ploppies sacrifice their BR"S for a chance for a buffet comp at the Strat!

That's Funny! :-) *NM*
Posted by SammyBoy on 07-Jan-2003 14:45:30 (#2373)

Re: Request for Alienated
Posted by Theef on 07-Jan-2003 15:43:04 (#2380)

I guess instead of competitive games, they rely on their desirable location and high foot traffic.

Re: Request for Alienated/Theef
Posted by Bob Turner on 07-Jan-2003 19:23:36 (#2403)

I guess instead of competitive games, they rely on their desirable location and high foot traffic.

This Theef guy makes things too easy. Theef, have you actually ever been to Las Vegas? The Strat is in a "desirable location"??? "foot traffic"???

For those not familiar, the Strat is located in the part of town affectionately known by locals as "heroin heights". The closest casino on the south side would be the Sahara, which would require one to walk past several "hooker motels". Downtown is to the north, but is too far to travel by foot.

Re: Request for Alienated/Theef
Posted by Learning to count on 07-Jan-2003 19:41:55 (#2408)

Actually the Strat has been bringing in a lot of clientel. This is due to they having the cheapest rates outside of downtown. They have been cheaper than the station casinos. As far as foot traffic a lot of people do the Las Vegas sprint back and forth from the other super gambling joint called the Sahara. Ya gotta love them half cut six deckers for a buck a hand!!!1

The apartment buildings behind the Strat (west side) are interesting too. A lot of Las Vegas locals live there or should I say inhabit the area. It would be hard to say anyone has much of a life in those conditions. If you have a room on the back side you have an incredible view of the parking lot. The Parking lot hides the neighborhood. I priced a cute little duplex in the area. The price would get you a 3/2 with a pool and 2 car garage in Summerlin. The realter said it is valuable property so close to the strip....OUCH!

Mr. Turner you really dislike Theef dont you!

Bob, Bob, Bob...
Posted by Theef on 07-Jan-2003 22:32:51 (#2417)

I was being sarcastic. I replied to a sarcastic post with another sarcastic post. Jeez. Read it again.

The Stratosphere quite possibly gets the least foot traffic of the entire Strip. It was an attempt to slow the southward migration of the Strip, and at that it seems to have failed.

technical computer URL question
Posted by BradRod on 07-Jan-2003 11:37:52 (#2364)

I wonder if anyone can help me with this.

Whenever I go to post a message I get a default entry in the subject line of "Re: Questions". This happens in either case whether I am initiating a new posting or responding to the message of another in the group.

Anyone have any idea about how I can get rid of this.

Can I delete and reset this site or my computer's memory of it ?

Re: technical computer URL question
Posted by Cyrano on 07-Jan-2003 11:47:12 (#2366)

For a LAST RESORT (and I really stress LAST RESORT), you might want to try this: If you're using IE, you might want to try this: Click: Tools--Internet Options and under the General tab, Delete Cookies. The cookies are macros that identify who you are to the webpage and vice versa. Sometimes, cookies story certain info, like your name when you post responses. Be warned though: when you delete cookies, you might be wiping out your ID from other sites. It basically means you'll be starting from a clean slate as far as "fill in the blanks" is concerned--passwords, IDs, etc. Oh, to make it worse than it sounds, I guarantee NOTHING. For all I know by the diagnosis, it could be a wholly separate problem.

Re: technical computer URL question
Posted by The Mayor on 07-Jan-2003 17:59:34 (#2389)

I have the system set up to suggest a subject, namely whatever the previous subject was, it adds a "re: " in front of it. That is by my choice. But, it sounds like you always get the same thing, in this case it may be the cookie thing.

Re: technical computer URL question
Posted by BradRod on 07-Jan-2003 20:29:07 (#2413)

i got rid of the cookies. that seems to have done it,

thanks..

How To Fool The Clowns in Surveillance
Posted by Scorpion on 07-Jan-2003 12:47:57 (#2369)

To slide unnoticed try playing when the pit is going through a drop box change.The morons in surveillance will be to busy eyeballing this procedure. This happens about 11am,7pm,and 3am. Your window of opportunity will be about 30 minutes. Also at around 5am the slots machines take are being cleaned out which is good time to clean the blackjack tables out.

good point, thanks for sharing Scorpion..(nt) *NM*
Posted by Adam N. Subtractum on 08-Jan-2003 00:06:54 (#2422)

Contemplating Counting Systems
Posted by BradRod on 07-Jan-2003 13:04:23 (#2370)

Having put in a considerable amount of time as a counting player. I have noticed some intersting things about my personal counting abilities that I wanted to share with the group in the hopes that they might stimulate some discussion that will have value to all. I hope that this is not too personal a treatise that it does not have broader applicability to everyone who reads it. I also apologize if it is too long.

I do not have a particularly mathmetical orientation although I am very math able. Numbers are okay but, I think more visually as an architect. In my work as an architectect I can add and substract profficiently in units of feet and inches -- down to quarters. All the while doing conversions in my head of 1/4's , 1/2's of inches and then of inches as being 12th's of feet. I can also multiply in feet and inches ( converting inches to decimals as an intermediate step) to arrive at areas.

My statistical background is from a Masters degree that I earned in City and Regional Planning.

In one way I feel like chosing a counting system is an investment because you have to acquire the system, internalize it, practice it and then profficiency takes time too. I think the most critical consideration in choosing a system is that it is suited to your playing style , abilities and to your game and that it will win for you in the long run.

