At one time, the website CardCounter.com held an active message forum with many contributors. When the previous site owner planned to shut down the site, he allowed us to archive the messages here at BlackjackInfo. They are formatted as they originally appeared, but no further comments on threads are permitted. If you want to discuss any of these topics, please do so at the BlackjackInfo Forums.
Professional BJ players
Posted by BjFool on 07-Dec-2002 06:10:00 (#1286)
Is it possible to play BJ for a living? How reasonable is it? I know Standford Wong (for one) doesn't recommand BJ as a main revenue. I'm asking anyone in this BJ community if the objective of becoming a professional BJ player is a reasonable one?
thanks
Re: Professional BJ players
Posted by TRACKER on 07-Dec-2002 06:28:58 (#1287)
Hi,
It is definitely possible to make a living from Blackjack. Although after a while you will probably start getting very board of it and wished you had just kept it a hobby.
I myself am a professional gambler (hate that world!) and it can be a very profitable business (if you already have enough finance behind you).
I would never suggest to anyone just to play blackjack professionally, I would also suggest that they learn many other games as well, like Poker, Backgammon or Bridge. I play all four professionally, although Poker is my forte.
Advantages are that you are keeping yourself fresh, and in the case of Blackjack, you would not be exposing yourself everyday (barrings etc..). Also, for me, Poker is more profitable long-term.
Also, its takes quite a while to become good enough to take these games to the professional level. I studied a hell of a lot, twice as hard as many of my student friends did at University or any other further education.
It a VERY hard business, but all it takes is time, determination, patience and a fat bankroll behind you.
good tracking
TRACKER.
Re: Professional BJ players
Posted by Learning to count on 07-Dec-2002 08:02:46 (#1288)
Professional blackjack is something that you do or dont do. You need an incredible bankroll and you need an education. The majority of masters are mathmeticians. The Majority of pros are highly intelligent, daring, and most of all tough. You have to have a grifter's heart and be worldy. The casinos know every angle. They have seen it all. The pros I know are above all experts in this game. (I am a rec player.) A lot of pros despise rookies. We play like we are counting and can sometimes bring heat on them because we draw heat. Most of the time its the pit boss chuckling at our obvious card counter tells.
Pros are a secretive bunch and are not going to let you in thier world. I know! It took me years to get to where I am now. I had to slug it out by reading all the books. I have had the good luck to have befriended a master and two pros who have had and are having a definite effect on my skills and knowledge. I can play. I have skills. I make money! But for lack of a better explanation I feel I have had begginers luck. If you want to do this thing you better study it first. Then Figure out the math. Then figure out a good strategy on how to administer what you know. Then try and figure out how to make a few bucks every day.
Remember this, the average amount needed for a bankroll that I can figure; from every one I have met; every one that has mentored me; and every thing I have read is $100,000.00. This if you are going to live off it; much higher if you are expect to live the life. Keep your day job and play at night, weekends, or vacations. Today being a pro borders on being a master villain.
PS Hello tracker welcome to this website. I am a frequent poster learning what I can from players like you. I appreciate what ever you can share.
Go Semi Pro
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 07-Dec-2002 10:15:51 (#1290)
You are much better off having more than one stream of income, so don't quit your dayjob if you have a good one. Much of this decision has to do with your other financial obligations. If you don't have any and can move around easily it will be easier to go full pro than if you have a wife and children and a mortgage, car payments, etc.
You can play like a pro on a part time basis and still call yourself a professional player IMO.
Re: Professional BJ players
Posted by TRACKER on 07-Dec-2002 12:25:49 (#1294)
First of all, I don't think you have to be a "highly intelligent" person to be a professional Blackjack Player (I'm not, although I was always good at maths). An above average intelligence will do. "Above average to realize the potential money making business this is (none of my friends or there friends can understand how I can be a professional gambler, that's why I hate the word "gambler". To be a gambler means to "bet against the odds". I don't, I bet with the odds!) And an average intelligence to implement the advantage play methods. It might all seem hard to do, all it takes is hard work and persistence. I play Hi-Opt II as my count and I also doing some ace tracking which is very effective. Most wannabe advantage players think it's all too much. Well, to a recreational player this is true, but if you play to get as much money as possible, then you must use all the ammo you can get you hands on, and for me this is the most effective strategy for me. Note, that I said best strategy for "me". Everybody is different, and some systems work better for some than others.
As regard to bankroll, that really depends on what limits you prefer playing at. Most people assume that you must play at $25 min to make good money, this simply is not true. You can make good money playing at $5 min tables. Plus at the $5 min you would get substantially less heat than some playing at $25 min. It also depends on what kind of a risk vs reward you like. I personally like playing with no more than 5% Risk Of Ruin. Many other players prefer less risk, and that is fine to. In fact if I was JUST playing BJ, I probably would also want that, but that's another advantage of playing other games professionally.
Another factor is spread. the general conception is to play 1-12 for 6 decks (my favoured game), I at the moment I play 1-40, but that also depends on casino, country and past experiences. You should spread with whatever you can get away with. I believe that if you are going to spread from 1-12, that will cause as much heat as going 1-40. There are many different views, but that's good because it keeps people thinking and coming up with new ideas, there is no right or wrong way to play BJ(except progressions!). For me my Blackjack bankroll is just over 100 max bets (4.25% RoR). For someone to play just BJ as a pro, I would suggest, as many do at about 200 max bets (0.5% RoR).
I would say that the biggest and best advantage of being at pro gambler as that you can organize you own day to suit you. Most tournaments are in the evening and BJ is mostly 24 hrs (umm..those 11 am alarm calls!!). I can imagine it being a very big step to quit you job and play pro, I started when I as 17, so I never really had a "real" job as such, and as I think Rob said it also depends on want responsibilities you have, wife, kids etc.. and also persuading them that this really is possible (in fact that never happens!)
I think I have pretty much covered the most common things (I was in one of those moods to write a long letter!)
(Hi "Learning to Count", Thank you for welcoming me).
good tracking
TRACKER.
Welcome Tracker!
Posted by The Mayor on 07-Dec-2002 13:43:42 (#1296)
Greetings, Tracker!
You started when you were 17? So you have been a professional gambler your whole adult life? No other professesions?
I would love to hear about more about you, your games, and anything else you want to share.
Thanks for sharing your knowledge and experience on this board,
--Mayor
Re: Welcome Tracker!
Posted by Dave on 07-Dec-2002 19:31:55 (#1305)
Well, the thought of going pro sounds intriguing. Here is my situation. I'm good at math and have had 5 years of college mathematics. I was going to be a high school math teacher but once I got in the classroom and started teaching, I hated it. I own my house that I live in so I don't pay any rent. I don't have a wife or kids. My car is completely paid for. Basically, the only things I pay for are car insurance, water bill, electric, gas, and property taxes. At this point, I'm thinking of either going back to college or actually giving blackjack a shot. I'm sort of a loner but I'm not sure if I enjoy being a loner or if I am a loner by circumstances. I was so close to getting my college degree but quit about 12 weeks before I was to get it. If I did go back, I'd probably change my major to pure mathematics or computer science. I'm 26 and I hate working 9 to 5 to be quite honest. I think I'm sort of a drifter. Any comments are welcome even if they are negative. I'm wondering the same thing as Tracker.
Re: Welcome Tracker!
