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 331 to 360

An interesting exercise
Posted by BradRod on 11-Jan-2003 21:30:01 (#2505)

At the Mayor's suggestion I recently performed an interesting exercise. I wanted to share my observations from that exercise with the forum.

It goes like this:

Deal hands as if playing one on one with the dealer using only 6 cards. 3 - T value cards, A, 5, 6. The equivalent TC is 18. Play 100 hands.

With such a rich deck to play from I expected it to be a very player friendly run. It was. The end result put me up 20 units after the 100 hands. These were maximum bets because of the high count. What was eye opening was that I lost nearly half of the hands. Still did well because of blackjacks and successful double downs.

I did not count the hands where the dealer got BJ with an ace up. Since I would have bought insurance and would have won the insurance bets. Thses hands were the only (effective) push hands possible with the cards being used.

These Ace up dealer BJ's demonstrated to me that there was not so much to fear in the long run of a dealer BJ in a high count with a big bet out. Because
a. insurance offsets the potential losses and
b. a dealer BJ is still just a 1:1 loss. While the 3:2 player BJ payoff far offset those.

This got me wondering. What are the odds (if surmisable ) of a dealer BJ being Ace up or T up ? is it even ?

Re: An interesting exercise
Posted by AsZehn on 11-Jan-2003 22:02:07 (#2506)

It couldn't be even. There are 16 cards with a 10 value and only 4 aces per deck.

Explain further please.
Posted by BradRod on 12-Jan-2003 11:27:06 (#2519)

>>It couldn't be even. There are 16 cards with a 10 value and only 4 aces per deck.<<

I guess this is the same source for Rob McG's assertion that 1 in 4 BJ would be Ace up.

My confusion is. I can understand how the 1:4 ratio of Ace to T would effect the possibilty of the hand being a BJ at all-- rather than a T and any other card. I just do not understand how that ratio effects the order in which that A-T combination would be dealt.

Thanks

1 of 2 BJs will be ace up *NM*
Posted by T-Hopper on 12-Jan-2003 11:31:42 (#2520)

Re: 1 of 2 BJs will be ace up
Posted by BradRod on 12-Jan-2003 11:45:29 (#2522)

Thank you TH

What does the 1:4 ratio explain then ?

Yes, here is the argument
Posted by The Mayor on 12-Jan-2003 11:54:10 (#2523)

Yes, half of the blackjack's will be face up.

Here is how it is done (with an infinite deck)...

Let X = BJ.
Let Y = A is showing.
Let Z = T is showing.

Then
P(X given Y) = 4/13.
P(X given Z) = 1/13.
P(Y) = 1/13.
P(Z) = 4/13.

Blackjack and an A is showing:
P(X and Y) = P(X given Y)*P(Y) = 4/13*1/13 = 4/169.

Blackjack and a T is showing:
P(X and Z) = P(X given Z)*P(Z) = 1/13*4/13 = 4/169.

They are equal.

--Mayor

The Fact of The Matter Is
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 12-Jan-2003 12:18:31 (#2526)

A BJ is composed of two cards, one an Ace the other a 10. The ratio of 10 to A will be 4 to 1, and over the long run your BJs will be A,10 A,J A,Q, and A,K, half A up and half the 10 J Q K up.

Re: The Fact of The Matter Is
Posted by The Mayor on 12-Jan-2003 13:55:41 (#2532)

I am not sure you understand the question, Rob.

But, the answer is that 1/2 of the dealer's BJ's occur via an A up, and 1/2 occur via a T up. That is just how it goes. Now, if an A, the dealer is 4 times as likely to have a BJ as if he is showing a T, but on the other hand, the dealer gets a T up 4 times as often as an A. Hence it evens out.

--Mayor

Re: The Fact of The Matter Is
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 12-Jan-2003 15:00:01 (#2539)

"I am not sure you understand the question, Rob.

I'm sure I didn't get the drift, as I said from my first post, if I am understanding the question correctly, or the point of the exercise. I assume there is a point to it somewhere, and that it had to do with betting the advatage to some degree. This written medium and pop up posting leaves a lot to be desired.

"But, the answer is that 1/2 of the dealer's BJ's occur via an A up, and 1/2 occur via a T up.

Of course.

"Now, if an A, the dealer is 4 times as likely to have a BJ as if he is showing a T, but on the other hand, the dealer gets a T up 4 times as often as an A. Hence it evens out.

All makes sense. 1 out of 13 will be A up, 4 out of 13 ten up, 8 out of 13 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 up, and if and when the dealer has a BJ it will be 50% A up and 50% ten up.

What is the point of the original exercise you set the man out to do? That would help in this discussion.

The point of the exercise
Posted by The Mayor on 13-Jan-2003 18:39:11 (#2578)

The point is that even with fabulous cards and a huge count, horrible things happen. If one does this exercise enough (and 100 hands is not enough) then you will find the dealer pulling 3 21's in a row with a 5 showing, or the dealer getting 10 BJ's for your 1. Just enough to make you realize that even with a huge + count, life can really suck. And with these cards, that's exactly what happens, either you get a great run of cards or the dealer does, there is not much middle ground. It gives an experiential idea why the variance is so large when the count gets high.

The point.

--Mayor

Re: The point of the exercise
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 13-Jan-2003 18:45:57 (#2579)

That is why I posted "You were also rather lucky." in the original reply. You can have an amazing edge and still get killed as you well know. That is why I mentioned minimum boldness, and using it to grind your edge instead of throwing yourself at it like a fly into the spiders web.

I must say that the quality of discussion...
Posted by zengrifter on 12-Jan-2003 17:09:31 (#2546)

... is climbing fast around here! zg

Re: I must say that the quality of discussion...
Posted by BradRod on 12-Jan-2003 17:31:38 (#2548)

.. is climbing fast around here! zg

has a way to with your contribution .... although i must say that i find your messages mostly abit cryptic ...

brad

Re: I must say that the quality of discussion...
Posted by zengrifter on 12-Jan-2003 17:49:24 (#2549)

I told you "it depends who's dealing"! zg

LOL ,, Thar ye go ! *NM*
Posted by BradRod on 12-Jan-2003 18:56:18 (#2553)

Half
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 12-Jan-2003 12:32:57 (#2527)

you can insure against, the other half not.

Re: An interesting exercise
Posted by zengrifter on 11-Jan-2003 22:26:40 (#2507)

This got me wondering. What are the odds (if surmisable ) of a dealer BJ being Ace up or T up ? is it even ?
--------------------------------

It would depend who's dealing! zg

Re: An interesting exercise
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 11-Jan-2003 23:02:26 (#2509)

"This got me wondering. What are the odds (if surmisable ) of a dealer BJ being Ace up or T up ? is it even ?

If I am understanding your question properly, dealer BJ happens 1 out of 5 with an A showing. In the case you are talking about below 1 per 4 BJ's would be A up.

"Deal hands as if playing one on one with the dealer using only 6 cards. 3 - T value cards, A, 5, 6. The equivalent TC is 18. Play 100 hands.

"With such a rich deck to play from I expected it to be a very player friendly run. It was. The end result put me up 20 units after the 100 hands. These were maximum bets because of the high count. What was eye opening was that I lost nearly half of the hands. Still did well because of blackjacks and successful double downs.

You were also rather lucky. In The World's Greatest Blackjack Book on page 201 it shows two different scenarios. One where you have a 2% advantage and one where you have a 2% disadvantage. You have a 49% chance of doubling your roll betting it all on one chance with the -2 and 51% with the +2. BUT, by playing with smaller amounts, you can increase your chances of doubling by making 100 even sized bets over 100 hands. You have a 98.2% chance of doubling after these 100 hands. On the contrary side, you will have a 1.8% chance of doubling your roll after 100 -2% hands. Better NOT to bet at all against a -2% game, and bet small amounts to grind out the time against your 2% edge on the quick side of this game.

"I did not count the hands where the dealer got BJ with an ace up. Since I would have bought insurance and would have won the insurance bets. Thses hands were the only (effective) push hands possible with the cards being used.

"These Ace up dealer BJ's demonstrated to me that there was not so much to fear in the long run of a dealer BJ in a high count with a big bet out. Because
a. insurance offsets the potential losses and
b. a dealer BJ is still just a 1:1 loss. While the 3:2 player BJ payoff far offset those.

It's great to know what every card left in the deck is isn't it? smile

Re: An interesting exercise
Posted by BradRod on 12-Jan-2003 11:37:12 (#2521)

>>>>>>>If I am understanding your question properly, dealer BJ happens 1 out of 5 with an A showing. In the case you are talking about below 1 per 4 BJ's would be A up.<<<<<<<<<<<

Please see my question in the next post.

"Deal hands as if playing one on one with the dealer using only 6 cards. 3 - T value cards, A, 5, 6. The equivalent TC is 18. Play 100 hands.

>>>>You were also rather lucky. In The World's Greatest Blackjack Book on page 201 it shows two different scenarios. One where you have a 2% advantage and one where you have a 2% disadvantage. <<<<<

What is the player's advantage with a + 18 count ?

>>>>> by playing with smaller amounts, you can increase your chances of doubling by making 100 even sized bets over 100 hands. <<<<<<

Are you saying I shouldn't be making maximum bets with a +18 count. Or did I not play this oversimplimfied simulation correctly ??

>>>It's great to know what every card left in the deck is isn't it? smile <<<

Although it is true that I did know what the remaining cards were , my decision to take insurance or not would have been based solely on the count , not on knowledge of remaing counts.

Re: An interesting exercise
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 12-Jan-2003 12:47:03 (#2531)

>>>>You were also rather lucky. In The World's Greatest Blackjack Book on page 201 it shows two different scenarios. One where you have a 2% advantage and one where you have a 2% disadvantage. <<<<<

What is the player's advantage with a + 18 count?

Let us guess that it is 9%. With TC+1 we play even in multi deck, TC+2 we get the edge, so using .5% per C ruff estimate let's say 9%.

>>>>> by playing with smaller amounts, you can increase your chances of doubling by making 100 even sized bets over 100 hands. <<<<<<

Are you saying I shouldn't be making maximum bets with a +18 count. Or did I not play this oversimplimfied simulation correctly??

If we are going to use 9% of our bankroll as our max bet, yes, we would be betting too much. Half Kelly or quarter Kelly, or a top max bet no matter how high the count gets, possibly 2% is what Igor K (Humble) is suggesting in the long run grind of the house. He uses 1/100th of the bankroll, or 1%.

>>>It's great to know what every card left in the deck is isn't it? smile <<<

Although it is true that I did know what the remaining cards were , my decision to take insurance or not would have been based solely on the count , not on knowledge of remaing counts.

Very good. Was this exercise only an insurance exercise? I think there is a lot to learn from exercises like these, and that is why I thru the maximum and minimum boldness as it is called in the book into the exercise.