SO, mathemetical results aside I believe that different systems gives you different experiential insights into the game. For example, I think Hi-Lo demonstrates the basic value of 10's and the burden of 5's and 6's,

a 2 level system adds a greater precision to the value of intermediate cards that I was not aware of until I tried Omega II. It let me look at Aces differently in a more dynamic way too. I could definitely feel the power of the system while I was using it. I did find it quite mentally taxing over time though.

From KO I found a kind of visual way of seeing at the dynamic of the shoe. I have felt at times like I am watching an apple card tipping slowly until the center of gravity shifts and it goes beyond the pivot point and all the apples come tumbling out. It really has helped me to visulaize the fluctuation in the cards as the count travels along the average distribution line from beginning of shoe to end.

The unabalnced system to me is like a taking CAT Scan of the shoe and seeing its internal composition and dynamics.

At this point I am thinking that my results may be suffering from the lack of power of this system though.

Two recent postings by T Hopper and Zengrifter have inspired me and in my most recent outing at the tables I tried out a new counting technique. Same KO sytem

The postings (http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?noframes;read=2168) related to side counting and using letters as numbers--- Link by TH, and mnemonic systems----Link by ZG. These led me to draw on an ability that I have of counting using hebrew letters. I have been doing this since I was a kid and so the letters are almost the same as numbers to me.

In my recent outing I was using letters and numbers interchangeably, adding and subtracting in both systems at the same time. The results I found were

a. No amount of number calling by other players or the dealer could shake the count out of my head or make me uncertain as to whether I had not gotten derailed and lost the count.... That ever happen to you ? I was totally sure at every moment what the count was.

b. If I saw an interruption coming on ( fill of dealer's chip tray, new player buying in, change of dealer, dispute resolution , etc....) I immediately converted the count to letters and locked it in through the pause.

c. Expanded grey matter capacity. It was as though two numbering systems gave me twice the mental capacity . I felt no counting or playing decision stress through the play. I started playing word games in my mind using the same letters I was counting with.. It is like how it is much easier to remember all the words in a 10 word sentance than a series of 10 unrelated numbers.

Thanks both TH and ZG

If this gives anyone any ideas about how they might expand their grey matter ability while counting, I would like to hear about it

I think that using this method I can easily handle a 2 level system with a side count. I think I would like to stay with unbalanced. Anyone have any suggestions ??

Brad

Unbalanced Zen Perhaps? *NM*
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 07-Jan-2003 13:21:01 (#2371)

Re: UBZ
Posted by BradRod on 07-Jan-2003 19:27:58 (#2404)

Thanks Rob,

I am looking into Zen and UBZ now.

Re: Contemplating Counting Systems
Posted by The Mayor on 08-Jan-2003 09:47:31 (#2427)

> No amount of number calling by other players or the dealer could shake the count out of my head or make me uncertain as to whether I had not gotten derailed and lost the count.... That ever happen to you ? I was totally sure at every moment what the count was.

Yes, this does happen to me. In shoe games, the RC is +19 when the dealer calls out "17" or some other value of a hand played. I am sure this happens to me still.

>b. If I saw an interruption coming on ( fill of dealer's chip tray, new player buying in, change of dealer, dispute resolution , etc....) I immediately converted the count to letters and locked it in through the pause.

Another good point, I have forgotten the count in these situations as well. It sounds like you have found a good trick.

>If this gives anyone any ideas about how they might expand their grey matter ability while counting, I would like to hear about it

Don't grow old! It is interesting, but I have felt a subtle decline in my abilities over the last few years. I am 45 now, and I seem to forget or be distracted much more than when I started. Also, I don't have the stamina that I did just a few years ago (when I could work all day, drive to Vegas (5 hours) then play till dawn).

>I think that using this method I can easily handle a 2 level system with a side count. I think I would like to stay with unbalanced. Anyone have any suggestions ??

I can only talk about what I have used: Hi-lo, Hi-opt 1, and Halves. Hi-lo is by far the best count out there for many reasons, but let me list a few:

1) team mates all share the same system
2) ease of use -- little practice required
3) power of the system in shoe games
4) common language of counters everywhere
5) lots of "0's"
6) can play a long time without getting tired

Here are a few drawbacks to the system I use (halves):

1) not many people know it
2) almost no "0's" hence a lot of work
3) takes constant practice to keep it up to speed
4) wears me out quickly

I know many professionals who use Hi-Lo very successfully to this day. If you want more power, you have to decide the game you want to play. In that case, if you are going to specialize to shoes, don't bother with side counts, and the division is easy, to use a balanced count. In pitch games, sidecounts matter, so choose your system wisely. With sidecounts, TC conversions, etc., it is a lot of work.

My thoughts,

--Mayor

Side counts don't matter in shoes?
Posted by T-Hopper on 08-Jan-2003 10:45:00 (#2430)

I have some evidence to the contrary. First,

3d comparison chart</a>

shows the difference between T-H Expert (side count of aces) and T-H Advanced(no side count) is obvious in a 6 deck game with good penetration.

Also, my classic post "6 Deck Bombshell: Playing Strategy is Key," reproduced below. This time, the cut was a meager 4.5/6.

I ran a series of simulations using my series of systems and also K-O Core from Knock-Out Blackjack by Ken Fuchs and Olaf Vancura and the "Dirty 32" from James Grosjean's book Beyond Counting. In all of these simulations, the same count was used for betting(2-7 +1 10, Ace -1).