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 07-Dec-2002 20:14:01 (#1309)
It is actually wonderful to see you sharing your personality so freely. It is easy to do on the internet, and allows people to get to know you much quicker. You are in a discovery period, and adding blackjack to that mix will not hurt you. Money wise you are in the right position, and time will tell if a significant other will come your way. In the mean time take a shot at it.
BECOME A HIGHSCHOOL TEACHER
Posted by Learning to count on 07-Dec-2002 21:09:59 (#1313)
What I mean is get the school job and use the frequent time off; summer vacation, xmas vacation, spring break, long weekends of teacher days office and the usual hodge podge of legal holidays; to go to vegas. Thats what I would do. You only will work 170 days a year give or take working the summer semester. This way you will have two careers education and advantage play!
Re: Welcome Tracker!
Posted by TRACKER on 08-Dec-2002 12:24:41 (#1337)
Hi "Mayor" and anybody else,
First, I would like to congratulate the Mayor and the rest of the posters on this forum. It is definitely one of the friendliest boards on Blackjack and that's important. Although there do seem to be some compulsive posters (there are on every board), which I do get slightly annoyed about.
I started playing for money at 17 in Backgammon and Poker in home games (I was relatively inexperienced at the time, but you soon learn fast when you are playing with real money), but I didn't plan to be a pro, I just fell into it because I was making more money doing that than anything else. My main ambition was to be professional orchestral percussionist, and I did study at the Royal Academy in London, but there isn't the money or the demand to consider it being my full rime job (most resident musicians in the orchestras stay till there 65+!).
I was also "financially lucky" that I inherited a lot of money when my father died, and that enabled me to be able to start at such a young age. It's doesn't matter how good you are, you need to cash in the first place to be able to play full time.
As I have said before, I believe in playing many different games. It spreads the risk and I also believe it gives me an edge over "one game" pro's. Bare in mind that there are many different types of poker, and also variations on Backgammon, like Nackgammon etc.
I don't know if I want to be pro gambler my whole life. The nice thing is that you can stop, or start up again when you feel like it, no deadlines or waiting for vacancies.
I am in the process of forming a Rock/Pop/Folk Band (Alanis morissette/Cranberries) with a quality line up and a very big name guitarist from the early 90's who mysteriously disappeared!
As far as the question of turning pro goes, I don't feel I am in the position to tell you how to approach that, as I had a slightly different route to most. However, you do sound in a good position to give it a go, but make sure you do you homework, you must study just like you might study for any other subject, and generally there is more money on the line than most careers - be careful.
Good tracking
TRACKER.
(p.s. thanks Mayor for helping me earlier)
Other thoughts
Posted by ZOD on 07-Dec-2002 20:01:33 (#1308)
Good bankroll advice from TRACKER. You might also consider your temperament. Does losing feel like someone kicked you in the stomach? Do you feel the need to protect your winnings when the count gets high? Even as a conservative semi-semi-pro, I had to address these issues in my own psyche. Don't forget that even advantage blackjack is still gambling. Your bankroll is important. Your ability is important. But there are times when you still need ice water in your veins. Do you have it? Best...
ZOD
thanks--__PW_FORM_DATA_BOUNDARY__
Posted by Dave--__PW_FORM_DATA_BOUNDARY__ on 09-Dec-2002 01:02:09 (#1357)
I appreciate your advice. I ordered The Theory of Blackjack and should be getting it soon. I need to get Blackjack Attack since so many people have been recommending it. I don't have a desire to change society or make the world a better place so I don't think being a school teacher is in my future. I was just way too miserable back then. Besides, lawsuits, angry parents, long hours at home and at school, and uncontrollable teenagers are other reasons to consider. I could get into many other things but I won't. I just appreciate hearing your casino experiences. Once I feel that I am good enough, I will hopefully have some of the same experiences. I have a twin brother and I was thinking, software is fine to practice with, but I'm gonna see if he'll deal me some hands. My standard of living is so low right now that I could probably live comfortably off of 17,000 dollars a year. What do you guys think about video poker? I was reading some of Bob Dancer's article and he said that a consistent advantage can be achieved off of video poker just like blackjack. I just don't trust those machines.
--__PW_FORM_DATA_BOUNDARY__
Re: thanks- VP
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 09-Dec-2002 08:06:20 (#1362)
The VP edge is very small if you find the right machine and play a perfect game. VP is good for comping since it's all about coin in, so if you like to sit on your ass all day then go sit again in the buffet to fill your face, pass out from a full stomach in a free room, you've got it made! ;>
BJProfessional Reviews www.cardcounter.com
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 07-Dec-2002 10:21:39 (#1291)
To die for. No, not Eliot Jacobson, aka The Mayor, the sites owner, the site's URL www.cardcounter.com! If you have a site up that deals with counting, or became interested in counting and took a spin on the 'net looking for information, chances are you have probably punched those letters in and found yourself at Eliot's site before.
The first thing you will see when you get there is The Mayor's picture. Most counters try to hide their identity to protect themselves from being spotted by casino surveillance. Not The Mayor. "I encourage casinos, governmental agencies, and casino detective agencies to take down my name, take a good look at my photo, and to realize that integrity demands no secrets. You are targeting me. I am targeting you."
Read more here:
http://webhome.idirect.com/~blakjack/2k2gone.htm
Nice, thanks!
Posted by The Mayor on 07-Dec-2002 10:51:36 (#1292)
Nice, thanks!
Re: Nice, thanks!
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 07-Dec-2002 10:58:55 (#1293)
Welcome. I tried to capture all of your skills and talents without going over the word count. Hard to do! smile
Introduction
Posted by Ch Dog on 07-Dec-2002 16:19:45 (#1299)
I finally decided to switch over fron CCC because of all the flaming there. I hope everyone here is more civilized.
I've been playing an counting, off and on for 30+ years. Probably not for the same reasons as most. I play for the thrill of doing it without getting caught. Fortunately I've been more successful than not.
Ch Dog
Re: Introduction
Posted by The Mayor on 07-Dec-2002 17:16:18 (#1302)
Greetings,
Regardless of your CCC past, this is a different place with its own feeling, and we hope you join the conversation and have a good time here.
Welcome
--Mayor
Welcome CH DOG
Posted by Learning to count on 07-Dec-2002 21:03:54 (#1312)
Does ch stand for Chicago. Some time smoke rises here but the guidelenes for posting are strict and fires are put out, at the earliest, at the smoldering stage. I like that. You can still challenge though intellectual debate. State your arguement and offer proof plain and simple.
Re: Welcome CH DOG
Posted by Ch Dog on 08-Dec-2002 01:24:37 (#1316)
Actually it stands for Champion Dog. When I'm not working or playing BJ, I'm a dog show judge.
Ch Dog
Cool!
Posted by Buick Riviera on 09-Dec-2002 01:35:20 (#1359)
When I'm not sitting in front of this thing, in Las Vegas or working my real job, I'm helping rescue retired racing greyhounds. Same church, different pew.
Welcome, CH Dog.
Buick
Re: Cool! My Mother...
Posted by zengrifter on 09-Dec-2002 10:38:46 (#1373)
...in LV is VERY ACTIVE in obediance competition! (three champions that compete western states) zg
Re: Cool!
Posted by SammyBoy on 09-Dec-2002 16:26:07 (#1398)
Buick, I hope you're not anti-Greyhound Racing?