Re: An interesting exercise
Posted by BradRod on 12-Jan-2003 14:15:17 (#2535)

<<<<<<<If we are going to use 9% of our bankroll as our max bet, yes, we would be betting too much. Half Kelly or quarter Kelly, or a top max bet no matter how high the count gets, possibly 2% is what Igor K (Humble) is suggesting in the long run grind of the house. He uses 1/100th of the bankroll, or 1%.<<<<<<<<

I thought that kelly criteria was based on player advantage. No more no less in order to double the BR before depleting it.

You are suggesting that there is another criteria to follow for bet ceiling based on something other than BR and TC ? This seems to disregard the players advantage in betting. At what counts would you do that ?

>>>>>>Very good. Was this exercise only an insurance exercise? I think there is a lot to learn from exercises like these,<<<<<<<

The exercise was not only for insurace but, I think for general expectation at a high count.

>>>>>>>>> and that is why I thru the maximum and minimum boldness as it is called in the book into the exercise.<<<<<<<<

i did not understand this

Re: An interesting exercise
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 12-Jan-2003 15:08:06 (#2540)

<<<<<<I thought that kelly criteria was based on player advantage. No more no less in order to double the BR before depleting it.

I am justing pointing out "minimum boldness" to you, many small bets instead of larger ones. "Max boldness" is plunging your entire roll on one shot, the proper play against a neg ex game. Some players will never bet more than 1% of their bank, some use 2%, even if your advantage is 9%. We are still working with risk of ruin here.

>>>>>>Very good. Was this exercise only an insurance exercise? I think there is a lot to learn from exercises like these,<<<<<<<

The exercise was not only for insurace but, I think for general expectation at a high count.

>>>>>>>>> and that is why I thru the maximum and minimum boldness as it is called in the book into the exercise.<<<<<<<<

i did not understand this

If I had a flat bed scanner I would put the pages up here for you to view. It's hard to get a grip on things this way.

Re: An interesting exercise
Posted by BradRod on 12-Jan-2003 18:29:11 (#2551)

sorry rob , we do seem to be miscommunicating...

Wrong
Posted by T-Hopper on 12-Jan-2003 15:57:57 (#2543)

You were also rather lucky. In The World's Greatest Blackjack Book on page 201 it shows two different scenarios. One where you have a 2% advantage and one where you have a 2% disadvantage. You have a 49% chance of doubling your roll betting it all on one chance with the -2 and 51% with the +2. BUT, by playing with smaller amounts, you can increase your chances of doubling by making 100 even sized bets over 100 hands. You have a 98.2% chance of doubling after these 100 hands.

I'm sure the book says nothing about having a 98% chance of winning after just 100 hands.

Re: Wrong
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 12-Jan-2003 20:00:30 (#2555)

You don't have the book obviously. I will photocopy it scan it so you can read it.

It makes absolutely no sense
Posted by T-Hopper on 13-Jan-2003 09:52:25 (#2566)

How about with 100 UNITS and not after 100 HANDS?

Re: It makes absolutely no sense
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 13-Jan-2003 13:43:21 (#2572)

100 hands of 1 unit each more like?? How much wood could a wood chuck chuck if a wood chuck could chuck wood? Or is it would?? I photocopied that page so we can all look at it tonight.

When is ground hog day anyway?

Boss!! De Page! De Page!
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 13-Jan-2003 16:36:19 (#2575)

Re: Boss!! De Page! De Page!
Posted by T-Hopper on 13-Jan-2003 20:38:35 (#2580)

What you said:

In The World's Greatest Blackjack Book on page 201 it shows two different scenarios. One where you have a 2% advantage and one where you have a 2% disadvantage. You have a 49% chance of doubling your roll betting it all on one chance with the -2 and 51% with the +2. BUT, by playing with smaller amounts, you can increase your chances of doubling by making 100 even sized bets over 100 hands. You have a 98.2% chance of doubling after these 100 hands. On the contrary side, you will have a 1.8% chance of doubling your roll after 100 -2% hands.

That supposed to be 100 UNITS, not 100 hands. Obviously it is almost certain to take more than 100 hands to win or lose 100 bets.

T-Hopper: Errata?
Posted by Cyrano on 12-Jan-2003 08:54:14 (#2514)

Ok, I FINALLY got around to reading your TH Basic.... Sorry it took so long.

Excerpt from your T-H Basic book, pg. 31:

The T-H Basic playing strategy is not designed to have the highest possible expectation at all times. In fact, the expectation is lower than standard basic strategy if the same amount is bet at all times.

**I think you're mistaken. Consider: if the above-statement is true, why even vary playing in accordance to counts? It's to obtain a higher EV, no? If you can obtain a higher expectation with standard BS, then you certainly will only play BS. I think you touched on what you mean is what you state in the latter sentence, "it is a dollar-weighted strategy, which means the expectation will be greater in the higher counts when more money is bet..." Any descent count system will have an expectation that's higher than BS with just the play variations--that's why you start off with BS and then vary your play in accordance to the count. What's different about most UB systems is the fact that they have a higher BE, whereas TC'ing produces a higher PE.

Also, on page 66, I'm not sure if this is a mistake, but, if you scan the ROI/100 for the 2-player table, the % goes down with more decks. At the full tables, they jump dramatically at the 4D, basically implying that the 4D games at FULL TABLES are superior to all the 2-player games?

Re: T-Hopper: Errata?
Posted by T-Hopper on 12-Jan-2003 10:32:06 (#2515)

Regarding your title, yes. I just got an email from someone giving me two small corrections to make, and I've noticed a more serious one myself (page 26 is a duplicate of page 25).

The T-H Basic playing strategy is not designed to have the highest possible expectation at all times. In fact, the expectation is lower than standard basic strategy if the same amount is bet at all times.
**I think you're mistaken. Consider: if the above-statement is true, why even vary playing in accordance to counts? It's to obtain a higher EV, no? If you can obtain a higher expectation with standard BS, then you certainly will only play BS. I think you touched on what you mean is what you state in the latter sentence, "it is a dollar-weighted strategy, which means the expectation will be greater in the higher counts when more money is bet..." Any descent count system will have an expectation that's higher than BS with just the play variations--that's why you start off with BS and then vary your play in accordance to the count.

The above statement refers to the fixed T-H Basic playing strategy, which is independent of any count system. It will underperform basic strategy if you are flat betting/play all, but no card counter does that. Once you include a bet spread and/or table hopping, T-H Basic is much more efficient than standard BS.

The complete T-H Basic system includes the following elements:

<UL>
<LI>T-H Basic playing strategy
<LI>Single-level unbalanced count (2-7 +1 10, A -1)
<LI>Running count indices for only insurance and even money
</UL>

The same betting charts can be used for the multi-level Bushido Basic system as well, as detailed in the Appendix. There is no significant difference between the performance of these two counts at the Basic level.

Also, on page 66, I'm not sure if this is a mistake, but, if you scan the ROI/100 for the 2-player table, the % goes down with more decks. At the full tables, they jump dramatically at the 4D, basically implying that the 4D games at FULL TABLES are superior to all the 2-player games?

The 4, 6, and 8 deck System Reports include table depature, while the 1 and 2 deck System Reports. See page 75 for the table departure strategy used by all systems. Even the systems that use TC for betting use this simple running count departure strategy to ensure that all systems play the same hands.

Finishing a sentence
Posted by T-Hopper on 12-Jan-2003 10:51:58 (#2516)

The 4, 6, and 8 deck System Reports include table departure, while the 1 and 2 deck System Reports

do not.

Re: Finishing a sentence
Posted by Cyrano on 12-Jan-2003 10:57:15 (#2517)

Table departure--Does that also include the 2-player tables 4-8D numbers? It seems the top table does not include Table Departure play, while the bottom table does.

That is correct
Posted by T-Hopper on 12-Jan-2003 11:19:21 (#2518)

Table departure is used only for 4-8 decks with 6 players at the table. That's because it is easier to do in real life when the casino is crowded. Also, you need the extra edge to make up for the slower pace. I report the ROI/100 hands, not the ROI/Hour.

trip question
Posted by hammer on 12-Jan-2003 12:00:54 (#2525)

You are goinhg for a quick 3 day trip, you have yur goals and
loss limits(I know Mayor doesn't use stop losses), you reach your
goal and make loads of cash on the first day 3rd session.

Now what?
reduce remaining sessions? and just cruise around
continue with same strategy?

or what?

Re: trip question
Posted by Learning to count on 12-Jan-2003 12:37:13 (#2528)

"You are going for a quick 3 day trip,"

I preume you mean a cruise like Carnival? I was recently on a cruise see my post "1001 ploppy tales; Splitting tens and being called a jerk".

"you have your goals and
loss limits(I know Mayor doesn't use stop losses),"

If your are protecting your BR. Which is rsponsible. Then try and play at a higher EV: Wong, Wong out, The past few threads are about playing AC eight deck games. There is a lot of Excellent INFO on the topic of eight deckers and mierda two deck cuts.

My stop limit is when I cant take the losses any more. I am emotionaly drained so I stop. Also watch for steaming this can cause you to bet progressively. Trying to get that loss back. DANGEROUS. I takes a lot of experience and self knowledge to be a cold hearted no feeling player. One stop measure I have is being tired. If you are tired; quit; rest up and come back later or tomorrow.

"you reach your
goal and make loads of cash on the first day 3rd session."

Depends I always said if I double bank roll I would continue playing but at a low ROR or if I hit the jackpot I would go buy a house. Since this is probably not going to happen keep on counting! The reason counters go on playing is that they understand that the full benifit of the game is gained in the long run. For some it is an experiment in life not just a way to make money(the greed factor). They want to see if all that math will work itself out and reveal the advantage. Since this is based on infinity make up your own style of play just remember the big picture as well.

"Now what?
reduce remaining sessions? and just cruise around
continue with same strategy?
or what?"

Knowing how bad the games can be on the ship you will probably ride the roller coaster and keep playing looking for the advantage. I found that you actually end up playing even on those ships. One thing to shoot for is calculate what the whole trip will cost and try for that. Then the trip is free. Then go up to the pool put on the shades and have that pina colada. LTC

Re: trip question
Posted by BradRod on 12-Jan-2003 12:37:35 (#2529)

IMHO

Take a break to reevalute based on your new bank roll. Create a new goal and loss limit and keep playing in games with positive counts until you reach your new limits. Re-evaluate . Repeat.

Re: trip question
Posted by The Mayor on 12-Jan-2003 13:57:49 (#2533)

Win goals are meaningless -- they don't earn money for you, they lose money -- bigtime. If you won as much as you hoped to win, good for you, but keep playing. The rest of the hours you play are also with a positive EV, and hence they earn even more for you (this is not a "maybe they earn more" -- simply put, they DO earn more).