6 decks 4.5 dealt S17 DAS No Splitting 10s 2 players 1-10 unit bet spread

Playing Strategy ROI Strategy Variations
K-O Core 0.10% Insurance only; "generic" basic strategy
T-H Basic 0.13% Insurance only; dollar-weighted basic strategy
T-H Intermediate 0.15% Top 2 dozen plays
T-H Advanced 0.17% Full set
T-H Expert 0.19% Extended set with ace side count
Dirty 32 0.20% Top 32 plays with custom multi-level counts for each
T-H Expert/Dirty 32 0.22% Combination of the above 2 systems

ROI is defined as the Win/100 Hands divided by the bankroll necessary for a 10% risk of ruin.

These numbers clearly show that even in a 6D game with a mediocre cut, there is a lot to be gained by using proper count-based playing strategy variation.

Re: Contemplating Counting Systems
Posted by Learning to count on 08-Jan-2003 11:52:44 (#2432)

{I can only talk about what I have used: Hi-lo, Hi-opt 1, and Halves. Hi-lo is by far the best count out there for many reasons, but let me list a few:

My thoughts,

--M}

AAAAHHHH HI-LO! I agree the mayor is right but I would like to add that there is a lot of information, papers, research,etc on HILO. Most of it is free or available for purchase for less than ten bucks a book. I really like HI-LO because it is a challenge but yet I can bifercate my concentration and party along with the ploppies and dealers as I play. There are stronger systems but Hi-LO IMHO is very strong in the shoes and adequate for single and double deck.
Because of the large assortment of source material you can educate yourself beyond just being a player. You can identify amd calculate ror, ev, sd etc.
Keep on counting and stay out of the strat! LTC

Re: Contemplating Counting Systems
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 08-Jan-2003 12:35:39 (#2434)

It may help some to picture everything set around a clock. RC at 9, TC at 3, A denisty at 12, and all the other confussion between 9 and 3 the table. Place the RC at 9 because before you get your next deal you will convert it to TC, which is at 3 sitting over first base. Ace density can be pictured as a hand set before, after, or on the 12. This will be made into a "heads up" display on the inside of your glasses for the next batch of apre MIT count teams. It will leave your mind free to do other things.....

Coming to a theater near you......

Re: Contemplating Counting Systems
Posted by BradRod on 08-Jan-2003 14:43:50 (#2439)

I do like visual images. When I picture Rob's clock it starts to resemble a spring action lawn sprinkler. The modulating arm pulled in by the spring, then forced out again through the force of the water pressure. keeping a rythmic beat over the lawn area.. (lawn area = 3 to 9 in McG's example. ) then it reaches the end of the arc (@ 9 o'clock) and quickly repositions itself to 3 o'clock.

In other words. The time between the last play at 3rd base to the start of the next deal at 1st base seems to pass very quickly.

More so when the dealer wipes out the table, scoops up chips and cards, deals... Less so when the dealer busts and goes around paying each player.

Single Deck Indices Question?
Posted by SammyBoy on 07-Jan-2003 14:51:06 (#2374)

I'm a little confused about the index number for 9 VS 2 (single deck). The index number is +1, does this mean that if the true count is +1 or less you don't double? Basic strategy for single deck 9 VS 2 is to double. Thanks in advance.

Re: Single Deck Indices Question?
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 07-Jan-2003 15:07:06 (#2376)

9 vs 2 If the count is +1 or more, you DO double. Less than +1, don't double.
Throw this extra one into your brain since you will never forget the above.
9 vs 3 If the count is -1 or more, you DO double. Less than -1, don't double.

This isn't only single deck. Play multiple decks the same way.

Thanks ADM! *NM*
Posted by SammyBoy on 07-Jan-2003 15:08:45 (#2377)

Risk-aversoin
Posted by T-Hopper on 07-Jan-2003 15:52:28 (#2381)

I don't know which count you are using, but you might want to add a point to one or both of these index numbers. Would you really want to double if the edge was only 0.2% or less?

Re: Risk-aversoin
Posted by The Mayor on 07-Jan-2003 17:15:59 (#2388)

With 9 vs. 2 and a TC of +1, you would be doubling a relatively small bet anyway, so yes, you would risk the extra small bet with a small advantage.

My understanding is that risk adverse usually applies to those situations with a max bet out, where the strategy deviation gives a minimum advantage, then there is something to be said.

For example, you have a 1.00% edge with a $100 bet out. Would you want to put out $200 to get a 1.02% edge? That is, would you risk that extra $100 on a .02% gamble?

Another way to look at this is that the SD greatly increases, but the EV only increases a little. We are hoping to maximize EV/SD with our RA indices.

--Mayor

Re: Risk-aversion
Posted by wongway21 on 07-Jan-2003 18:12:41 (#2391)

Are there any good resources that discuss risk-aversion strategies as they relate to each increment of a betting spread? I've wondered what the effects of changing a spread from say 1-8 where you step up in small increments (ie 1,2,4,6,8) vs stepping up more rapidly and to slightly higher increments (ie 1,4,8,12). This is because of the mayors point, that for smaller betting values the risk may be justified since it is a smaller fraction of your bankroll. A larger number of hands are also played at the smaller count values, so I'd also like to know how this affects the outcome.

Also, is there any increased risk of being suspected of counting by stepping up in larger increments? Or is the main thing to worry about the total spread?