Sammy: Switching to Non-BJ Message Board *NM*
Posted by Buick Riviera on 09-Dec-2002 21:13:59 (#1409)
Ch.Dog, you may wish to...
Posted by zengrifter on 08-Dec-2002 03:01:30 (#1325)
...scroll down (or click below) to the OFFICIAL and authorized CCCafe 'flame and censorship' thread and review (and?) comment, if you like.
NO discussion of those ISSUEs is to take place elswhere on this site, in any event.
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=824
zg
[Edited for content]
loss
Posted by hammer on 07-Dec-2002 16:37:41 (#1301)
why do we lose large and win small and how to we reverse the
trend.
Re: loss
Posted by The Mayor on 07-Dec-2002 17:17:26 (#1303)
I lose large because I can play longer when I am losing.
I win small because if I have a short quick win, I am out the door.
These things are fine with me. Add these results together over the long haul and I am a winner, even though my average loss is about $200 more than my average win.
--Mayor
Re: loss
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 07-Dec-2002 20:00:03 (#1307)
The trend reverses itself over time. You lose 10 hands of $5 and $50 is nothing. Lose 10 of $200 and that feels significant, even if you know you were playing head long into a +8TC. These are the swings of this game unfortunately. You need to get into a nice winning streak to get your nerve back!!
It has been somewhat disheartening...
Posted by Advantage Jack on 08-Dec-2002 02:26:15 (#1320)
I learned this card-counting last September, and I've been playing (almost) every weekend (usually from Friday night till Monday morning) ever since. I don't claim to have a lot of experience, but it's been a few months and I'm starting to see some pattern in my wins/losses, which happens to be exactly the same as described by Hammer. I usually play OK, and I break even or I'm up a couple of hundred dollars at the end of the weekend. (I normally play 5~20, 10~30, or sometimes 25~50) But, for the few weekends when I was down, I was down a couple of thousand dollars each time. I don't know if it's normal, but I would rather have the opposite pattern: A few big winning weeks and some losses for all the rest.
Am I doing something wrong? Or is it just a normal pattern in Blackjack? (I use Canfield expert system with about 20~30 indices, if this matters. I (almost) exclusively play SD games.)
Thanks,
~Jack
Re: It has been somewhat disheartening...
Posted by Learning to count on 08-Dec-2002 07:05:48 (#1326)
I cant comment on what your doing wrong or if you are doing anything wrong because i'm obviously not watching you play. With all do respect do you use a progresson betting scheme while you play, (oops I think I just bit the hook). This is what I gathered from your recent posts/articles on the mathamtical proof that progressions can out perform flat betting and possibly be used positivily in regards to lowering the casino vig will even disabling it.??
I dont uderstand the actual mathmatics you described. I do uderstand that no matter what that progression betting scheme is. It, the scheme, is still affected by the casino vig. Even on a short winning session you will eventually be consumed by the vig. If you play one time your whole life and win over your starting bankroll and you leave, great! Your a winner! You have beaten the casino! But If you stay or come back later the vig will kick in and you will be eaten up. The vig itself cannot be changed in a game. You can only change your ability to bet more money at the proposed advantages identified by the the count. This in turn gives you the ability to win more money at the predicted time so as to offset the vig taking of your money at your loosing times. Due to the nature of the game; the rules, card cut, your bet spread, I believe that no betting progression sytem can win long or short.
Card counting theory, (playing descisions and betting tactics), is based on formulations of extremely extended mathamtical simulations. Thes sims are run out millions and millions of calculations to get as close to the answer as posibble. This in turn will get a fair idea of the percentages involved in the odds of how to bet and play each hand. Progressions by them selves are weak and dangerous. They work against the balance that the recommend bet size offers through out the game. Bet size is in proportion to the calculated ror and the TC at hand. Even with card counting you can lose. With a proggression you can end up overbetting or under betting. This I believe has the effect of raising your ROR or putting your self in a position of loosing betting effeciency. This is my position and I have only skimmed the icing off of the cake. I cant back this up with a lengthy desertation of formulas of statistics and probabilities because I am mathmatically ignorant. If you can back your theory please do so. But in a laymans terms please. The true intellectual can teach everyone not just pleasure his own ego. Welcome to the site> LTC
WIth all due respect, LTC
Posted by The Mayor on 08-Dec-2002 11:11:23 (#1331)
I read AJ's post slightly differently. I read that he was counting and had a bad streak. I could be reading it wrong, but I didn't see anything pointint to the use of a progression.
My advice to AJ is to read this article:
http://www.cardcounter.com/Essays/Three_Hundred_Hours.htm
--Mayor
Re: WIth all due respect, LTC
Posted by Learning to count on 08-Dec-2002 15:26:55 (#1342)
Yes excuse me if I was wrong but I was speaking about a post he made on bj21 free pages on saturday. I jump back and forth so much between webs sites that I probably got confused. The post I was talking about was one that discussed how progressons could be useful or something like that. sorry. You know that four black jack board thing that Mcgarvey put up is pretty good for checking all four sites at once. Except that he has rge publishing and not Nachts site advantage player.com.
AAAAH so you saw it Eliot on BJ21
Posted by Learning to count on 08-Dec-2002 15:40:00 (#1344)
I agree with you 100,000,000,000 %. Progressionist should form their own web site societies. A good book on super progressionist systems is by John Patrick its called "so you want to be a gambler; Slots." It was a book I picked up at a yard sale for 10 cents. It was quite funny. I will send you the book, Eliot, maybe you can use it to start the grill. :)
I should have known better ;-)
Posted by Advantage Jack on 08-Dec-2002 15:35:43 (#1343)
Dear LTC,
The messages I posted on other BJ sites regarding progression are purely theoretical (at least at this point), and, as I said on a couple of occasions, I don't believe in progressive betting systems (again, at the moment). My point was they (anti-progressionts, including yourself?) were confused with theoretical and practical issues, and facts and beliefs. I asked whether there was "rock-solid" proof that progression doesn't work in BJ. I haven't heard any convincing arguments so far.
Sorry, since you brought it up, I had to defend myself :-)
Regarding my betting system, sure, I use "some sort of" progression as suggested by some experts (like Canfield and many others): I don't raise the bet when I lose even though the count is positive, etc etc. If you call it a progressive system, then I'm guilty as charged. But, I still cannot understand my win/loss pattern based on my betting pattern (which, I assume, is probably very common among AP players since I learned them from BJ books).
BTW, I'm also LTC.
~Jack
PS: Thanks for "standing up" for me, The Mayor!
Re: I should have known better ;-)
Posted by Learning to count on 08-Dec-2002 18:29:04 (#1352)
No problemo hombre. Everyone has a right to play as they want. Its just that this is strictly an advantage player website and I guess I am predjudice about progressions my self.
One thing I can say about your spread if your playing six deckers. Your spread may need adjustment. You may have to spread one to 30/40 units if your playing red action.
I play red and ramp up one unit at nuetral. At plus 2 I go 5 units. At plus 2 to plus 3 I go to 9/10 units and at plus 3-plus 4 10/15 units and at plus four-plus 5 (when surrender offered) max bet of 20/30 units any thing over, plus 5 or over play two hands at 20(and if you can get away with it two hands at 25 units). With this bet ramp you can only play a short times. An hour or two then leave. This is moderately aggressive and you have to be careful. This betting scheme is for a good bank roll to support it as well 5-10k. The worst swing I experienced was at primo high TC'S Ilost over $1200 dollars in twenty minutes at a fast table. I was devastated. An emotional coaster ride. Luckily I came back strong the next two days.