--Mayor

T-Hopper. where are posts ?
Posted by BradRod on 12-Jan-2003 13:58:33 (#2534)

I am trying to locate

"6D Bombshell: Playing Strtegy is Key"

and

comprison chart of side count vs non side count (www.bjnet.com/thop/sample3dchart)

Please advise..

thanks

Brad

Re: T-Hopper. where are posts ?
Posted by zengrifter on 12-Jan-2003 14:18:54 (#2536)

I couldn't find the link, but TH is saying that, contrary to popular opinion emergent from megalaDON's paradigm, learning an extra 50+ i#s CAN make a not-insignificant improvement in 6-8D games. zg

Re: T-Hopper. where are posts ?
Posted by BradRod on 12-Jan-2003 14:46:36 (#2538)

LOL, I love your editorial snippets ZG but, didnt you also give accolades to Adam N subtractum's post on the validity and applicablity of side counting in multi deck shoes. (POM)

In that post ANS made frequent refernce to TH's postings.

Thank you for your synopsis of those posts. : ) I do think there must be value to reviewing them first hand as well as Reid, Humble, Griffin and others...

Brad

Re: T-Hopper. where are posts ?
Posted by zengrifter on 12-Jan-2003 16:59:08 (#2545)

LOL, I love your editorial snippets ZG but, didnt you also give accolades to Adam N subtractum's post on the validity and applicablity of side counting in multi deck shoes. (POM)
---------------------------

The main thrust of Adam's '21st Century' post was that there is an easier yet more accurate method of side-counting Aces, for play-efficiency, not about shoes per'se, but the shoes can improve close to 20% with more i#s, etc. zg

Re: T-Hopper. where are posts ?
Posted by T-Hopper on 12-Jan-2003 15:26:48 (#2541)

My original post has finally cycled off the Card Counting Systems board and into the members only archives. That is why I reposted it just a few days ago on this site. You may have noticed my follow-up post, "Single Deck Bombshell: Playing Strategy is Everything" still on the board at http://www.bjrnet.com/thop/board_systems.htm

Here is what you asked for:

http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl/read=2430 (embedded link doesn't work)
http://www.bjrnet.com/thop
http://www.bjrnet.com/thop/sample3dchart.png

Or download T-H Basic Blackjack and get all 4 charts along with everything else.

http://www.bjrnet.com/thop/T-H_Basic_Blackjack.zip

The 3D charts in Bushido Blackjack are slightly different, covering the Basic, Intermediate, and Advanced versions of that count.

Bad link
Posted by T-Hopper on 12-Jan-2003 15:40:49 (#2542)

http://www.bjrnet.com/thop/board_systems.htm should just be
http://www.bjrnet.com/board_systems.htm

Re: Bad link WHERE...
Posted by zengrifter on 12-Jan-2003 16:41:39 (#2544)

... is the 6D Bombshell post? zg

Repost: 6D Bombshell:
Posted by T-Hopper on 12-Jan-2003 18:23:57 (#2550)

..Playing Strategy Is Key

[Note: My simulator now has even more powerful systems for both betting and playing than the T-H Expert/Dirty 32 combined system. I plan to update this material and make it a permanent part of my web site]

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.

You can refer anyone
Posted by T-Hopper on 12-Jan-2003 18:32:11 (#2552)

who says "it doesn't matter what system you use" to this post. If they still disagree, send 'em to me!

Can you roughly quantify...
Posted by zengrifter on 12-Jan-2003 19:09:12 (#2554)

...for us the approximate relative extra gain that 60 i#s will garner versus 20 in a 6D decent pene game? 20%? zg

Roughly quantified...
Posted by Adam N. Subtractum on 12-Jan-2003 20:52:12 (#2558)

zg, the following is an excerpt from a post by chem nerd at BJMath.com, in which he presents his final analysis (for 6D) after a few threads of discussion.
I believe T-hop participated in these threads as well, and perhaps he will comment more on the subject.

-60 Hi-Lo Indices-

--------------------------------------------

Game: 6D, S17, 75% pen, Hi-Lo (indices from Wong's PBJ)
Betting scheme: 1 at TC<=1, 2 at TC 2, 4 at TC 3, 6 at TC 4, 2 hands of 6 at TC 5.

play dev_index_%gain_cum_rel
insurance 3 0.114 0.114 33.4
16 v. 10 0 0.041 0.155 45.3
15 v. 10 4 0.019 0.174 51.0
12 v. 4 0 0.018 0.192 56.3
12 v. 3 2 0.015 0.207 60.6
11 v. A 1 0.012 0.219 64.2
13 v. 2 0 0.012 0.231 67.7
10 v. 10 4 0.008 0.239 69.9
12 v. 5 -1 0.007 0.246 72.0
12 v. 2 3 0.007 0.253 74.0
16 v. A 8 0.006 0.259 75.8
10 v. A 4 0.006 0.264 77.4
9 v. 2 1 0.005 0.270 79.0
13 v. 3 -1 0.005 0.275 80.4
9 v. 3 0 0.004 0.278 81.5
soft 19 v. 6 1 0.004 0.282 82.6
16 v. 9 5 0.004 0.285 83.6
9 v. 7 3 0.003 0.289 84.6
15 v. A 10 0.003 0.292 85.5
8 v. 6 1 0.003 0.295 86.3
13 v. 4 -3 0.002 0.297 87.0
12 v. 6 0 0.002 0.300 87.7
10 v. 9 -1 0.002 0.302 88.4
soft 19 v. 5 1 0.002 0.304 89.0
8 v. 5 3 0.002 0.306 89.5
14 v. 2 -3 0.002 0.308 90.1
soft 20 v. 6 4 0.002 0.309 90.6
soft 13 v. 5 0 0.002 0.311 91.0
16 v. 8 7 0.001 0.312 91.4
6-6 v. 3 0 0.001 0.314 91.8
soft 19 v. 4 3 0.001 0.315 92.2
13 v. 5 -4 0.001 0.316 92.6
9 v. 4 -2 0.001 0.317 92.9
soft 18 v. 2 0 0.001 0.318 93.2
soft 20 v. 5 5 0.001 0.319 93.6
14 v. 3 -4 0.001 0.321 93.9
15 v. 9 8 0.001 0.322 94.2
soft 14 v. 5 -1 0.001 0.322 94.4
3-3 v. 4 0 0.001 0.323 94.7
11 v. 10 -4 0.001 0.324 95.0
15 v. 2 -5 0.001 0.325 95.2
soft 15 v. 4 0 0.001 0.326 95.4
6-6 v. 2 2 0.001 0.327 95.6
soft 13 v. 4 3 0.001 0.327 95.8
17 v. A -6 0.001 0.328 96.0
8 v. 4 5 0.001 0.329 96.2
14 v. 4 -6 0.001 0.329 96.4
16 v. 7 9 0.001 0.330 96.6
soft 14 v. 4 1 0.001 0.330 96.7
9 v. 5 -4 0.001 0.331 96.9
9-9 v. 2 0 0.000 0.331 97.0
soft 19 v. 3 5 0.000 0.332 97.2
soft 20 v. 4 6 0.000 0.332 97.3
15 v. 3 -6 0.000 0.333 97.5
9 v. 8 7 0.000 0.333 97.6
10 v. 8 -4 0.000 0.334 97.7
soft 17 v. 2 1 0.000 0.334 97.9
15 v. 8 10 0.000 0.335 98.0
14 v. 5 -7 0.000 0.335 98.1
soft 13 v. 6 -1 0.000 0.335 98.2

Re: quantify
Posted by BradRod on 13-Jan-2003 08:51:05 (#2559)

play dev_index_%gain_cum_rel

what are cum and rel ?

cumulative & relative *NM*
Posted by Adam N. Subtractum on 13-Jan-2003 08:58:11 (#2560)

Re: cum. and rel.
Posted by BradRod on 13-Jan-2003 10:57:50 (#2568)

What do these describe ?

Do You Split Tens?
Posted by SammyBoy on 13-Jan-2003 09:18:10 (#2561)

This is a move that I have never made. Maybe in the right situation I would try it, but when the count calls for it I grit my teeth and stand pat. My feelings are that I'm scared to draw any unneccessary attention towards my play, from either the dealer, other players or the pit critters. What do you do?

Re: Do You Split Tens?
Posted by Cyrano on 13-Jan-2003 09:26:20 (#2562)

I've done it once (in 3 months' of play). The count was pretty high in a 2-D game--9 (UBZ count), with more than 2/3's of a deck dealt. The dealer had a 5 out. The correct strategy was to stand in H17 games. This was one, but I just wanted to mix it up a little and thought it couldn't hurt. I got a 9 and another 10 (which I didn't split). The dealer received a 7, and busted with a 10. Seldom, it's right to split 10's. If you never split 10's, I don't think you'd lose much in winnings.

Quite Frequently
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 13-Jan-2003 09:29:23 (#2563)

With a minimum bet out, and several slow playing obnoxious ploppies at the table, I split and re-split 10s every time.

90% effective at getting heads-up play for the next few shuffles.

Damn counter~
Posted by Cyrano on 13-Jan-2003 09:32:44 (#2564)

So THAT was you who screwed up the flow of the cards for me!!! :-P

LOL: *NM*
Posted by BradRod on 13-Jan-2003 11:00:35 (#2569)

The best quote I've heard...
Posted by Adam N. Subtractum on 13-Jan-2003 09:38:59 (#2565)

...on the subject:

"The only people who split tens are idiots...and idiot savants."

Though splitting tens is a very valuable strategy deviation, this is almost always negated by the heat it generates. Even if a PC isn't near you when you make the play, the complaints and groaning of ploppies will assuredly call attention to your action. This play is best left for the better "actors", who are known to the pit as "wild" or "crazy" gamblers. I should point out that there are some places where ploppies do split tens more than usual, and this would obviously allow you to blend in much easier. All in all, its probably best avoided. Comfort yourself with the fact that splitting tens increases variance, which would offset some of the ev gain anyway.

ANS

Re: what's the loss?
Posted by Todd on 13-Jan-2003 11:02:18 (#2570)

Since I dont split tens I was wanting to know the ev that is lost by not splitting. I use hi-lo (4tc or better to split).

thank you.

Re: Do You Split Tens?
Posted by The Mayor on 13-Jan-2003 10:52:08 (#2567)

I don't do it except if I am playing heads up in a heat free environment (not very often).

Of Splitting 10s and Flipping Coins
Posted by zengrifter on 13-Jan-2003 14:04:42 (#2573)

Of Splitting 10s and Flipping Coins

I�m an enthusiastic 10s-splitter, though I fancy that my 10s get split at a higher count typically than the strict Ev-based indices suggest, thus a bit more RA (risk-averse)� and as the #splits increases, my index rises higher into RA territory.