WW21

Re: Risk-aversion SEE BJATTACK...
Posted by zengrifter on 07-Jan-2003 18:21:35 (#2393)

...by whats his name. zg

Re: Risk-aversoin
Posted by T-Hopper on 07-Jan-2003 19:31:46 (#2406)

With 9 vs. 2 and a TC of +1, you would be doubling a relatively small bet anyway, so yes, you would risk the extra small bet with a small advantage.

I have three points to make here.
<OL>
<LI>Even a one unit bet is still money at risk. And doubling down quadruples the variance.
<LI>Your average bet will be greater than one unit when the TC is +1. Sometimes, you would have made a larger bet and then seen some big cards elsewhere on the table.
<LI>For a very small edge (say 0.2% or less) why would you even want to double down? What if your TC conversion is off by a few cards. You're essentially betting on a coin toss.

My understanding is that risk adverse usually applies to those situations with a max bet out, where the strategy deviation gives a minimum advantage, then there is something to be said.

This is when the risk-averse index could be 2,3 or more points higher than the risk-neutral number. It's worth being risk-averse on ALL marginal plays.

Re: Risk-aversoin
Posted by hammer on 07-Jan-2003 22:56:36 (#2418)

The advantage is greater if surrender is allowed. Iused to
hate the rule and now love it,if not allowed do not play and
play other games-dbl/6 deck.

Re: Single Deck Indices Question?
Posted by Learning to count on 07-Jan-2003 19:45:01 (#2409)

You cant forget A TC of +3 doubling 9 against dealers 7!!!!!

doubling 9 against a 3
Posted by Jim Masters on 08-Jan-2003 08:56:50 (#2426)

With 9 against a 3 and a TC of -1 you so NOT double.
I hate this play on close dicisions anyway because
of the 2. IMHO

Re: doubling 9 against a 3
Posted by Learning to count on 08-Jan-2003 10:27:29 (#2429)

"With 9 against a 3 and a TC of -1 you so NOT double.
I hate this play on close decisions anyway because
of the 2. IMHO"

The suggested deviation indicise's for nine against 2,3,and seven I believe are 9: 2/1,3/0,4-6,7/3. HI-Lo. So at dealer up card of 2 with a tc of +1 you would double, and yes dealer up card of 3 with a tc of 0 or more you would double, and at a dealer up cards 4 through 6 you would auto double. If the dealer has a up card of 7 and you have a +3 TC you would double.

So yes if you have a dealer up card of 3 and a TC of minus 1 or less you would hit yes! IMHO

Re: doubling 9 against a 3
Posted by zengrifter on 08-Jan-2003 13:47:06 (#2437)

Whether you double 9v3 @ +1,0,-1 makes NO difference to your Ev - this is where you have license to round the # to 0 AND excercize INTUITION. Rounding the 9v2 to +2 provides for an RA-improved base, as well. zg

Thanks I will use it! *NM*
Posted by Learning to count on 08-Jan-2003 16:26:50 (#2443)

Definitely agree with Grifter. *NM*
Posted by Jim Masters on 09-Jan-2003 09:42:07 (#2450)

How Do I Turn Off the E-mail Notification?
Posted by SammyBoy on 07-Jan-2003 16:44:28 (#2382)

It is not under Edit Profile.

turn off email notifaction
Posted by Brad on 28-Mar-2005 20:31:08 (#12616)

where is this I need help please

thanks

I did this for you... *NM*
Posted by The Mayor on 29-Mar-2005 14:51:33 (#12618)

Read this message
Posted by The Mayor on 29-Mar-2005 14:52:52 (#12619)

http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=2383

Re: How Do I Turn Off the E-mail Notification?
Posted by Learning to count on 07-Jan-2003 16:50:11 (#2383)

When you finish your post look below where you put in your password. There is a check square for saving your password and below that to the right is a box that is checked that reads "if you like email notification... check this box". Make sure the box is not checked.

Ahhh! Thank you! *NM*
Posted by SammyBoy on 07-Jan-2003 16:53:04 (#2384)

Complicated BS.
Posted by Cyrano on 08-Jan-2003 05:49:40 (#2423)

I'm contemplating learning the Two Card Composition Dependent BS at bjmath.com for the 2D H17 game. Does anybody know what my gain over the Generic BS for the same game is? I.e. is it worth it for me to learn?

No reason to learn basic strategy *LINK*
Posted by T-Hopper on 08-Jan-2003 10:51:23 (#2431)

Haven't you read T-H Basic Blackjack yet? There is a short Appendix that explains how to use the charts with the Bushido count. And the T-H Basic playing strategy itself is optimal to use with ANY count.

Re: No reason to learn basic strategy
Posted by Cyrano on 08-Jan-2003 12:35:02 (#2433)

Sorry Hopper, maybe you misunderstood me. My intention was to play a more accurate BS to lower the casino advantage even more. I was wondering, compared to the BS that don't break it down to 2-card composition-dependent hands, how much do you gain/lose in ONLY the BS differences. BTW, good job! Your TH Basic definitely introduces a few concepts (such as composition dependent hands) that other well-known works neglect to mention. I just think your generic strategy (and most generic BS to boot) with the -0.1% difference is a little "expensive" for my tastes. I was trying to cut that down to near perfect. In bj, where the house edge difference between good to poor games can be a difference of 0.5%, I consider 0.1% huge. That's actually my motivation for learning the CD BS. What do you guys think? Is my rationale off?