.....and try to leave at minus 1 true counts.
Re: It has been somewhat disheartening...
Posted by Biff on 09-Dec-2002 18:24:50 (#1400)
I also use Canfield's Master System with about the same number of indices. Spread about the same 1 - 3 or4 units. I use a side count of aces betting purposes and play mainly single deck.
I had a tough streak that took me out of the game for 3/4 of a year. I questioned my ability and also my willingness to put the money on the table when count was positive.
I have gone back and reviewed my records for last 2-3 years and have started playing a small unit game just to get my game back in shape.
The bottom line is you are going to have more units on the table when the cards are positive and dealer has as good a chance of getting the big cards as you do unless you spread to two hands. ( this will get you the tap on the shoulder in SD game )
I suggest you cont. playing and accept those small wins and if you keep at it you will hit some big wins to go with the small ones.
Good luck and keep posting as there are not too many of us Canfield players around.
Biff
Re: loss
Posted by Ch Dog on 07-Dec-2002 20:45:09 (#1311)
There are a number of reasons why you lose large.
1. "You eat like a bird and shit like an elephant" i.e. you chase losers.
2. You're not a desciplined player
3. Sometimes you bet the count and just don't get the cards.
Ch. Dog
Re: loss
Posted by Learning to count on 08-Dec-2002 11:08:04 (#1330)
I think CH Dog's post maybe a better explaination for your problem Advantage Jack. LTC
question about your play
Posted by Steve on 08-Dec-2002 11:59:13 (#1335)
Hi,
I'm sorry that you are having problems. I am wondering if you "Wong" out at high negative counts? Do you sit there with high negative counts hand after hand after hand? For me personally, if a count gets overly negative and stays that way for long I leave that table. I then backcount the next table I want to play at and only sit down to play if the true count is > 3.
One thing that I have noticed about six deck games, now I am sure the math boys will argue ferociously about the "theory" of this statement, but I am just speaking from my own experience and observations, six deck games tend to be streaky, so if you are getting hammered get up and leave. I will usually leave a table if I lose three or four hands in a row and the count is negative. Here is an example, I sat down at a table to play, it was a fresh shuffle, I lost four hands in a row, the count never got above 0, so I quit. I stood next to the three card poker table to "see who this game is played" and backcounted the low stakes bj table next to it, when the true count was 4 I sat down to play. I watched the "bad" table out of the corner of my eye and watched player after player get hammered (sorry, couldn't resist).
If I were you I would start keeping statistics of my play. Analyzing these statistics may give you a clue as to what is wrong.
Keep on trucking, baby.
Steve
Answer to your question about my play
Posted by Advantage Jack on 08-Dec-2002 16:07:47 (#1347)
> One thing that I have noticed about six deck games, now I am sure the math boys will argue ferociously about the "theory" of this statement, but I am just speaking from my own experience and observations, six deck games tend to be streaky, so if you are getting hammered get up and leave.
I only play SD games, but I'm somewhat superstitious myself. If "the dealer gets hot", I usually change tables. I also consider myself relatively disciplined. If I'm on a losing streak, I sometimes play slots or pow gaw pokers, or just go out for a fresh air. But, the strangest thing is, if I'm on one of those losing streaks, it doesn't matter whatever I do. I go to bed early and come back the next day, and I still lose. Either I keep getting stiff hands (15, 16, 15, 15, ...) or the dealer keeps making 21 no matter what upcard she has....
The only thing I can think of to prevent the big loss is that I just quit playing once I realize this week is a "bad week" (if there is a such a thing...).
Thanks,
~Jack
Re: question about your play
Posted by The Mayor on 08-Dec-2002 16:35:20 (#1350)
>One thing that I have noticed about six deck games, now I am sure the math boys will argue ferociously about the "theory" of this statement, but I am just speaking from my own experience and observations, six deck games tend to be streaky, so if you are getting hammered get up and leave.
This is silly and has nothing to do with advantage play.
On the subject of "Math Boys" -- such phrases are welcome on Patrick's site (www.johnpatrick.com) but not here. The mathematics is correct, there is no argument among the mathematicians about it.
I hope that if you post again, you will understand that mythology has no place on this site.
--Mayor
Re: question about your play
Posted by Learning to count on 08-Dec-2002 21:46:52 (#1354)
Hello steve welcome. So AJ and you are into the proggresionist movement. Sounds like a religious movement. Well all I can say in behalf Of the "math boys" is that the evidence is at hand but sorry to say only the math boys can explain it in mathimatical terms. In english the theory is that if you play a perfect game you will be able to offset your losses during negative deviation. This means that you will lose even in high plus counts. But you will stil be able to pull ahead of your losses because you wll be betting the premium bet efficiency during times when the odds are in your favor and you will win during positive diviation. This high betting efficiency occurs at high TC"s.
Why would you play at single deck when under such horrible conditions (even in vegas) when there are some real juicy six deckers out there. I play single deck for tiny stakes and I do okay. I play single deck because It is very challenging and is good for warm up. It gets my senses up to read the table quick. Hey guys great debating with you but this is a strictly advantage player web site. Keep the progressions over at JP's site and tell frank stanton hi!
Re: question about your play
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 08-Dec-2002 23:48:04 (#1355)
Within the math that tells us we should be betting x at +2 y at +3 and z at +4 we can be underbetting our bankroll within a progression for cover, comps, and to nibble away smaller wins and take most of the swing of the game away. I will look for the article that H Tamburnin wrote on this issue. ie
+2 = $50 10 25 50
+3 = $75 15 35 75
+4 = $100 20 50 100
Re: question about your play
Posted by Learning to count on 09-Dec-2002 09:38:39 (#1367)
<Within the math that tells us we should be betting x at +2 y at +3 and z at +4 <we can be underbetting our bankroll within a progression for cover, comps, and <to nibble away smaller wins and take most of the swing of the game away. I <will look for the article that H Tamburnin wrote on this issue. ie
<+2 = $50 10 25 50
<+3 = $75 15 35 75
<+4 = $100 20 50 100
<I had been doing this for a while and was very happy to see HT's article on it <basically verifying for me what I had been experiencing.
Wow great view on bet changes.
I would NOT use any progression to cover my bet strategies. This is due to the fact that a strict progression (as you said and i agree with) will hurt your ability to offset the losses and make a profit. I use bet changes as well. I dont want to appear to be following some sort of betting pattern that is easily identifiable by the Pit Buzzard. AS long as your in the +EV zone and the TC is strong, change the size of your bet If the bet called for is $50 I bet will $75 0r $35 after a big win. SO if I do lose it. I lose less. The Buzzard will see some money on the table. I try and give them the view that I'm losing as much as I win.
The problem with the progressionist view is that they think that by "feeling/esp" alone that they will get on board the streak train and ride it to the bank. They have this feeling of ESP/Luck because they felt the Psychological power of having a good day. There is no way/ability to predict the streaks as they claim.