As ADM has suggested, I also establish myself early-on as a 10-splitter by splitting and re-splitting 10s incorrectly with small bets out, even against a 3 or a 7 perhaps - and, yes it is an excellent way to clear the table of excess players � and if I�m �lucky enough� to �cause� the loss of others� bets due to the split(s) I laugh without mercy at the other�s loss and announce that �it will work better next time! Now, hurry up and deal some more 10s!� (the others get the message)

As some have heard me fond of saying, if a ploppy invades my table I will often immediately ask them in mock surveyesque fashion �would you play at the same table as some crazy yahoo who splits 10s?� More times than not they will passionately reply �NO!� to which I turn to the dealer and say �hurry up Sally, deal me some 10s!�

Notwithstanding the above, I m also fond of getting another player at the table to split their 10s � usually a wild redneck or one of �the brothers� � I put up the other half (�partners�) - in which case the index need only be BELOW what even doubling on 10 would be.

�Magic Coin�

Flipping coins at the table is an additional flourish that, if done adroitly, can add to one�s �cover� of various plays including 10-splitting.

A beautiful example of this application occurred last November when I was playing at a 2D table with my ploppy-driver � she was at the table w/me because I had two LVA 3-1 BJ coups to play � the count was sky-high and she got 10s. I signaled her to split 10s and immediately the shift-boss was camped-leaning over 1st base and I said �WAIT!� He said �she should do it!� I said �oh no, arrgghh, ok� � she splits and gets a 7 and a 10 � SB says �split�em again, I think you�ll win!� I wanted to split BUT I hesitated for her and then said to her �lets flip a coin, heads we split again, ok?� � SB tells me to flip it on the felt "where we can all see it" (apparently he thought I might call it wrong on purpose) � Heads, we split again � another 10 �oh no!,� again the SB tells her to split, we flip, heads, split and catch a 9 and an Ace � SB says �doubledown I think you�ll win, flip the coin!� I put the coin away and borrowed a line from Robin Williams in Club Paradise - �I may be crazy but I�m not stupid� � we won and I thanked the SB for giving us the courage.

Flipping a coin at the table can be a good subterfuge � at the wide-area/coin-toss-zone, where it doesn�t matter which way you decide hit/stand, etc., noticeably going with the coin in almost superstitious fashion, visibly, suggests that there is no strategy, strictly random-decision making. If the flips are working it becomes the �magic-coin� and I may flip it for others as well.

With a noticeably large bet out, I can call the pitcritter over and have him flip the coin for hit/stand/double, etc. � or, even for occasional bet-sizing where there�s a close call � heads we let it ride, etc.

If the coin-toss is missing, I can announce that the coin is now (borrowing from Gen. Custer in �Little Big Man�) �a perfect reverse barometer� and do the opposite of what the coin says, thus confusing everybody.

More on �intuitive-process� decision-making when in the �wide-area-zone� (WAZ) �

In one of the threads below, TH suggested that intuition in the WAZ should not be used unless one can demonstrate that its exceeding the results that would otherwise occur by random-guess� BUT I say that its ok to only achieve the random-guess result because it frees one from over-reliance on so-called �precise index#s � my logic being that THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN EXACT INDEX LINE OF DEMARCATION ANYWAY!

So... when you are in the WAZ be guided by the FORCE (or the coin, perhaps).

splitting 10's etc
Posted by BradRod on 13-Jan-2003 16:15:39 (#2574)

you mean we are supposed to have fun at this game ?

Re: Of Splitting 10s and Flipping Coins
Posted by T-Hopper on 13-Jan-2003 20:52:20 (#2581)

In one of the threads below, TH suggested that intuition in the WAZ should not be used unless one can demonstrate that its exceeding the results that would otherwise occur by random-guess�

The point I was really trying to make is that a good practice program should be able to measure the effect of such techniques. It's not good enough for the program to know the count; it should know the exact EV for every possible play. I believe Eric Farmer's practice program probably has this capability.

Re: Of Splitting 10s and Flipping Coins
Posted by zengrifter on 13-Jan-2003 22:16:12 (#2584)

I stand corrected - this would make for a potentially powerful practice and and verification simulator. Is Eric Farmer by chance related to Eudemonicn Pie's Doyne Farmer? zg

5 + 5, Coolest Man Alive.....
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 14-Jan-2003 08:47:09 (#2593)

There is an exact index for each play, but since that number is based upon the overall effect of + or - cards and not each card individually, there is room for this exact point to move up or down. RA makes sure you are not guessing. And in the grand scheme of things, I'm sure you have made mistakes playing at the table like hitting a hand or doubling a hand that "the book" tells you not to and pulled off a winner by chance. We have the edge, but luck, or variance as it is technically called, will have its way with you.

Re: 5 + 5, Coolest Man Alive.....NO
Posted by zengrifter on 14-Jan-2003 11:12:03 (#2599)

NO, I disagree - there is NOT a true-precice-exact index# for every play without taking into account the penetration of the particular game, not to mention #decks, rule-subset, hand composition, etc. ALL INDEX#s are an approximation and whether one hits or stands within a couple of integers makes NO real word difference. zg

Re: 5 + 5, Coolest Man Alive.....YES, oh Yes!
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 14-Jan-2003 12:38:54 (#2602)

We are both right. We don't know where that point is with our simplified counting systems, but it DOES exist. RA is like jumping across a river by an extra foot or two, rather than landing with your heel wet and your toes dry.

Apples and oranges, my man...
Posted by zengrifter on 15-Jan-2003 01:23:47 (#2627)

... or does Christians and Buddhists ring truer? zg

also...
Posted by Adam N. Subtractum on 14-Jan-2003 17:02:11 (#2615)

...depending on where you are (how deep) in deck/pack affects the indice.

Exactly
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 15-Jan-2003 08:49:32 (#2630)

Like where you are jumping across the river.

'Don't push the river' *NM*
Posted by zengrifter on 15-Jan-2003 13:13:04 (#2639)

Tunica Trip Report (for entertainment only)!
Posted by phantom007 on 13-Jan-2003 18:23:14 (#2576)

Within the last week, I spent 3 days in Tunica, MS. I netted $1250. in BJ profits, $89. in Texas Hold-em profits, and $100. "cash-back" bonus, or $1438. for the trip. When I got home, I gave my wife $1,300.: That is our deal, she gets my profits, and then does not gripe (too much) about my absences for investment trips. OK, $138. for 3 days work...about the same as McDonald's.

The trip starts off as they all do. While at work, I called my favorite casino/hotel, GoldStrike, for reservations. I LOVE the GS...great restaurants, many open 24 hours, great buffet, great cafe, great gourmet, decent pizza, etc., etc. Weekdays, GS usually has 2 $10. SD and DD games available, and when times are hard, about 15 $5. 6D's for one's playing pleasure. And did I mention 24-hour Room Service? GS is even better for me, in that "I learned to play there", thus, as a LTL (Long-Term Loser), am fully, and I mean, FULLY comp'd.

GS was booked! But I have a "VIP" Card! Does not matter, the World Series of Poker (WSOP) playoffs are in full swing, and there are quite simply no rooms to be had.

No problem. I get to Tunica about once a month. I usually stay at GS, but I also try to spread my business "around". So I called Horseshoe (next door to GS)..."No Room at the INN"...FxxxKing WSOP.

Again, No problem. Once or twice a year, I stay (and play) at Fitzgerald's...small casino, small hotel, GREAT Restaurants, only 2D and 6D BJ, AND DEALER's KEEP THEIR OWN TIPS! Fellow CC's should know that this destination has, at least, potential..."No Room at the INN"...FxxxKing WSOP.

Again, No problem. Sheraton is right next to GS and Horseshoe...by now I was out of phone #'s, so I hit the internet. My query to Sheraton informed me that they also were full for the desired dates (FxxxKing WSOP), but that a room was available in another PPE Property (Grand). And so, I checked in to the Grand.
As I made my reservation via Credit Card, I did note that the "little padlock symbol" was absent in the right lower corner of my viewing screen, but I did not worry, because this was a reputible organization.

In doing same, I was informed that via my registration, I could now view info. on 29 PPE properties world-wide...does this mean that if I should be barred at a PPE property, that I will now be barred from 29 world-wide?

After my night-shift ended, I drove the 4-hour drive to Tunica. When I checked into the Grand, the Credit Card that I had used to make the reservation was "Declined". My protests that "it was good 8 hours ago" had no weight...fortunately, I had other CC's to chose from in order to cover my expenses.

When I got to my room, very nice by all standards, this CC issue had me "Pissed off". So I called my CC company. I was informed that some outfit called "Planet Telecom" was making multiple charges against my CC. I told them that I had not authorized these charges. They told me to contact the "fraudulent biller" and get them to take the charges off! I spent close to an hour trying to get this straightened out, but to no avail.

I was PISSED! I was VERY PISSED! I needed a drink, or several! I opened up the Grand Room Service menu, for the purpose of ordering several of their $4.50 Beers....it was 12:05pm...weekdays, Grand's Room Service closes from noon to 5pm.

DAMN!

I went to the Giftshop in the lobby, and purchased #4 Amstel Lights...at $2. each, a great bargain! Back to my room, twist off the cap, OUCH!

DAMN! They ain't twist-offs!

Metal framework on the headboard (why do they call it a "headboard"?)...beer is now open!

And I need to Shit, and I mean, I need to shit bad! So I did. As part of my New Year's Resolution, I went on a high fiber diet...same is medically likely to result in small but frequent BM's...my ass does not read the literature...I had a "4-pounder" with laterally squirting liquid, and used nearly a whole roll of TP for the purpose of Anal Cleansing!

And I PLUGGED the toilet! While "my cup does not runneth over", my bowl sure does.

Compliments to the Grand, and their plumber...response time, less than 5 minutes. I tipped the guy $5. for his trouble.

Got some sleep, then went to the Casino. In Session #1, spent 5 hours straight at a DD table, betting $10. in Negative Decks, $20. on 2 hands in (+) decks, and $40. in two hands in (++) decks. Won $600.

Then went to Grand's Poker Room and won $88. from their professioals!

Had to work (in the geographic area) the following day, then revisited Grand for 5 straight hours on SD, same parameters as above. Won $650.

In general, penetration was 55% for both SD and DD...did NOT vary by dealer, thus I suspect was set "by the house".

Curious, either a Big Compliment, and/or a Big Warning, in that towards the end of my second 5-hour session, the Dealer told me: "You are an Excellent Money Manager!". When I asked what she meant, she said: "You are the type that could hurt a casino, big-time!" When the Dealer's changed, she got the PC's attention, pointed to me, and said, "He is an Excellent Money Manager".

He did not (seem) to have a clue. She said again, "He is an excellent money manager!" He still did not (seem) to have a clue, so she walked off, and I cashed in, and went back to my room to take one last SHIT!

And when I got home, and tried to settle this CC situation, they decided to cancel my Card, and re-issue another, once this issue of Fraudulent Billing is settled.

More information than I need 8-)
Posted by The Mayor on 13-Jan-2003 18:33:01 (#2577)

But a nice report, full of the kind of stuff that really happens on trips -- a good bathroom can be hard to find.