BeeJack 2021
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 08-Jan-2003 12:39:05 (#2435)

It will take you a bit of time, but you can do this yourself by inserting each two card subset into play, and can even pick which hit card you get if you hit to form your own MASSIVE chart for this proposal. ;>

C-D BS
Posted by T-Hopper on 08-Jan-2003 12:55:03 (#2436)

On the first round after a shuffle, you gain about .04% from C-D variations in a single deck game. In double deck, the value would be less than half of that, maybe as low as .01%. You can get most of the gain from remembering the following rule:

Stand on a 3 or more card 16, unless there are more 6s than 5s in the hand (then hit)

Re: C-D BS
Posted by Cyrano on 08-Jan-2003 14:02:05 (#2438)

Ah~ That's exactly what I needed to know! Thanks for the 3vs16 rule. 0.04% for SD games is certainly not trivial. I'll probably devote some effort to memorizing more when I have the inclination.

Of waning 1Ds and sidecounts...
Posted by zengrifter on 08-Jan-2003 15:00:50 (#2441)

... were I to specialize, I personally wouldn't care too much about the extra gain to be had by playing an Ace-nuetral system or CDBS or 7s multiparam BECAUSE with a 1-4+ spread the SCORE is ALREADY through the roof (assuming quality 1D), though if I were limited to a 1-2 spread that stuff would come in handy - now, if that were the case or I was otherwise motivated to utilize a semi-sophisticated side count in combination with a semi-sophisticated primary count, I would combine an Ace-compromised level-2, ala ZEN, UBZ, TH(does he have one?), with a 7s bivaluate (or perhaps 7s/8s as a block) - I suppose that once doing it with 1D that 2Ds would be not harder and equally rewarding.

Notwithstanding the fact that I played HO2 w/As and 7s sidecounts for years and I remain unconvinced of the value of that degree of sophistication in light of the limitations of the statistical model.

Possibly the top-echelon of level-2, Ace-neutral, that could be combined with the 7s bivaluate would be the BRH-2 UBTC-type system.

Keep in mind that the # of quality 1D games throughout the world is waning fast - endangered species list -and- that a mediocre 1D game is a TIME WASTE or otherise requires an obnoxious spread, thus negating the effort of employing those additional sidecount steps.

FURTHER, if the additional complexity slows your play by 15% you have gained NOTHING, better to keep it simpler and increase your speed by 20%.

LASTLY, just being aware of As,7s,5s,etc. and knowing that your brain misses nothing, and then going with 'the force' whenever you at the "wide-border/coin-toss" decision areas can be more powerful than a rigid sidecount scheme (not proven, its a theory, I should name it).

zg (future author of 'MetaGambling - Transcending the Statistical Myth!)

Re: Of waning 1Ds and sidecounts...
Posted by BradRod on 10-Jan-2003 14:56:57 (#2474)

will this include any discussion of fractal analysis in gambling ?

Re: Of waning 1Ds and sidecounts...
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Jan-2003 16:25:46 (#2477)

Brad, funny you should ask... but The Mayor already shot down my idea to "isolate the elusive BJ capital-flux FRACTAL!" zg

Ian Andersen named it
Posted by T-Hopper on 10-Jan-2003 15:03:49 (#2475)

LASTLY, just being aware of As,7s,5s,etc. and knowing that your brain misses nothing, and then going with 'the force' whenever you at the "wide-border/coin-toss" decision areas can be more powerful than a rigid sidecount scheme (not proven, its a theory, I should name it).

He called this "soft focus." I don't recommend playing by intuition unless you have a BJ practice program available that will analyze your decisions comapred to perfect play, and can prove you are doing better than random guessing. I'll look into the only one that might have this capability and report back later.

Re: Ian Andersen named it
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Jan-2003 16:28:26 (#2478)

Its NOT necessary to do better than random guess, random guess at those junctures loses nothing. zg

Re: Ian Andersen named IN FACT...
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Jan-2003 19:33:35 (#2482)

... it is the statistical 'non-effect' that these wide-border intuitive guesses will cause that releives the practioner of an over-reliance on precision index#s (which do NOT exist anyway). zg

AC low bet tables
Posted by NewToTheGame on 08-Jan-2003 21:58:45 (#2446)

This weekend I am going to put learning to the test and experience some live table action. Does anyone know what casinos have $5 blackjack tables this weekend. I haven't been to AC before, and my friends tell me the lowest tables are $10 on the weekends. Thanks for your help.
-NTTG

Re: AC low bet tables
Posted by Learning to count on 09-Jan-2003 07:09:16 (#2448)

If you are serious about card counting and need this type of info. You should think about joining a service such as CBJN at BJ21.com or Track Jack at Advantage player.com. They have this info readily available for subscribers.
As far as AC goes I have heard the games are tough and the minimums force quick loss of Bank rolls from over betting. The standard is 8 decks, two deck cut off. You should shop around and try and get a 6 or 7 night trip to Vegas. I have paid as low as $300 for seven nights and RT air. You have to look for the deals. Look up companies that service these trips. Also you may want to go to the Mississippi gulf coasts there are some lucrative deals going on there. They are in direct competition with Vegas and loosen up from time to time. LTC

Re: AC low bet tables
Posted by Count Luckula on 09-Jan-2003 07:37:22 (#2449)

I go to AC about once a month and could give you a little insight as far as what I have found. Please email me at count_luckula@hotmail.com

Hourly Rate & ROR?
Posted by JR on 09-Jan-2003 14:34:21 (#2451)

My plan as a newbie 'advantage' player is to play 1D--DOA,H17 using the Hi-Lo counting system with a 1-4 spread of $5-$20 betting $5 at TC of 1 or lower, $10 at 2, $15 at 3, and $20 at 4 or higher. I will also be trying to use as many BS play variations as I can remember. What I would like to know is what the EV's would be for hourly rate and ROR% with a bankroll of $1000, $1200, and $1400 would be? Hope I haven't left out any info. All replies would be much appreciated.