Lately there has been a big move by the progressionists to prove their FEELINGS by logic supported by math. The problem is (and I am not a mathmatician) is that even with six billions sims (and please if I am wrong on the theory let me know because I am picking up where I should have started in college but did not)that there is still a slight change in the rate of probability. In fact from what I understand that the rate of probability has a certain amount of infinity to it. Thus there is a slight continuing change but it is so small that we can get close to the prediction that we have a fairly good idea of what EV zone we are in. So we can know when to bet big or small and how to play each hand. Nothing is perfect but I do knopw that progressions are a poor way to bet from every thing I have read, everything I have be shown and most of all from casino experience. So this change will hurt the progressionist.
Progessions also lose because they tend to make little money when they are done. Hey we all have seen the 2 hour craps roller or the 10 spin winner on roulette. The vig will get them eventually. You know the casinos know this and they are still in business kicking ass. The casinos want this kind of action. I have spoke to some highly informative/educated pit buzzards and they know what kind of action as far as betting they want to see. I have had a couple tell me in english and a little in mathmatics that progressons are a suckers strategy.
Re: loss
Posted by BradRod on 08-Dec-2002 16:19:37 (#1349)
It was a bit comforting to read hammer's post and the string of responses following a devastating weekend of play. It seemed like I was playing to endless dealer making hand after hand and me constantly getting 2 - 6, T and then either an inadaquate pull or busting.
The count generally staying in a mediocre range not low enough to get up and leave, not high enough to increase my bet (KO system). Times I did increase my bet in high counts. I seemed to lose more often to the dealer making his hand with a counter-intuitive series of small card pulls. The few winning streaks I had were in counts on the low side or when the count was just fluctuating at the beginning of a shoe with me having low bets out.
Rob McG suggests rightly in a different message string that life is too short to play anything but advantage games. (I am an architect btw) I take this to be good advice but, think that be succesful at this game one needs nerves of steel,a deep bankroll and lots of time.
Just when I thought I might throw in the towel I read the responses and found them helpful in understanding what may have happened. I think that instead I will just back away, restudy my game, gather some playing money together and have at it again.
Brad
Re: losing and AP
Posted by V-man on 14-Dec-2002 11:12:46 (#1689)
Loosing is unavoidable for anyone who plays long enough in this game.
I remember the few first time I lost big time, when I started learning to count cards. I couldn't undertand why I could lose in monster counts, the dealer keeps getting good cards and I kept getting stiff hands.
I checked my play, re-read all my books, join the Internet BJ forums, and most importantly I continued playing. My positive turn around is just at the corner.
Winning or loosing in a night would not tell the difference between an AP and a ploppy, I have ploppy friends who, some nights won an amount more than I lost. Trying to explain to someone that you are a card counter and you loose when other ploppies win! you just give them a good laugh!
Fortunately, there is a difference between ne, the card counter and my friend, the ploppy. The difference is the long run (or in some case the very long run). I remember a science experience in high school. You take a sample of the waveform and display on screen as a series of dots. The few first samples barely show the waveform pattern, but as more and more samples are captured, a well defined pattern appear on the screen. This is similar to my BJ trend and my ploppy friend BJ trend. If I and he play long enough, the trend will appear obvious: mine goes up and his goes down!
I beleive loosings (although sometimes not good for your health and stomach) are good experience for any good AP. You said you have never lost big? I said you are not a good AP yet.
So next time when you loose big, think of it as a big step forward to better Advantage Play. The turn around might be just at the corner!
To Rob McGarvey
Posted by Z on 08-Dec-2002 11:11:50 (#1332)
I took your advice on online BJ vs. counting at Foxwoods. I agree with you that with my current bankroll and Foxwoods' rules the online advantage of up to 199% is far better than the 1% I could eke out using Foxwoods' rules through simulating millions of hands.
Anyways, I thought that this correspondence from Captain Cook's Casino was over the edge (I mean "what the ****??):
"The good Captain is so sure you are going to have a big win we wanted to
get a few of the formalities out of the way first - So when you do win we can pay you immediately!
Please send us a copy of the front and back of the credit card you have
registered with us along with a recent utility bill showing your
address (as you have registered at the casino) plus some photographic ID for us
to keep on file. If you have not registered a credit card with us please just send us the photographic ID and a utility bill. These can simply be scanned and emailed to accounts@captaincookscasino.com.
Alternatively (in case you do not have a scanner) - you can fax these to us at this number:
Inside the USA: 3478230527;
Outside the USA: +1 3478230527
Should you choose not to send these documents now, that's ok, you can
supply these at a later date (after that BIG win which is sure to come
soon:)."
I actually lost the enire bonus amount and just wanted to get my initial deposit back. My result may serve as a gauge to cardcounters. Flatbetting basic strategy with a 198+% edge over a 100's of hands can return you 0! Anyways, what is up with this Rob?
Z
Re: To Rob McGarvey
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 08-Dec-2002 16:09:56 (#1348)
Whew! What did you start off with? $100 for $100? Were you flat betting $2 hands? If you can, go to the play check and right click it. Click view source and save that as a file and then do the same with all of the pages so we can look at them. I've played over 80 of these casinos and never had that kind of luck. When that happens at the beginning of your onLine career you may end up seeing the other side of the coin. The average return on investment clocks in around 98% or more.
Re: To Rob McGarvey
Posted by John May on 09-Dec-2002 10:42:20 (#1375)
As I said over at the CCCafe, MG casinos have a security clampdown going on right now. Before embarking on internet blackjack its a good idea to have a fax machine or all your documents scanned and ready. If you aren't prepared to do this (which is not unreasonable considering what a bloody liberty it is) then don't play blackjack online, because you will get asked for ID at some point, and only after they have your deposit money.
Generally speaking casinos which do this are more reputable and security conscious than ones that don't. I've never had problems with misuse of this information, though casinos should not be permitted to do this without clearly informing you during the sign-up procedure.
Re: To Rob McGarvey
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 09-Dec-2002 11:32:38 (#1378)
I have faxed all of my numbers, pictures, birth certificate, blood type, you name it to them. Bottom line is they pay you, and if I have to do a coupla back flips to get the money, it's worth it. Playing two places right now as we speak. I can't run two Micro's at the same time but I can run a Micro and a Golden Palace at the same time. I find I can play longer by switching between them than looking at the same old boring screen all of the time. Took a day off now that I have made the grade and deserve a minor break.
Greetings
Posted by The Mayor on 09-Dec-2002 13:10:49 (#1381)
Greetings John,
This is your first post here that I recall. I am just writing to welcome you to this site. I hope you enjoy your stay.
--Mayor
Oline bonus grifting IS NOT BJ...
Posted by zengrifter on 09-Dec-2002 15:59:42 (#1395)
... it is something else. I suggest that discussions about scaming online casino bonuses be taken elsewhere, perhaps to CCCafe. zg
Sorry Zen!
Posted by Z on 09-Dec-2002 18:42:56 (#1402)
You're right! I'll refrain in the future.
Z
Re: Sorry Zen! MAYOR
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 03:01:48 (#1419)
Mayor can call it, but I don't beleive that the art and science of scamming bonuses from online casinos is BJ in the sense of this board. Done correctly you may average $50+/day though the record keeping is demanding, not at all like BJ in a casino - it might be a poor-man's way to scrape up some scratch, but really its the pits - a good board for discussing this online bonus grifting - most notably is www.gamemasteronline.com and a good source of recon as well - a notable second MIGHT be CCCafe. zg
Mayor weighs in
Posted by The Mayor on 10-Dec-2002 08:29:32 (#1429)
I personally made about 2K this year in online bonus hunting.