Congrats on the win!

--Mayor

Re: Tunica Trip Report (for entertainment only)!
Posted by SammyBoy on 14-Jan-2003 09:37:43 (#2595)

I've been to Tunica twice, the first time I played the GoldStrike and enjoyed it. The second time was on a weekend and it was packed tighter than a... well, the place was so full you could barely walk around. Lots of hotties strutting around too. Anyway, all the SD and DD tables were $25 minimums. Too rich for me.

Thanks for the report. A little too detailed, but enjoyed it anyway. Thanks.

Question for T-Hopper
Posted by joe_r_black on 13-Jan-2003 22:38:14 (#2585)

In your free ebook it states the TH Basic performs 30% better than KO Core or High Low. While most systems use generic basic strategy and then have indices for basic strategy departures, you seem to have combined the two to create a modified basic strategy that utilizes the higher betting units at the departure points and incorporates that into the modified basic strategy.

How does your TH Basic system compare to HighLow with the Catch 22 or with say 50 High Low indices?

How does it compare to Zen with the Catch 22 and with 50 indices?

Re: Question for T-Hopper
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 14-Jan-2003 09:14:33 (#2594)

I asked a similar question at the CCC:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/blackjackcardcounterscafe/message/17704

RM:Great news! Please tell us how it stacks up against already
available systems like Hi Low, Zen, Hi Opt II, etc."

> That's what http://www.bjrnet.com/thop is for.

RM:Yes, but all I see is "rating." What are you using to rate the
systems with? What is the PE and BE of each system. I think it
might be a good idea to show how they stack up against each other
using the standard methods of comparisions already being used.

> Extensive simulation results and the risk vs. return using optimal
bets.

> What is the PE and BE of each system.

PE and BC(not BE) measure the potential of each set of possible
point count values, not the real-world performace of a complete
system. The T-H point count values have a theoretical BC of .98,
and PE .56 (.70 with ace side count). I don't have the Bushido
numbers handy, but it is very similar to UBZ (.97/.63).

> I think it
> might be a good idea to show how they stack up against each other
> using the standard methods of comparisions already being used.

ROI is equivalent to SCORE, DI, and N0. In fact, a page of
conversion charts between these measures is given in the Advanced
section of each series. The system comparison rating is calculated
as System ROI/T-H ROI * 100 for each game. I grouped systems for
comparison purposes according to the following levels:

Basic: Running count for betting and insurance only
Intermediate: Running count for playing and betting, partial set of
indices (usually 16-24)
Advanced: True count for playing and betting, full set of indices
Expert: True count with one side count

RM:Super! Your different approach should be well received by newer
players, and possibly frowned upon by "The Old Boys" network, which
means you made the grade! Congratzi......

Are YOU convinced?? smile

Re: Question for T-Hopper
Posted by T-Hopper on 14-Jan-2003 10:42:20 (#2596)

In your free ebook it states the TH Basic performs 30% better than KO Core or High Low. While most systems use generic basic strategy and then have indices for basic strategy departures, you seem to have combined the two to create a modified basic strategy that utilizes the higher betting units at the departure points and incorporates that into the modified basic strategy.

Yes, I call it a "dollar-weighted" strategy. Normal BS is unweughted, leading to poor results for a card counter.

How does your TH Basic system compare to HighLow with the Catch 22 or with say 50 High Low indices?
How does it compare to Zen with the Catch 22 and with 50 indices?

I didn't create any new subsets of systems for my comparisons. I used entire systems exactly as published. You can see how High-Low Lite Sweet 16 from Blackbelt in Blackjack compares to T-H/Bushido Intermediate at http:/www.bjrnet.com/thop/intsystems.htm , and how the complete Zen compares to T-H and Bushido Advanced at http://www.advsystems.htm . If you want to compare systems of different levels, you can either eyeball the scale from my 3D System Charts, or buy the books and have the EV, SD, and ROI available for any game or spread you might choose.

If I sell enough books, there will be an interactive CD-ROM version later that will include the System Reports for other counts. For now, I've gone out of my way to make it easy for anyone else to reproduce my results.

How about a SCORE comparision? *NM*
Posted by koko on 14-Jan-2003 13:33:17 (#2608)

The theory of Bj
Posted by tweety on 14-Jan-2003 07:32:10 (#2592)

Does anyone know how it gets the values for expectation on page22 of the theory of BJ(eg.+1, -0.5)? Does it make up the no.s?

Thanks
Tweety

Re: The theory of Bj
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 14-Jan-2003 12:40:07 (#2603)

The chart is based on a set of 5 cards. [5,6,8,9,T]
So playing basic strategy with the hands and dealer upcard given, just exhaust all the hits/stands possible with the remaining 2 cards. Add up all the wins/losses, divide by the number of hands played, and you get the expectation.

About the only thing made up in "Theory of Blackjack" is Griffin teaching the elephant the correct way to play a blackjack (Sue, the elephant in question, already knew how).

11 vs 10 Index?
Posted by SammyBoy on 14-Jan-2003 10:45:28 (#2597)

For single deck? I usually don't double in a negative count. What is the actual index? Thanks.

Re: 11 vs 10 Index? CLICK. ON 'INDICES' (left) *NM*
Posted by zengrifter on 14-Jan-2003 11:32:54 (#2600)

Player 11 VS Dealer 10 is not listed. *NM*
Posted by SammyBoy on 14-Jan-2003 11:42:48 (#2601)

Try -4.
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 14-Jan-2003 12:45:35 (#2604)

Anything less than -4 (and 0 is way less) and you are leaving money on the table. Basic strategy of always doubling will make you more than only doubling in positive counts on this play. So just hit it in the high negative counts only.

Wow, That's Low!
Posted by SammyBoy on 14-Jan-2003 13:18:15 (#2605)

Thanks Abe! I'll make the neccessary adjustment.

11 vs 9 is the same, so now you know 1 more. *NM*
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 14-Jan-2003 13:25:16 (#2606)

Necessary adjustment
Posted by The Mayor on 14-Jan-2003 13:27:16 (#2607)

Go out and buy Wong's PBJ and learn a bunch of indices.

But, if you have to choose, also choose indices that have + values to learn, since they will be critical when you have big bets out. Who cares about a -4 index with a min bet out? It has almost no value.

I learned it.
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 14-Jan-2003 13:42:36 (#2609)

Simply because the double down on 11 when looking at a dealer's 10 up card was kind of a pet peeve. Much like the ploppie who doesn't like to split 8s because it involves putting up additional money, it just ticked me off to double a bet (even a small bet) in a highly negative count when I knew I wasn't going to get the cards.

You are right however. Positive indices are much more valuable than Negative ones. And indices for frequent hands (like 16 and 12) are much better than hands like A,A vs A.

Soft 18 vs A is another one of my pet peeves. Stand at +1.

Re: Necessary adjustment
Posted by SammyBoy on 14-Jan-2003 13:51:57 (#2610)

At one time I owned Wong's PBJ, before I knew how to count. At the time counting seemed so complicated that I thought I'd never learn to do it. I got so frustrated after several big losing sessions as a BS ploppy, that I swore off all gambling. I gave or threw away all of my gambling books. About six months later I went back to playing blackjack, and still could not win. This time it just made me more determined to learn how to play a winning game. So I began reading online and practicing everyday, until it became almost second nature. Now I'm practicing with the flash cards to learn the indices. I've also noticed that even though I'm playing often in casinos or playing with SAGE blackjack on the computer, I still need to do the counting drills with actual cards to keep me sharp. Wong's PBJ is the only book I really regret getting rid of. I will buy another copy this week.

I've become much more disciplined about my gambling since becoming a counter. I've gone into many casinos and then walked right back out because there were no decent games. Two years ago I couldn't do that because it was more about the action than it was about making money. I can honestly say that the day I can no longer find a good game of BJ is the day I no longer visit casinos. OK, maybe that's too strong of a statement. That's probably the day I start playing poker instead. :-)

This one IS worth learning
Posted by T-Hopper on 14-Jan-2003 15:34:25 (#2611)

First of all, the dealer will have a 10 up 4x as often as any other card. Second, you are lowering risk by not doubling, rather than increasing risk by finding another hand to double on. Finally, the value of this double plummets as the count drops further below -4.

Another important risk-reducing index to learn is when NOT to split 8,8 vs. 10 at high counts.

...unless you only play shoes *NM*
Posted by T-Hopper on 14-Jan-2003 15:39:01 (#2612)

Excellent points...
Posted by Adam N. Subtractum on 14-Jan-2003 17:14:52 (#2617)

The true effect of play deviations like 11 v T, 8/8 v T, and s18 v A often goes overlooked. Along with the ever so slight increases in ev, there is also the reduction of variance that needs to be factored in when determining the value of plays like these.

ANS

# for not splitting 8's?
Posted by Todd on 14-Jan-2003 18:52:34 (#2621)

In a shoe game, is it about 7 or 8?

Do you (or anybody) here, know what the loss in ev is for not splitting tens against 5 and 6 when at a tc of 5 and 4? I would think this should be an important question for those who care about ev losses.

thanks.

Re: # for not splitting 8's?
Posted by Learning to count on 14-Jan-2003 21:35:52 (#2625)

"In a shoe game, is it about 7 or 8?"

I looked up in PBJ, Wong, page 48:h17;no das; 88 split 2-9, 10/6* (* reverse the meaning. Split only if the count per deck is less than the number in the table, split id ealer has ace. If DAS allowed then 10/8*. Same for s17 game.

"Do you (or anybody) here, know what the loss in ev is for not splitting tens against 5 and 6 when at a tc of 5 and 4? I would think this should be an important question for those who care about ev losses.

thanks."

Per Schlesinger page 191 in BJA I "refusing to split tens costs about 0.05-0.10 units per hour." Sorry this is best I can do without staying up all night. Hope this helps.

R-A 8/8 v T........ +4 *NM*
Posted by Adam N. Subtractum on 15-Jan-2003 18:36:25 (#2642)

DAS can make a difference *NM*
Posted by T-Hopper on 16-Jan-2003 10:47:33 (#2651)

At Neggy 4
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 14-Jan-2003 17:16:32 (#2618)

That's why it isn't in the Ill 18. You won't find any of my $$ on the table, unless we are playing single or double decky.

New Page: "The Best"
Posted by The Mayor on 14-Jan-2003 17:12:15 (#2616)

I have started a new page on this site, consisting of the best posts. I will be the sole judge of what is put on that page, but if you want to suggest a post, please do! I chose a starting 8 already.

--Mayor

3 of 8
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 14-Jan-2003 17:22:54 (#2619)

I will call these wonderful guys "3 of 8" Not as hot as 7 of 9 is, but heck, they're just counters! Congratz dudes! You've been crowned by the Mayor!