Re: Hourly Rate & ROR?
Posted by The Mayor on 09-Jan-2003 15:50:49 (#2452)

How many rounds dealt per deck?

My "guess" is that with an average game in Vegas, you'll just about make minimum wage. But, let me know if you found a great game (or at least, the penetration) and I will tell you some numbers.

Re: Hourly Rate & ROR?
Posted by JR on 09-Jan-2003 16:15:37 (#2453)

Well, it looked to me when I was playing downtown LV over the Xmas holidays that 1/2 a deck was about it. With more than 3 players at the table, 2 rounds were dealt I think. What brought this on was info that I have read that said for 1D spreading 1-4 between $25-$100 with a $7000 bankroll, the ROR% was 12% and the hourly rate would be $50. As I would not be able to manage this, I was wondering if everything could be divided by 5 (approx'y)? So, if that was the case then the hourly rate would be about $10/hr.

Re: Hourly Rate & ROR?
Posted by The Mayor on 09-Jan-2003 17:05:11 (#2454)

Playing the downtown game, giving you RO6 (more or less dealing 30 cards out of 52) and betting exactly as you described $5 at +1, $10 at +2, $15 at +3 and $20 at +4 (and above), counting system is Hi-Lo, using Wong's PBJA, 10,000,000 hands, I got:

Average win rate per 100 hands: $3.67

ROR with bankroll of $1500: 39%
ROR with bankroll of $3000: 15%
ROR with bankroll of $4500: 6%
ROR with bankroll of $6000: 2.5%

Not very good, eh? Well, R06 is not very good. So why not play at the Western or LVC and play with dealers that give you at least R07 and sometimes R08? Same sim, this time dealing 40 cards out of 52 on average (which is about what the Western game is right now):

Average win rate per 100 hands: $8.14

ROR with bankroll of $1500: 18%
ROR with bankroll of $3000: 2.5%

So, get the game! Otherwise, you are not going to have much fun.

--Mayor

Re: Hourly Rate & ROR?
Posted by JR on 09-Jan-2003 17:47:40 (#2455)

A very genuine 'thanks' to you. I find it quite amazing how you and other posters continue to unselfishly respond to even the most simple and/or trivial questions that 'we' (newbies, novices, rookies, etc etc) ask. I have to admit that I have been quite engrossed in this whole BJ thing for the last 3 months or so. Thus far in 3 Vegas trips I have been mainly playing coupons and not willing to let the casinos have the 'advantage'. As I stated when I first joined your site, I am very impressed with it and I find that I keep coming back to it before others. I live in Canada and my 'other' and I have trips planned for Reno in Feb and another trip to Vegas in March. I am trying to take it one step at a time in getting 'there' so to speak. I probably should be posting this on the non-bj message board but I just wanted to express my appreciation and send you and others who regularly post here the kudos that I think you all deserve...great stuff...sincerely...JR

PS...I didn't realize that the Western had such a good game so I will check it out in March. I hear that Reno has good 1D games.

Re: Hourly Rate & ROR?
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 09-Jan-2003 20:50:11 (#2457)

This is totally a BJ message JR so no sense posting it in non BJ area. I didn't want to burst your bubble re the hourly wind rate but that's it in a nutshell. Add the swing of the game to it and it makes you wonder if it's worth your while. You'll need a bigger bank to play it and hit it harder, but the swing stays the same x ? We have spoken about playing online, and that is a good way for you to build your bank. You can hit the real game with cyber game cash and not feel so bad when the neg swing hits you. $100 in for $100 bonus played x10 = 2000 divided by $100 = 5 cents per dollar played. With $2 hands you will make about 10 cents per hand. You will make more money per hour with relatively little swing online compared to 1:4 nickel BJ.

Are you going for vacation with the sig other? I hope it is a vacation because it will be rather difficult to win enough to cover your costs otherwise. The costs have gone nuts these last years. They are going to add another fuel surcharge. I used to fly for $99CAN and tax was $100CAN and had my room covered by the hotel with freebie din dinz.

Those were the dayz.........I'm sure some of the oldtimers around here have some amazing stories about the real good old days.