Although it is not strictly BJ advantage play, I certainly have no problem with it appearing on this site.
Anything that promotes taking $$$ from casinos playing blackjack (in whatever form) is blackjack "advantage play" to me.
--Mayor
Re: Mayor weighs in
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 10-Dec-2002 12:50:31 (#1437)
"and in this corner" ;> 2K is a small amount, so I would think that you didn't go at it very hard. If anyone wants to check my site they can see on my Reading Room page a link called Strike. I got $100 in bonuses per day that I was off. Yesterday I took the day off and played a Micro and a Golden Palace casino and made around $600US. With casinos round trip 3 hours away its the fastest safest easiest way for me to make money.
My additional two cents
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 13:10:32 (#1438)
Other factors, though include the inordinate amount of recon that will insure against newbies being ripped-off, how to keep and maintain records and correspodance, and that its NOT BJ per'se - at the least it would require a seperate board or it will clog or otherwise diffuse the serious BJ discussion, for starters - I recommend AGAINST. Gamemaster.com and other venues seem to provide this discussion sufficiently whereas it will interfer with the clarity that this board should have. zg
What's a good TC?
Posted by ElementX on 08-Dec-2002 14:33:47 (#1339)
When wonging six-deck games, taking time and expected advantage into consideration, what is a good hi-lo TC to wait for before playing? I usually like to see a TC of +5 before sitting down.
ElementX
Re: What's a good TC?
Posted by The Mayor on 08-Dec-2002 14:57:58 (#1341)
Don Schlesinger has a long list of optimal entry and departure points for various games using various systems in "Blackjack Attack, 2nd Edition".
Typically, enter with a TC of +2. Max bet at +5.
Another style of wonging is to enter a fresh shoe and leave with a TC of -1.
--Mayor
You must stand around a lot.
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 09-Dec-2002 09:59:42 (#1368)
A TC of +5 or more occurs about 4 hands out of every 100 in a 6 deck shoe.
A good approach would be to enter at TC of +2, up your bet at +4, max at +5, and exit as soon as shoe goes negative.
Re: You must stand around a lot.
Posted by Learning to count on 09-Dec-2002 10:04:17 (#1370)
The mayor is right start at the begging of the shoe and wong out at -1 TC. You get more playing time. This is good when the casino is crowded and seats are full. I would rather be sitting at a positive shoe from +1 to +5 and above imstead of waiting around. You have the chance to make even more money!
Blackjack Practice (originally posted by darksun)
Posted by ElementX on 08-Dec-2002 19:37:38 (#1353)
I saw an earlier thread started by darksun about blackjack practice in the OC/LA area. Is this still in the works?
ElementX
LA Area
Posted by ElementX on 09-Dec-2002 15:15:50 (#1390)
I live in Los Angeles and if anyone is interested in getting a practice group together- maybe once or twice a month thing- let me know and we can arrange it- I'm tired of practicing and dealing to myself.
ElementX
Re: LA Area
Posted by darksun on 09-Dec-2002 15:40:48 (#1392)
I had thought about doing this but it didn't seem like all that great of an idea. A lot of it has to do with my girlfriend probably freaking out about people she doesn't know coming to our apartment haha. I also found that it's a lot more efficient to use software.
-darksun
Re: LA Area
Posted by Sonny on 09-Dec-2002 16:56:18 (#1399)
>A lot of it has to do with my girlfriend probably freaking out about
>people she doesn't know coming to our apartment haha. I also found
>that it's a lot more efficient to use software.
I know what you mean! I bought a felt layout and materials to build my own table, but the wife keeps saying "we don't have enough room for another table!" Of course, we would never even THINK of getting rid of any of HER things!
I'm in the LA/Pasadena area, so if anyone starts a group I'm in. Software is great for drilling, but how are you going to practice your act?
Re: LA Area
Posted by ElementX on 09-Dec-2002 20:15:57 (#1405)
I'm in LA and wouldn't mind starting a group since there doesn't seem to be one already set up among the guys here. Software is definitely a great tool but I find it gets very boring after a while, plus I don't know anybody who shares my passion for the game. My friends say I'm absolutely crackers and think that blackjack is boring and a waste of time.
ElementX
Re: LA Area
Posted by Reddevil on 09-Dec-2002 20:41:00 (#1407)
I go to Arcadia/Temple City area about once a month and should be down there round the 17th for a week or so. If something gets started I'm in.
Re: LA Area
Posted by Hinoon on 09-Dec-2002 23:05:15 (#1413)
*raises hand*
LA - Westside.
Let me know.
Re: LA Area
Posted by kyzr on 10-Dec-2002 00:18:52 (#1414)
I have been considering building my own table as well. Do you (or anyone else) have a source for table plans? The only ones I can find seem a bit over priced since the project is pretty simple.
I am in San Diego and would be interested in practice sessions here. If there was a big get-together planned, I may be willing to drive up to LA...
thanks...
kyzr
PS great board Mayor!
Re: LA Area
Posted by ElementX on 10-Dec-2002 11:11:34 (#1434)
>I have been considering building my own table as well. Do you (or anyone >else) have a source for table plans? The only ones I can find seem a bit over >priced since the project is pretty simple.
I wouldn't specially buy a table- use an existing one and attach the blackjack layout cloth onto it and that should suffice. As long it's playable.
>I am in San Diego and would be interested in practice sessions here. If there >was a big get-together planned, I may be willing to drive up to LA...
Yeah it seems like a few people are interested- sonny, reddevil, hinnon- if I'm not mistaken. I'm in West LA- some of you are near LA and some are not- I wouldn't mind holding a session here or driving somewhere also. A group of at least four would be good. Who'd be interested in a west LA session ?
ElementX
Re: LA Area
Posted by kyzr on 10-Dec-2002 13:48:43 (#1441)
I have been considering building my own table as well. Do you (or anyone else) have a source for table plans? The only ones I can find seem a bit over priced since the project is pretty simple.
I am in San Diego and would be interested in practice sessions here. If there was a big get-together planned, I may be willing to drive up to LA...
thanks...
kyzr
PS great board Mayor!
Re: Blackjack Practice
Posted by Sonny on 10-Dec-2002 12:44:40 (#1436)
Who's got a table? Or do we need to rent one? What about a space (garage, basement...anything nicer than the El Cortez)?
And some chips
Posted by ElementX on 10-Dec-2002 21:55:53 (#1475)
Since we would probably want to test betting strategies as well as point counts. I could grab some from Wizards on the Coast (or whatever it's called). I like the garage idea.
ElementX
Re: And some chips
Posted by hinoon on 12-Dec-2002 21:52:41 (#1590)
Sounds like the beginning of a good idea.
It would help to determine what rules/count systems we're all trying to develop so that we can support eachother by verifying count/play.
Personally, I'm using the standardized "Vegas Strip" 6 deck S17, DA2. DAS, no surrender Basic that's distributed on one of the Strategy engines. I'm using this because that's the only place I play.
I'm also slowly working on a very basic +/- count. No side tracking, nothing. I start at 0 and hopefully at the end of the deck, I can tell you the value (+ or - ) of the last card.
The where and when of it is the next step.
Cheers
Re: And some chips
Posted by ElementX on 14-Dec-2002 04:17:10 (#1681)
Hi Hinoon
>Sounds like the beginning of a good idea.