Re: New Page: "The Best"
Posted by Learning to count on 14-Jan-2003 19:25:13 (#2622)

I know I will get razzed for this but I would like to nominate the following:

"Of Splitting 10s and Flipping Coins

Posted By: zengrifter
Date: 1/13/03 12:04:42 p.m.

Of Splitting 10s and Flipping Coins

�Magic Coin�

Flipping coins at the table is an additional flourish that, if done adroitly, can add to one�s �cover� of various plays including 10-splitting.

More on �intuitive-process� decision-making when in the �wide-area-zone� (WAZ) �

So... when you are in the WAZ be guided by the FORCE (or the coin, perhaps).

zg"

I nominated this post because it is an excellent example of what this site is about: "Learning from each other and learning from the Sensei's of blackjack and card counter.com."

Zengrifters application of his "loony" style of play is exactly what we should be adding to our play..."FUN". Time after time I spot the profile card counter; cold, focussed, concentrated effort. Then you watch the bet spread up with the count and NO DONT SPLIT DOSE TENS BROTHA! This is what we need here more ideas more creativity. I like to clown around too. My goofyness has a determined objective, to win, and take thier minds off my successes.

ZG has not only showed us a technique but he added when, how and why he does split. Though unorthodox it works. Some times ZG gets above my altitude but all in all he teaches. Splitting tens is a big tell for the eye and the PC. This is a counter or a goofball ploppy. ZG one of these days I want to play with you and your liberterian independent streak. Your still a grouch though...Merry Christmas!!! LTC

gracias amigo!
Posted by zengrifter on 14-Jan-2003 20:24:30 (#2623)

I was hoping to get more challenges to this unconventional example! zg

Re: gracias amigo!
Posted by Learning to count on 14-Jan-2003 21:11:05 (#2624)

De Nada Hombre de nada. Once I watched a counter play so cold and determined that even the dealer said "its so obvious". I saw the same counter six months later playing the extreme drunk and recklace gambler. This time the only thing that was said was "hey buddy you've had enough to drink". All the while he was stuffing green chips in his pocket. He even made $100 dollar cold cash plays and won and got away with it. Interesting approach but he was obnoxious.

Thank you very much!
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 15-Jan-2003 10:15:56 (#2632)

I feel very honored for having my 'enemy' posts included in your selection.

I would also like to point out the post 'Re: Know the Enemy II', not because I want another post on your 'best' page, but because I also feel this post contains some good cover advice.

PS -- You going to be in Vegas over Superbowl Weekend?

Thanks Mayor...
Posted by Adam N. Subtractum on 15-Jan-2003 19:41:15 (#2643)

This is a great addition to the site, and I'm honored to have a post included.

ANS

Same goes for me *NM*
Posted by alienated on 15-Jan-2003 21:06:23 (#2647)

Is the Travel Channel trying to encourage counting
Posted by ace on 15-Jan-2003 12:29:28 (#2634)

(also posted on bj21.com)

I am a bit of a Vegas junkie so of course in between trips I love watching Vegas Week on the Travel Channel. So far in two of the shows, they have tried to paint counting in such a light that everyone should do it, and hey its legal! So if you are going to play blackjack, "learn how to count"

In a show titled something like "Top Ten Ways to Win in Vegas", "Learn How To Count Cards" was number TWO! I mean I am not agruing with the logic or the reasoning, but who are these shows aimed at? Not advantage players, in my opinion they are more aimed at Ma and Pa Ploppy who make a visit or two a year and miss being in Vegas. So this is the #2 suggestion you are giving them? In this show they went out of there way to point out that card counting is not against the law but that "casinos dont really like it."

In a show shown last night called "Las Vegas Quiz", there was a question regarding card counting in which the correct answer was, of course, that card counting is legal. Again, they state that casinos dont really like it and can refuse your service, but that it is not against the law. They even had the head of the GCB Enforcement Division on to say yeah its not against the law but casinos dont like it because its taking away their edge.

Is there a bad/good/any precedent being set here? I have watched these types of shows for years and NEVER have they given this much press to counting. Are they encouraging people who shouldnt be counting to try it? And is this a bad thing for APs?

Just looking to get some thoughts going on the recent publicity.

Same old story
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 15-Jan-2003 12:45:31 (#2635)

Blackjack has been touted as a beatable game ever since Edward O. Thorp published "Beat the Dealer" in 1962.

Why do you think blackjack surpassed craps as the most popular table game? In the 40s and 50s, Craps was king.

The casinos telling Ma and Pa Ploppy that blackjack can be beat by counting, and then offering single deck with bad payoffs, CSMs, multideck games with poor penetration and rules, is just good business.

Re: Is the Travel Channel trying to encourage coun
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 15-Jan-2003 12:48:50 (#2636)

Media hype, gets people excited, and no, it is not good for real counters.

Re: Is the Travel Channel trying to encourage coun
Posted by ZOD on 15-Jan-2003 19:56:09 (#2644)

I think media hype from "The Vegas Channel" or "Bringing Down the House" is good for the game. More excitement means more players and more players means the house is happier. I do my best work when the house is happy to see me...

ZOD

Re: Is the Travel Channel trying to encourage coun
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 16-Jan-2003 13:00:08 (#2653)

They are only happy to see me for about 15 minutes....grin. You could be right. Thorp did the most damage to the game. Do you think it will get worse or better with the new flood of losers? I mean, tables will be crowded, even good games will get swamped. Ploppies don't know what you are doing when you split 10's at a table. In fact, they could start doing it and eating the count own to zippo by the time the dealer hits!! grin

Re: Is the Travel Channel trying to encourage coun
Posted by ZOD on 16-Jan-2003 18:33:02 (#2662)

Let everyone hype blackjack as a "beatable game". Saturday night I'm playing 6D at the Mirage. Three ploppies at the table who have just finished reading "Bring Down the House" take pity on the poor "drunk bastard" at third base (me) and proceed to spend the next hour and a half giving me conflicting advice as they part with their money. I spread $10 to $250 with nary a glance from the floor and took any advice that happened to be right. The ploppies were happy just betting on a beatable game. The house was happy because the ploppies were losing money even faster than I could win it. And I was happy (of course) to stagger away from the table with an extra grand in my pocket...

ZOD

I Hear That!
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 16-Jan-2003 18:41:26 (#2663)

It is a laugh to watch people that know just enough to think they can beat the game at work. Now were you really drunk or fakin' it? grin I like my free toddies at the table. In fact I make sure I suck back enough juice to cover my tips to the waitress and the dealer, and then ask for my free din din to help sober me up! ;>

Re: Is the Travel Channel trying to encourage coun
Posted by Cyrano on 15-Jan-2003 13:01:27 (#2637)

--what was number 1?

In a show titled something like "Top Ten Ways to Win in Vegas", "Learn How To Count Cards" was number TWO!

Re: Is the Travel Channel trying to encourage coun
Posted by ace on 15-Jan-2003 13:08:18 (#2638)

Dont play with money you cant afford to lose.

Re: Is the Travel Channel trying to encourage coun
Posted by Learning to count on 15-Jan-2003 15:26:09 (#2640)

The vegas channel is fun. I just wish they would stop using old film to make new shows. I did happen to see some of my favorite dealers in the last few days.

A lot of the shows on how to play/win/lose in vegas are all hype. The best two are the vegas challenge and suckers bet. In Vegas Challenge the hot asian chick one big at Back A Rat...and the book store historian dude lost every thing at Blackjack. Well we know his story from last years nuclear fallout over him and PPE. Thats another story.

Now sucker bet was great...Anthony Curtis Vs MAX (lose a buck for every ten bucks in free stuff)Rubin. They went at it at craps, BJ, roulette, slots, vid poker etc. It was billed as intelligent playing versus let it all hang out ploppyism. The Ploppy won $75 over $62.50. These shows are fantasy and definitely make our world look simple. I do love the photography. Vegas is a pretty town.

The show on how they built Vegas was great. So thats how that ship sinks! I love "two for vegas" too. I laugh every time I see those Elvis reverends marry off that days contestants. My cousin got married there a year ago and we had a family reunion to celebrate it. Better her than me! I cant wait for thier reunion! All in all the vegas channel is harmless unless you buy into the meirda del toro!

Risk Aversion
Posted by Learning to count on 15-Jan-2003 16:02:31 (#2641)

Could someone please discuss/explain in english the theory behind Risk Aversion. I am starting that section in BJAII. In english or some tips to understand this would be helpful as I study this. Thanks. Risk Aversion page 311-316, 328-329. BJAII. Thanks! LTC

Re: Risk Aversion
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 16-Jan-2003 12:53:22 (#2652)

Simply put, you avoid risky plays (ie double your bet for pennies) until they are worth taking the risk for. The EXACT indice # is say +3. At that point after playing 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 hands you will be ahead by five freakin cents. By wating until the TC is +4, you will be ahead by a full dollar! grin It is also easier to remember index #'s if they are all +2 +4 +6 +8 or -2 -4 etc RA works the other way around on the neggy side. -3 you go RA to -4, but with small bets as the Mayor suggests, min bet out, just keep couting and watchin those flashy waitresses shakin it.

SHAKE YO ASS
WATCH YO CARDS
DANGER!!

(at home pounding casinos, sorry, got carried away!)

Re: Risk Aversion DRUGGED
Posted by zengrifter on 16-Jan-2003 14:57:20 (#2656)

"...just keep couting and watchin those flashy waitresses shakin it.
SHAKE YO ASS
WATCH YO CARDS
DANGER!!
(at home pounding casinos, sorry, got carried away!) "
---------------------------

See LTC, gambling IS A DRUG! zg

Damn Straight!
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 16-Jan-2003 16:07:08 (#2657)

I'm so high...in fact, I'm $350US higher than I was when I wrote that first bling bling! Don't take much to make me happy, so you may think I'm overdosin', but I come from the factory like this.

Risk Aversion, eCasino Subversion
Takin the Cake, Right Out the Gate
Play by the Rules, Dis off them Fools
Put it all Together, No one does it Better
Pump and McGrind, Time after Time
You and me, and my Bobby Mac Gee

(Higher than Janice Joplin, without gettin' dead)

"I stand right next to a mountain".....na, I'll leave that til tomorrow. I can play all of those tunes on my Strat with my teeth! ;>

Re: Risk Aversion DRUGGED
Posted by Learning to count on 16-Jan-2003 20:00:28 (#2668)

Well I will agree he is a jovial fellow and he is a canuk so I guess I will excuse his eccentricities. Your right about the addiction part...degenerite gamblers all of us.