Re: Hourly Rate & ROR?
Posted by JR on 10-Jan-2003 13:44:11 (#2469)

Hey Rob, thanks for your input...I guess that I should have mentioned the main reason I want to play $5 chips with 1-4 spread is that I haven't as yet played the game as a counter--I mentioned that I did some counting on the last trip but didn't bet spread except for a couple of times. I was just getting my feet wet and getting the feel of it. Now to take it to the next level, I want to do the whole thing but since I am so new, I just want to try it out at the lowest level--although I suppose I could go to $2-$8 at the El Cortez but I think that is getting a bit rediculous. From all I have learned so far I can see that the swings can be quite serious, so I think for me it is prudent to start out low while I am still capable of making errors, no? I also realize that for this to be profitable when the overall advantage is not likely to be over 2% then yes...a $25-$100 spread would be in order. Should things go well as I expect them to, then it is my intention to get there, but at the appropriate time. As far as expenses go to travel to gambling destinations--yes, these are vacations first and foremost for us. We both love Vegas and already do the coupon thing for RFB and shows etc so we know how to stretch it out and have a blast at the same time. I will send you another email as I have some more questions about the online stuff and your book...Regards...JR

Re: Hourly Rate & ROR?
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 10-Jan-2003 14:00:02 (#2470)

Single deck hand held might not be the place to get your feet wet counting.
If you are playing heads up or with one other player, the pace of the game is going to be quick (you aren't going to have time to count and decide how to play your hand). In a hand held game, you won't see the other players cards until the dealer quickly flips them over at the end of the hand. You will have to worry about what cards you have seen and already counted, and which you haven't.

Go find a low limit $5 face up shoe game. Play with a full table, and sit towards 3rd base, so you will have plenty of time to count the other players (and your) cards, before you have to make a hit/stand decision. With a full table you won't be playing that many hands per hour, but you will be seeing a lot of cards (this is practice, right?). Whenever you lose the count, (which you will many times, everybody does their first few times out), then stop and wait for the shuffle or look for another table.

With low limits, and playing slow games at full tables, by the time you go thru a couple hundred of your bankroll, you will be like an old pro ;>) Of course, you might get lucky and never look back.

Re: Hourly Rate & ROR?
Posted by JR on 10-Jan-2003 14:44:24 (#2472)

Hey Abe, thanks for your imput. Here are some of the reasons I have chosen to go after the 1D game: I have a downloaded program (Sage) that I have been practicing on at home and am fairly comfortable with the face-down play; I prefer the 1-4 spread versus a larger spread which I understand needs to be considerably more--like at least 1-10; I played a limited amount of various #'s of decks during the 2 week LV visit in the summer and also the 2 week visit during this past Xmas season and just like the hand held games; I have decided to target the 1D game for future play mainly because I have read that it is where the most advantage and therefore 'gains' can be made; I don't mind playing with others at the table in 1D games while I hone my skills and then as I progress I should be able to handle 1-2 others at the table or even heads up; I am partial to the idea of getting a new shuffle frequently to 'start the count over' if I have to rather than having to wait or moving to a new table; I like the venues of the 1D games that can be found downtown LV and hopefully in Reno. Some of the challenges that I realize that I will be faced with are: having to incorporate BS play variations as I understand that there is equal importance of those along with bet variations in the 1D game; that the advantage player is more 'visible' in the 1D game, and so cover will be harder; that the swings can be much more volatile; that the future of 1D games is in jeopardy as the casinos move more and more to eliminating them as a playable game...eg 6-5 BJ payout games. So, am I making any sense here at all or am I out to lunch?

Re: Hourly Rate & ROR?
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 10-Jan-2003 14:53:11 (#2473)

Sounds like a good plan. Just don't get discouraged at first. Everybody loses the count the first time in real casino conditions.

How to adjust Ace side count for playing decisions
Posted by koko on 09-Jan-2003 19:49:34 (#2456)

How to adjust the main count with Ace side count if one kept for playing decisions only in Hi-low or TKO?

Re: How to adjust Ace side count for playing decis
Posted by zengrifter on 09-Jan-2003 21:22:37 (#2458)

Richard Reid's advice from DBJ is to simply add the #Aces (x2 for a level-2) seen to the RC before converting to TC, when detirming insurance and and certain Ace sensitive hands. I would like to hear some coherrent methodology and reasoning on this myself! zg

Re: How to adjust Ace side count for playing decis
Posted by koko on 09-Jan-2003 22:29:11 (#2459)

Does it mean that the adjustment has to be made only to hands involving Ace?
What about certain doubling oppurtunities such doubling 11 excessive Aces will
hurt and will help doubling 9 and 10?

Re: How to adjust Ace side count for playing decis
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 10-Jan-2003 09:13:21 (#2468)

No. An Ace played is an Ace played. If you see it, it's a part of your betting count, and in this instance, a part of your modified playing count. It is treated something like a 2 for some playing decisions (+1). You can work out each play by using a BJ calculator like BeeJack2021.

21st Century Sidecounting...
Posted by Adam N. Subtractum on 10-Jan-2003 14:33:40 (#2471)

Sidecounting has come a long way from the days of the antiquated excess/deficiency ace adjustment methods, with much easier mutations available to today's advantage player. The general concensus amongst most in the cardcounter community is that sidecounting is of little value when compared to the effort that is exerted in employing one. Furthermore, with the majority of blackjack in the world being multi-deck, where playing strategy is so much less important than betting, it would seem as though they might be right.

However, recent research, most notably that conducted by T-hopper (presented in his post "6D Bombshell: Playing Strategy is Key"), suggests that playing strategy can have much more of an impact in shoes than originally suspected. For example, in T-hopper's aforementioned post he reports that in a common 4.5/6 game, his T-H "Dollar-Weighted" basic strategy, and 2-7/T-A for betting, has a 30% higher ROI (return on investment) than KO betting w/ stock BS!!! I don't think many people realized the magnitude of this...we're talking about a dollar-weighted BS, that was the only improvment...no indices, and to top it off, this was with fair penetration! This alone should be enough to make doubters think again about the importance of playing strategy in shoe games, and about the use of sidecounts to further enhance that playing strategy.