Hope so.
>Personally, I'm using the standardized "Vegas Strip" 6 deck S17, DA2. DAS, no >surrender Basic that's distributed on one of the Strategy engines. I'm using >this because that's the only place I play.
>I'm also slowly working on a very basic +/- count. No side tracking, nothing. >I start at 0 and hopefully at the end of the deck, I can tell you the value.
>(+ or - ) of the last card.
That's a good start- get some good basic practice in to start with
>The where and when of it is the next step.
We're both in West LA so let me know when you are available and we can work something out.
ElementX
loss
Posted by hammer on 09-Dec-2002 00:13:19 (#1356)
The point is how much to we lose before enough is enough
and when its going strong how much for the take
or simply leave it to the cards like the Mayor says.
many go for % takes and % losses
many have stop losses
other ideas.....?
Re: loss
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 09-Dec-2002 07:59:37 (#1361)
If you are playing BJ properly, ie good games, basic startegy, indice variations, bet per TC, you should consider using a kelly betting format. We always use 10K since it makes the concept simple to explain. Break this roll into 10 mini banks. Go play and lose 1K. Next time out you have 10 $900 mini banks. Win a few times and you may have 12K, then your mini bank is $1200. You will never go broke playing like this, and you can play one two or three sessions a day if you wish, but I would clear my head after a lose OR a big win. Both can do damage to your nerves of hard cold steel. Sharks eye me lads!
Re: loss
Posted by The Mayor on 09-Dec-2002 09:59:50 (#1369)
Play while you have energy, adequate bankroll in your pocket, a good game, and the heat is low.
Leave after a quick, large, win that will get you noticed.
Leave when you get tired.
Leave if your bankroll in your pocket is so low that you can't double/split.
Leave if you feel heat.
Leave if conditions at the table deteriorate.
Leave after 1.5 hours (or less) in any event.
Stop losses, %'s, have nothing to do with advantage play.
--Mayor
why does (if it does) mood affect play?
Posted by Steve on 09-Dec-2002 11:07:50 (#1377)
Hi Friends,
I thought this was appropriate for a thread about losses. Why does mood affect play? Does it really, or do we just remember the events better? I have the idea that when I am happy go lucky, and just "fooling around" that I win a lot, and if I am being studious, overly serious, and "worried" about whether I win or not, I lose. I haven't kept any statistics on this to see if it is true or not. Perhaps it isn't that my play is all that different, but I just remember the event better. I think if I play while "happy go lucky" if I do lose I just shrug it off and go find something else fun to do so I don't "remember" the loss, and if I win, I was "up" so the memory is reinforced. On the other hand, if I am "down" and I win, I have the Eyeore (spelling?) response, "oh well, at least I didn't lose", and if I lose, the memory is reinforced because I was down, "see, I knew I shouldn't play when I am down".
I don't know if it is the memory thing or not, but I asked several Yoga teachers I know for exercises to do to "raise" energy levels, it seems that doing these exercises, thus elevating mood, makes a difference.
The worst outing I ever had was my first outing after I decided to give up my day job, I got completely hammered, but my friends all told me before I went, "you shouldn't go right now, you are too worried about losing". I'm not sure if there is any credence to this or not.
What is your experience? Does your mood affect your play? If so, why do you think that is? Could it be that when you are "down" you make too many mistakes? Or does mood just make us remember the events more clearly?
Regards,
Re: why does (if it does) mood affect play?
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 09-Dec-2002 13:47:30 (#1385)
"As a man thinketh, in his heart, so he becomes." Think about that! ;>
Omega II betting schedules?
Posted by sprettster on 09-Dec-2002 01:33:30 (#1358)
Where can I find a compilation of bet vs. TC schedules for various games using AOII?
Thanks,
sprettster
Re: Omega II betting schedules?
Posted by ElementX on 09-Dec-2002 15:20:53 (#1391)
I use AOII also- I don't know where you can the betting schedules- what I do is simply play an extra unit for each positive TC. When wonging, I wait for a +7 or +8 count and flat bet until the count goes down, at which time I make downward adjustments. Very simplified I know, but I think it's better than the betting system Carlson proposes.
ElementX
Re: Omega II betting schedules?
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 02:39:37 (#1417)
ElemX's betting is quite workable - but bets cannot be carefully crafted w/o taking into account the BR size - assuming reasonable sufficient BR, each
TC+1 = +0.25 so bet accordingly (after subtracting the housEdge). zg
Re: Omega II betting schedules?
Posted by sprettster on 10-Dec-2002 02:53:08 (#1418)
Thanks for the input. For 1 and 2D that's pretty much what I'm doing now. For 6 deck, which I really haven't played much of, wouldn't that lead to overbetting your advantage early in the shoe? Specifically, with how many decks remaining would a TC of 1 warrant an increase to 2 units? I realize that AOII isn't the easiest count for 6D, but it's the one I know...
sprettster
Re: Omega II betting schedules?
Posted by ElementX on 10-Dec-2002 10:49:21 (#1433)
Some good points sprettster. There may be some overbetting with the AOII count early in 6D shoes, which is why I like to enter shoes with about 2.5 decks left. Never believed in playing negative shoes. Try this in 6 decks: Say there are three decks left and the TC is +6. Then use this +6 as your pivot point for flat betting, increasing and decreasing as the TC varies from this pivot. Did that make any sense?! By the way, what are your thoughts on the AOII's treatment of the aces?
ElementX
Re: Omega II betting schedules?
Posted by sprettster on 14-Dec-2002 14:47:12 (#1697)
I'm not sure I follow you on that, but it sounds interesting. By this system, what TC at 2 decks gives a 2 unit bet? At four decks?
Regarding AOII and aces, I've had no trouble keeping and using an ace side count for 1 and 2D, but the 6D situation is a bit harder. I keep reading here about how 2-level counts in general are obsolete, with special abuse offered to AOII for the ace thing, but I think that as long as you can handle the extra difficulty without wearing yourself out then you aren't harming your game. But with good 1 and 2D games getting harder to find, if effective 6D play requires a different system then I'll make the change.
Re: Omega II betting schedules?
Posted by ElementX on 14-Dec-2002 22:43:23 (#1715)
>By this system, what TC at 2 decks gives a 2 unit bet? At four decks?
When playing through the whole shoe (i.e. not wonging), I would wait for a TC of +2 to make a 2 unit bet. Same for decks: wait for a TC of +2 before making a 2-unit bet.
ElementX
Re: Omega II betting schedules?
Posted by Mister M on 15-Dec-2002 03:06:43 (#1726)
You really have to ask the question of why are you using Omega for shoe games in the first place. The assumption that it "won't harm your game" seems a week justification.
Re: Omega II betting schedules?
Posted by sprettster on 15-Dec-2002 15:21:28 (#1744)
Thanks ElementX.
>> The assumption that it "won't harm your game" seems a week justification.
Agreed. My reluctance to change is just based on my investment in the AOII. I know all the strategy tables at TC +/- 24, and that took a lot of work. I don't relish the prospect of working to get that proficient with a different system.
Re: Omega II betting schedules?
Posted by Mister M on 16-Dec-2002 02:14:33 (#1757)
Mysuggestion is to cange to Zen and use the same tables as for the Omega.
Many pros group the indices into blocks thereby rounding as necessary.