Re: Risk Aversion
Posted by zengrifter on 16-Jan-2003 14:49:39 (#2655)

I have been asking for a simple-quantified 'universal RA adjustment' - 6-10 i#s shift to RA - rule of thumb (ie, 10v10 increase index by 70%, etc.) - perhaps someone here will take a stab at it, they are certainly easy enough to safely guess at it. zg

Re: Risk Aversion
Posted by V-man on 17-Jan-2003 08:07:15 (#2679)

My understanding of RA is like this:
The traditional way of caculating indices are based on EV alone. Play like 10 vs dealer's 10, if you double down when TC is +4 or more, you stand a better EV but at the same time, your risk is larger. If you can play a trillion hands throughout your entire life than in the long, very long long run, only EV is concerned, but no one will play that many hands, hence EV should not be the only basis, obviously risk must be accounted for. RA indices account for EV and risk, just like the Sharp ratio. Myself, I like the RA indices, even though playing with RA reduces my EV, but my SD is also smaller.

Re: Risk Aversion ONLY 10...
Posted by zengrifter on 18-Jan-2003 01:07:44 (#2684)

... or so iindex#s need to be adjusted - 1 index (10v10) garners over 1/2 of the available RA-adjusted gain. So, someone please QUANTIFY THE PRIMARY index-adjustments for RA, please. zg

Stanford Wong on the Travel Channel
Posted by The Mayor on 15-Jan-2003 20:38:45 (#2645)

I just saw Stanford on TV, in the episode "The top 10 casinos in Vegas." He was explaining why the single deck game at the Horseshoe was a good one.

Incredibly, his only disguise was a hat.

Way to go SW!

--Mayor

Re: Stanford Wong on the Travel Channel
Posted by Learning to count on 15-Jan-2003 20:46:36 (#2646)

He was on a few nights earlier and was talking about vid poker payouts and later about Counting with one of the KO BJ guys I think it was Vancura. Last time I was at the horseshoe the single deck was sweaty and shallow.

HS 1D sucks
Posted by zengrifter on 16-Jan-2003 00:14:21 (#2648)

"I just saw Stanford on TV, in the episode "The top 10 casinos in Vegas." He was explaining why the single deck game at the Horseshoe was a good one."
---------------------------

How did he justify HS 1D as a good game? (The best game at HS currently are the two 2D games with 80+% pene. zg

Re: HS 1D sucks
Posted by Felix Rue-de-Guerre on 16-Jan-2003 16:08:22 (#2658)

He may have been presented in some twisted context. I didn't see the show with Mr. Wong, but the Travel channel has been showing some pretty screwball propaganda about card counting lately.

Building Up
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 16-Jan-2003 18:48:35 (#2664)

to go postal with the MIT crap they are working on in the back room.

I believe he was speaking of BS play... *NM*
Posted by Adam N. Subtractum on 16-Jan-2003 23:36:49 (#2672)

Re: HS 1D sucks
Posted by LVBear584 on 16-Jan-2003 23:54:50 (#2675)

"He was explaining why the single deck game at the Horseshoe was a good one."

It must have been an old taping.

Re: HS 1D sucks REAL OLD...
Posted by zengrifter on 17-Jan-2003 00:00:40 (#2677)

... for the uninformed - at a marginal 'Ro6' game like HS 1D, IF you can get 4rounds to 2hands, but only 5rounds to 1hand - play 2hands heads-up thru most counts +/-... this is how the best pene is achieved. Other DT 1D games such as LVC, Western, EC (days) currently are superior. zg

excellent point zg...
Posted by Adam N. Subtractum on 17-Jan-2003 01:56:45 (#2678)

...4 to 2 is clearly superior to 5 to 1, and I have a series of posts at BJ21 where I tried to explain this to a particularly dense poster. The posts showed a marked improvement in penetration, for both betting and playing purposes, as well as what kind of substantial effect these improvments could have on our edge. I'll try to re-post it up here as soon as I get a chance, I think some may find it of interest.

ANS

Re: HS 1D sucks
Posted by BlackJackHack on 20-Jan-2003 18:08:48 (#2706)

IMO, HS 1D is not that bad IF it is not crowded. I like to play green, and, unfortunately, most downtown 1D joints will call the national guard if you play green. HS is really the only 1D joint that will take green action pretty well. I've spread 1-6 (25-150) many times there without getting unusual heat.

The problem with HS 1D, in my opinion, is that it is typically too crowded. As anybody on this board knows, a crowded 1D game is totally useless.

Never played the 2D game at HS -- usually I don't look too closely at an H17 2D game with no DAS. But if it is 80% pen, it probably is worth a look.

Top 4 reasons for playing @ El Cortez & Western
Posted by zengrifter on 16-Jan-2003 01:15:33 (#2649)

El Cortez and Western, downtown Las Vegas, have been crticized by Don Schlesinger and others as "toilets" and "sweatshops" to be avoided - I enjoy visiting both whenever I am in town and playing low to moderate stakes. Here are my top 4 reasons for playing at these joints. zg

-------------------------------

Top 4 reasons for playing @ El Cortez & Western

4. The best 1D games in LV

3. The ambviance of an authentic '50s casino

2. Fine Tuner's highest SCORE rating.

And, the #1 reason for playing at the El Cortez & Western...

1. NEVER running into Don Schlesinger as he madly spins and hops, whirling dervish style, wonging from table to table constantly checking his watch, and chattering incessantly like a Lewis Carrol 'Looking Glass' character,
"I'm late, I'm late, I really must be going!"

Re: Top 4 reasons for playing @ El Cortez & Wester
Posted by Learning to count on 16-Jan-2003 05:49:52 (#2650)

Ha ha. Your right it does have a good game except for the penentration but sometimes face up or even two can get past the middle of the deck. The chicken fried steak is good in the cafe which is a blink of an eye away.

They do sweat though. The little Filipino pit critter gets nosy after they call out on a bet over $30 bucks. And if you start out in green they emediatley run for the phone.

MY best opportunities come in the morning and betting two hands to keep the bets broke up. The $35 dollar mark seems to be the catch all. It is hit or miss
at $30 if they will yell check play. So I go two hands of thirty.

The Western well that is a different story. Good game. They only sweat when you bet over twenty five bucks. They dont sweat the thought of you being a counter. They sweat wondering if they can pay you if you do win. The western is just that a "WESTERN". The John Wayne security/door man,, The drunk Mexican at the front one peso Blackjack table, A town drunk sleeping under a vid poker machine towards the back, the old half grey half bleached blonde haired waitress, and the lipstick stained coffee cup. I always look to see if a gunfight will start in the street. ZG versus DS....????? "Its not just a western its an adventure".

Hey ZG how agout answering my question on RA below!

Re: Top 4 reasons for playing @ El Cortez & Wester
Posted by reddevil on 16-Jan-2003 13:06:30 (#2654)

Dont forget at the Western
#5 The 60 year old cocktail waitresses that if you tip them will be the fastest servers in LV
#6 No one has name tags and most wont tell you their real names so you get to make names up. My personal favorite is the grave PC I call "Bones", though he does not seem to like that too much

On the note of penetration I was there on New Years playing with two other players at the table and twice in a 2 hour period a dealer had to reshuffel to fininsh out the hand. It was the first time i had seen this anywhere.

Red

Excellent Post!
Posted by The Mayor on 16-Jan-2003 16:41:35 (#2659)

And funny
and to the point

But then again, Don Schlesinger, when invited as guest of honor to the GC party for BJ21, had to have his room paid for by BJ21, because he did not have any comps in Vegas available.

Maybe he does play at the Western after all!

--Mayor

Re: Top 4 reasons for playing @ El Cortez & Wester
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 17-Jan-2003 08:46:42 (#2680)

The dealers at the El Cortez are often young Chinese girls straight off the boat, so they don't speak english. This means no idle dealer chit-chat slowing down the game.

A $1 tip is truely appreciated.

The Careful Kitty Cafe Breakfast Special can't be beat.

Renzey on Table Propositions
Posted by zengrifter on 16-Jan-2003 17:32:24 (#2661)

Wheeling and Dealing with Players at the Blackjack Table

by Fred Renzey

The player at third base had about $8000 in front of him with five $100 chips riding on his hand -- and he was the small bettor at the table!

Did I get your attention with that opening line? This happened in the High Limit room at one of the local casinos. I was just watching. Third Base was dealt a pair of 9s against the dealer's 8 up. The only other person at the table was routinely betting two to four purples ($500 chips) per hand. He had 17 and stood.

Third base hesitated pensively, apparently knowing that he should split -- but this was one of his biggest bets. "You know what you gotta' do," commented Big Purple with nonchalant confidence. Third Base remained frozen like a statue.

"Here. I'll take one of your 9s", Big Purple finally blurted out as he tossed Third Base a $500 chip. "Then I gotta break up my 18 and start all over with 9? Naw -- I need more than $500 to do that," beckoned Third Base. So Big Purple, ever the sport, tossed Third Base a $25 chip to go along with the original purple. "There's a guaranteed $25 profit on your 9 of hearts. I'll take that and you play the 9 of spades," suggested Big Purple in a final tone.

Third Base was on the spot. He could split his two 9s for $500 apiece, play a pat 18 for $500 total, or play one 9 against an 8 for $500 starting out $25 ahead. "How 'bout I keep the quarter, we split the 9s and divide up the results 50-50?" Third Base countered. "Sounds like a partnership to me -- deal the cards Mr. Dealer man," said Big Purple.

At uncrowded high stakes tables, these things go on fairly regularly. But the point is, it doesn't have to be a high stakes table. If you've got the blackjack "card sense" and can be quick and smooth about it, you too can wheel a profitable deal here and there -- be it on your own hand or somebody else's.

Once you become a perfect basic strategy player, you're either stuck with a 1/2% disadvantage or you have to move forward. The realm of "hand interaction" is a wide open area that almost nobody seems to pay any attention to. To use it to your advantage though, you have to know the odds.

How many times have you seen a player at your table split say, a pair of 6s against a 4, catch a 5 on the first 6, double down and buy a deuce? Then on the second 6 he catches a 3 and won't double there because he already has three bets riding with two of them on a bad hand. Well, his loss in perspective is your opportunity! You should know that any proper basic strategy double will win more often than it loses. So get your chips over there and grab that edge!

It doesn't necessarily work that way with pair splits though. Suppose you have a pair of 6s against the dealer's 3. Basic strategy tells you to split that, but it's only because splitting will lose less money than playing your 12. However, playing only one 6 against a 3 loses less money than either hitting 12 or splitting two 6s.

So the next time you've got a pair of 6s against a 3, ask somebody next to you if he wants one of your 6s. Since it's a basic strategy move, you may get a taker, and that'll save some money -- long term.

Sometimes you can even buy another player's hand outright. How? By taking advantage of their own false beliefs. For example, how do you feel when you have 19 against the dealer's 10 up? If you're like most players you're praying, "Please no 10 in the hole -- p-l-e-a-s-e no 10." But did you know that a made 19 is the outright favorite against a playable dealer's 10 up? Yet, many players half expect to lose that hand.

So what can you do? When the guy next to you has 19 against a 10 up for, say, $25 -- offer him a guaranteed $1 profit for his hand by proposing to buy it for $26. If he takes it you'll have manufactured a 3% edge out of nothing!