Now we see there are substantial gains to be made from play, and we know an ace sidecount will increase our Playing Efficiency dramatically if we are using an Ace-reckoned count (PE improvments will be much less with an Ace-neutral count), so it seems obvious, even without getting into the numbers, the improvement will be noticable. The question is, is it worth the effort? Or as I've heard some counter's say, "What's the return per cell?" This is a relative question, and one only you can answer for yourself.

Now let's take a look at a few ways we can make sidecounting less of a burden. First and foremost, I believe the biggest flaw in old-school Ace sidecounts is that they were used with ace-neutral main counts, requiring conversion to an adjusted count EVERY single hand for betting purposes. Does this seem ridiculous to anyone else? Why would we want to make the ace adjustment 100% of the time, when we would have to do it less than 30% of the time (during PLAYING decisions) if we used an ace-reckoned count?? I don't have the exact numbers on-hand, but using Catch 22 we vary our strategy somewhere around 28% of the time (don't qoute me). Now doesn't that seem easier?, we've already cut the "load per cell" by 2/3.*

*I should note that some people may have difficulty sidecounting a card already included in the Running Count, effectively having to "count the same card twice".

Ok, now let's examine the actual adjustment procedure. First we'll start with the antiquated method:

-Antiquated Ace adjustment steps-

1. keep RC of Aces played
2. calculate decks remaining (decks in play - decks played)
3. calculate Aces remaining (total Aces - Aces played)
4. calculate excess/defic of Aces remaining (Aces remaining - 4*decks remaining)
5. Add excess to Running Count and convert to True Count

Simple huh? Its a wonder people used this method for so long. The first improvment that can be made was pointed out by Lance Humble in "The World's Greatest Blackjack Book", where he states that the player should start his Ace Running Count at decks played * 4 and count DOWN as the Aces are played. This method combines steps 1 & 3, as you see, because we no longer need to calculate Aces remaining...we are counting them down as they come out.

I should note the reason we have to use Aces remaining for our adjustment rather than using the number of Aces played, as we are doing with every other card in our RC. The reason that we can't just ADD in the number of Aces played to counteract its betting value of -1 in the RC, is that in doing so we are throwing our pivot off kilter. Take hi-lo for example, it is balanced with a pivot of zero, but if we take the Aces away we now have an unbalance of +4 per deck, and a pivot of 4 * decks in use. This was the mistake made by Richard Reid in early editions of his E-book "Dynamic Blackjack". The mistake has since been brought to his attention, and was corrected immmediately(a great feature of E-books).

Next you see in step 4 we have to calculate excess/deficiency. Now we don't have that problem (with an Ace-reckoned count), because we don't need to know the excess or deficiency of the Aces...we just need to know the amount remaining, so we can subtract that amount from our RC, and make playing strategy decisions with the higher PE of an Ace-nuetral system (without any adverse effects on the pivot).

Let's review the steps we've deemed necessary for our Ace adjustment:

-21st Century Sidecounting Steps-

1. Count down Aces played
2. Add Aces remaining to Running Count and convert to True Count

We've cut the steps form five to two, effectively increasing "return per cell" exponentially in my opinion.

On another note, additional adjustments can be made for certain plays where the Ace's ideal value is other than zero, such as doubling hard 10 & 11, and insurance. This will add to complexity, but since we've broken it (the sidecount) down so much, we've got some extra brain cells to throw around. These extra adjustments are not necessary, and will not dramatically effect your win rate.

A testament to the performance of this "new" method of Ace adjustment is found in some research done by Dr. Brett Harris. I don't have the study on-hand, but in a single deck comparo between Advanced Omega-II and Brh-II, where AO-II used a traditional sidecount and Brh-II simply subtracted 2 from the RC for every Ace seen (for playing decisions only), Brh-II outperformed AO-II. It should be noted that this very weak Ace adjustment performed with the Brh-II system has the pivot problem we discussed earlier. Brh-II is a +2 unbalanced system, so by subtracting one full rank (the Aces) from the RC, Brh-II is converted to a -2 pivot, a very much suboptimal point......but it STILL outperforms AO-II with the antiquated ace sidecount.

Another benefit of Ace sidecounts that I'll touch on is their use for betting purposes. In the system I developed and use, AnS-I (Ace variable Sidecount-I), I use the Ace sidecount to adjust the "variable pivot" that I employ for betting purposes. This allows me to have 100% accuracy of TC without ANY deck estimation whatsoever, as well as a slight increase in Betting Correlation. I haven't gotten to doing the numbers yet, but I believe it will prove to be the most powerful level one system (albeit with a sidecount) ever developed, with estimated BC of .977-.980, and PE of .65-.69 (depending on # of Ace adjustments used). From the little info I've heard of T-hopper's Advanced systems, I believe he is using a similar "variable pivot" scheme for betting, as well as similar ace ad

BlackjackInfo.com

The World's Most Popular Blackjack Website

Home

Basic Strategy Engine

Rules of Blackjack

Strategy Trainer /
Free Blackjack Game

Card Counting

Interviews

Blackjack Blog

Message Boards

Blackjack Tournaments

Gambling Online

Newsletter Archive

Books & Software

Threads 301 to 330

BlackjackInfo.com

The World's Most Popular Blackjack Website

Strategy Trainer / Free Blackjack Game

Threads 301 to 330

Strategy Trainer /
Free Blackjack Game