By the way, who was the hustler and who was the "mark" in the deal between our two high rollers at the beginning of this story? Well, both 9 against an 8 and 18 against an 8 are 6-to-5 favorites to win. Big Purple saw an edge and bought his way into it. Third Base sold out half of his edge for too cheap a price, cutting his total expected gain down by one fourth.

How did the hand turn out? One winner, one loser and the sucker made $25 off of the "suckee" -- that time.

- January 12, 2003

See Playing Other Peoples Hands
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 16-Jan-2003 18:54:45 (#2665)

in Aces and Faces Blackjack, and pick up the exel table I created over at the Card Counters Cafe. Wong into a game at +2TC with a flat bet and while you are waiting offer your services to help "fund" + EV bets. As discussed earlier, make sure everyone knows what you are doing, splitting the win or the loss when you play together, or you take all if you buy them out up front.

McGrind's TABLE PARTNERS CHART
Posted by zengrifter on 16-Jan-2003 23:31:41 (#2671)

HERE - http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=559

playing others hands.. is old news...
Posted by hammer on 16-Jan-2003 23:50:50 (#2673)

Many casinos now have no play on others hands too,just the latest
from the real world of worried casinos. just like no mid entry.
the c and the western,,,old news too...there are others now that are
actually more worried too,.can we gueaa

Still play left...
Posted by zengrifter on 16-Jan-2003 23:56:37 (#2676)

... on this angle - I have MANY times been told by a dealer "No, cannot play another's hand" and then I proceeded without incident to do it anyway. zg

Everything Is Old News
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 17-Jan-2003 09:47:38 (#2681)

if you think about it. We can re-fry these beans 100 times, and they are still re-fried beans. Every so often some twist is thrown into it making "everything old is new again," and for new players, BJ is the bomb. Even George Bush is refried banana wars, cept now them bananas are growing in the desert. Maybe that's why they left Sad Man Who Sane in power? At least we don't have to hunt them down on the back of Jackasses with Springfields. We can do it Pee Diddy style in a Hummer and our life takers on full auto. ;>

small Clarification:
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 17-Jan-2003 09:58:54 (#2682)

McGarvey's Grind or McGrind is not a part of my XL Player Double & Split table. McGarvey's Grind is a "stand alone" entity used entirely for hustling bonuses. Coupled with certain constants, no weapon formed against it shall prosper! ;>

Anthology of my better posts @ CC.com
Posted by zengrifter on 16-Jan-2003 19:01:14 (#2666)

Anthology of zg's best posts @ CC.com

-------------------------

50+ INDICES, lazy goldbricks!
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=1250

The ULTIMATE LIST of FREE BJ Resources Online
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=2166

Of Splitting 10s and Flipping Coins
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=2573

Eureka! (and deja'vu)
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=96

Clever cover ploy # 128
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=109

The Uston Hit
http://www.cardcounter.com/nonBJ.pl?read=774

El Cortez, and the 'art' of 1D play...
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=147

Debating the issue of "precision" indices
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=161

My last visit to Tahoe...
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=141

Major BJ Breakthrough?
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=162

Consolidation Betting Revealed
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=299

Easy Shuffle-Tracking - CT 101
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=343

Birth of a Couponero
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=345

The things we do, Cover Ploy #94
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=370

EV Booster #22 "Partners on the double"...
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=539

Zengrifter teaches "TRUTH"
http://www.cardcounter.com/nonBJ.pl?read=323

Re: Anthology of my better posts @ CC.com
Posted by The Mayor on 16-Jan-2003 19:22:56 (#2667)

I agree, you have put up many excellent posts here.

I have made a sort of informal policy that reposting a post that previously appeared elsewhere precludes its inclusion in "The Best." That may or may not be a good policy, as I certainly want to encourage such reposts.

--Mayor

Re: Anthology of my better posts @ CC.com
Posted by zengrifter on 16-Jan-2003 21:19:31 (#2669)

I have made a sort of informal policy that reposting a post that previously appeared elsewhere precludes its inclusion in "The Best."
-------------

Thats like saying that a film that gets recognition at Sundance can't be awarded at Cannes. zen-griper

True...
Posted by The Mayor on 16-Jan-2003 22:53:01 (#2670)

I may re-think it 8-)

Tons
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 21-Jan-2003 23:25:10 (#2748)

There are tons of excellent posts at the Card Counters Cafe found in the rubble and garbage heeps of other not so BJ posts. And at BJ21, BJMath, etc. We can build this place out of old bricks, or new ones. They all meet the building code ;>

Parker Reviews 'Cellini's Guide' to Surveillance
Posted by zengrifter on 16-Jan-2003 23:54:04 (#2674)

The Card Counter's Guide to Casino Surveillance
by D.V. Cellini

Review by Parker/rge21

It has been many years since a book created a stir in the advantage player community comparable to that surrounding The Card Counter's Guide to Casino Surveillance, by D.V. Cellini. Written by a veteran surveillance agent, this book could have been titled, �Everything a card counter ever wanted to know about casino surveillance, but was afraid to ask, and probably wouln't have gotten a straight answer anyway.�

The book is not physically impressive, expecially considering its $100 price tag (our online catalog has it on sale for $79.99). Printed on letter size (8.5 x 11 inch) paper, it weighs in at a mere 88 pages, and rather resembles something put together at the local Kinko's. I found this somewhat surprising, as the book is published by Anthony Curtis' Huntington Press. My hardbound copy of Ian Andersen's �Burning the Tables in Las Vegas� (another HP title) is a top quality book.

However, we are paying for information, not mere paper and ink. The question is, does the book live up to the hype. For those �cut to the chase� types, the answer is, �Yes, indeed.� Others, read on.

The book consists of two parts. The first, entitled �Inside Surveillance� is essentially a �behind the curtain� look into the shadowy world of casino surveillance. We learn about the day-to-day routine of surveillance work, the equipment used, the records kept, and surveillance organizations and networks. We learn the jargon of surveillance � terms such as �Grill Shot� (a request for a facial shot of an advantage player), �Headstone� (a player who stays at a blackjack table for an entire shift), and �Buzzard� (a big player who circles the pit too much while waiting to be called into a game by spotters).

Much of this information has never before been made available outside the industry. To anyone who has ever spent much time in a casino, this is fascinating stuff.

The second section is even more intriguing. It seems that, at some point in his long and varied career, the author was a card counter himself, actually playing on a team, and section two is entitled, �The Card Counters' Survival Guide.� It gets down to specifics as to what methods surveillance uses to detect card counters, and what an enterprising advantage player can do to thwart them. Player tracking software and Facial Recognition Software (FRS) are discussed.

For example, regarding player tracking software, Cellini writes: �Here is an easy method for confusing all computer-tracking software programs. Simply make one really stupid play, such as standing on your first two-card total of anything less than 12 against any dealer's up card, or double down on a two-card total of 12 or more vs. ANY dealer up card, etc. Yes, you read it right. Just one truly knuckle-headed play can reduce Survey Voice's overall analysis of your playing skill level to �moron.��

How to look, how to act, how to dress, how to play, what surveillance looks for and how to fool them � it is all here, in great detail.

Regarding Internet websites, Cellini writes: �The Internet is another major source of information for casino surveillance spies. If you're a frequent user of site like bj21.com, advantageplayer.com, or the Card Counters' Cafe, you've been had! These sites have more casino surveillance and floor people on them than there are feds monitoring the Web sites that sell plans for homemade explosives.�

Of course, anyone with half a brain should have already realized this, but we now have official confirmation.

Naturally, there is a problem with all this. I would bet my entire bankroll that copies of this book are popping up in casino surveillance breakrooms all over the country even as I write this. In a few months, they will all know what we know about them, making the information of much less use. There will be software patches and updates going out, indeed, it may have already happened.

Nonetheless, knowledge is always preferable to ignorance. I have already made several changes both in the way I play and the way I act when inside a casino, as will anyone reading this.

Anyone playing at green chip levels or above, or anyone who aspires to ever play at those levels, simply cannot afford to NOT have this book.

###

Re: Parker Reviews 'Cellini's Guide' to Surveillan
Posted by sighguy on 19-Jan-2003 00:41:42 (#2690)

Hello all...reading the posts since I've been gone..."rumor" that I'm a Surveillance person? Gee, nice to be the subject of rumors. I just finished reading Cellini's book and it's interesting. However, I have to say that I came away with a "subjective" feeling..meaning I can't believe that this is the definitive guide, merely one persons take. The thought of it being counter [no pun intended] intelligence and a form of propaganda kept creeping into my wittle pea brain. I don't know whether it's real or not, but the thought of a hoarde of counters ponying up $100 bucks for made up crap would be a hoot. Umm, wait a minute, I ponied up $100 bucks too and I am not a world class -worthy to be in all of your exalted presence - counter...great read, worth every penny..yeah, I feel much better now.

If "surveillance observers" are such underpaid, underappreciated moronic grunts, why would he do it as long as he supposedly did?

Thank you For the "Casino Rebuttal" *NM*
Posted by Bob Turner on 21-Jan-2003 02:32:58 (#2714)

Probably Taking Kick Backs and Freebies *NM*
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 21-Jan-2003 13:57:03 (#2723)

Statement concerning the CCCafe is untrue
Posted by John May on 20-Jan-2003 06:24:39 (#2704)

If you're a frequent user of site like bj21.com, advantageplayer.com, or the Card Counters' Cafe, you've been had! These sites have more casino surveillance and floor people on them than there are feds monitoring the Web sites that sell plans for homemade explosives.�

This is untrue. Even if it was not untrue, there is no way Cellini could have that information, since he has no experience or knowledge of the moderation powers of a group owner or moderator at a yahoo group. This is just a generalization unsubstantiated by fact. The few attempts by casino personnel to get into the CCCafe were painfully obvious and dealt with easily.

Cellini was caught red-handed creating fake positive reviews of his book at bj21.com, which alone is a good reason not to buy this book. As a surveillance operative his work may not be without value, but I'd caution readers not to place too much weight on the writings of one, eccentric surveillance operative. I have collected half a dozen writings of casino personnel on internal procedure and they rarely correlate with each other-the advice of any one individual is of limited utility because casino policy in this area is scarcely consistent within a given chain of properties let alone in general.

More John May Nonsense
Posted by Bob Turner on 21-Jan-2003 02:31:39 (#2713)

The few attempts by casino personnel to get into the CCCafe were painfully obvious and dealt with easily.

There is no way in hell you could keep out any casino employees through the yahoo moderation process. you're really reaching here, even for you.

Cellini was caught red-handed creating fake positive reviews of his book at bj21.com, which alone is a good reason not to buy this book.

Please cite your source for this

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 331 to 360

BlackjackInfo.com

The World's Most Popular Blackjack Website

Strategy Trainer / Free Blackjack Game

Threads 331 to 360

Strategy Trainer /
Free Blackjack Game