The accuracy factor does not seem critical if you are "off by one" on occasion.
I find the Zen easier to use as less mental arithmatic is involved and consequently can play for much longer without error than when using the Omega.
I do not believe that an ace neutral count is justified for shoe games.
Just my 0.2!
BTW the switch took less than 20 minutes to master using the same 50 or so indices.
Re: Omega II betting schedules? YES
Posted by zengrifter on 16-Dec-2002 02:47:26 (#1759)
Omega indices will work fine for ZEN - just swap your Ace-9 tags and you are in business. zg
Re: Omega II betting schedules? YES
Posted by Mister M on 16-Dec-2002 23:47:31 (#1827)
Ace neutral counts such as Omega and HI-opt II do generally score higher.
However that listed score is attained by simulation only and assumes 100% accuracy. Anybody thatmakes even non frequent mistakes might as well stick with HI-Lo. The new version of CVBJ is superb and has numerous tests and drills.
Not a plug just my very humble opinion.
The end is near!
Posted by Learning to count on 09-Dec-2002 11:33:09 (#1379)
The entrance to The Plaza. Photo by Christine H. Wetzel.
Nevada News
Four downtown casinos to be sold
Longtime Las Vegas casino owner Jackie Gaughan has agreed to sell four of his downtown gaming properties for $82 million to a start-up company, sources familiar with the deal said Sunday.
This per the las veags journal today 12/09/02
Re: The end is near!
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 09-Dec-2002 11:37:14 (#1380)
...and I saw a new Las Vegas, for the old Las Vegas had passed away...
Relax, that will never happen as long as there is a United States of America.
No problemo I meant for old man Gaughan
Posted by Learning to count on 09-Dec-2002 13:11:01 (#1382)
I miss the vegas I first experienced in the early 90's. There were still old vegas fixtures around, the sands, alladin, dunes, etc. You could still feel the rat pack and win some coins on the slots.
Jackie is one of the last of the old time gamblers. He will be gone too. I met him once this summer. He was waddling through the el cortez and I shook hands with him by the Texas Holdem table next to the dollar wheel of fortunes. I had just won two silver strike coins from the quarter slot machine and I showed him. He smiled and said keep it it will be worth something some day. He shook my hand. Nice guy. I just wish the Filipino mama san pit buzzard was as nice at the BJ pit.
Re: No problemo I meant for old man Gaughan
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 09-Dec-2002 13:45:29 (#1384)
Memories are worth their weight in gold aren't they? ;> "And now the purple dust of twilight time steals across the meadows of my heart..." ahhhh Nat King Cole singing Stardust......
The meaning of that coin is priceless to you. Today we are making Stardust for the next generation of trackers, hackers, and deck whackers. The bad boys of the black and white era seem so simple to us in our technicolor world. Take a look at the remake of Oceans 11 and see what I mean. You can't recreate their style, but you can breathe new life into their dreams in a 2K3 kinda way.
Gaughan are the good old days ;>
Re: No problemo I meant for old man Gaughan
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 03:06:30 (#1420)
"Jackie is one of the last of the old time gamblers."
-------------
Lat of the old time mob-fronting, money laundering guys - his Western Casino is now managed by son Michael's Coast Resorts - the Western is cleaned up and dealing ALL 1Ds, worth a look. zg
SBA Sims
Posted by TRACKER on 09-Dec-2002 14:06:31 (#1386)
I am trying to compare the Hi-Opt II Count against the KO Count for English rules (ENHC, 6D, S17, DAS, D9+10+11, 75% Pen) on my SBA 5.5 program.
I am getting extreme results in the difference, which I was not expecting. Using a 1-40 Spread, (I know!!!, no comments plz!)and 16 Indices, leave at -1% advantage, I get -
Hi-Opt II
IB = 1.30%
RoR = 2.70%
Score = 50.07
Knockout
IB = 1.08%
RoR = 10.61%
Score = 25.20
This is basing the spread on the counts advantage, e.g. max bet at about 2.0% at a frequency of 1%. I can't help, but feel I am doing something wrong here. Surely the Hi-Opt II can't be TWICE as good. I expected results to differ from BJA due to British rules, but this can't be right, can it? How can I get the RoR to come down to an acceptable level(5%) for the KO?
If one of you has SBA could you try a few sims to verify.
thxs, I appreciate any input
TRACKER.
(email address, if one wants more info is drummerboybgb@hotmail.com)
Re: SBA Sims
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 09-Dec-2002 14:18:07 (#1387)
Don't be shocked. Well, I was too when I ran my own Hi Opt II sims. KO is to Hi Low what Zen is to Hi Opt II. A simplified version, which is like making steps to climb up to your own maximum potential as a pro level counter.
Re: SBA Sims
Posted by Count Luckula on 09-Dec-2002 15:51:14 (#1393)
What is the best SW for practice counting and play deviations? Also, is SBA the best analyzer? What are the cost of these items and where are they found?
Re: SBA Sims
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 09-Dec-2002 16:08:59 (#1396)
I can't really tell you which program is the best since I only have SBA, but really have no need for anything other than SBA. You can take a look around at the commercial sites and see what they are selling. Everyone has "the best program." For practice you can use Hoyle BJ. That is what I used for a while when not playing a real game. Then I discovered playing onLine and got $$ for practicing basic strategy and playing indices. That basically destroyed any desire for me to play against 8 decks of cards and a 3 hour return drive to a casino. You'll get me out from behind my computer with a single pass shuffle or a night out with the boys for hours of backcounting, tracking, and playing ploppies hands once in a blue moon.
A suggestion.
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 09-Dec-2002 14:33:34 (#1388)
I am not really familar with SBA or with KO, but here are my two cents. (probably overpriced).
KO has a tendency to overbet your advantage, sometimes when KO says put the big bet out, you don't really have as much of an advantage as the count says you do. With 40:1 spread, you are probably REALLY overbetting, and you are seeing the results in your ROR.
Hi-Opt II side count
Posted by BjFool on 09-Dec-2002 15:59:37 (#1394)
Can anybody tell me if a side count of 4's and 5's makes sense for betting and playing precision?
Correct me if I'm wrong but since those 2 low cards are good cards for the dealer, shouldn't they be included in a separate count along with the Ace side count?
Unlike the Ace card (-1) the 4's and 5's would have a +1 value and change the TC according to the number of 4's and 5's remaining in the deck (in my case decks)?
again tx in advance
BjFool
Re: Hi-Opt II side count
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 09-Dec-2002 16:19:41 (#1397)
That is how Humble put the original Hi Opt II together, but it does not work like the Uston version does. If you are using 4 and 5 and a whack of 2 3 6 & 7 are out you will be missing out. And keeping that second count is a waste of grey matter. Watch the discard tray, count the # of A you have seen per 1/4 deck (13 cards) and make adjustments to your bet. 4 per deck. It will help you discover how easy it can be, depending on the shuffle, to track them. The Uston-McGarvey version DOES NOT drop the bet when the deck is Ace poor which further increases the overall gain of the Hi Opt II. "UM" Hi Opt II. I'm working on a "UMX" version.
Re: Hi-Opt II - DISAGREE
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 02:27:34 (#1415)
**My responses to Robo's "advice" -
"That is how Humble put the original Hi Opt II together, but it does not work like the Uston version does."
**Aucontraire, Humble advocated the inadequate Ace-denisity per 1/4D method. Secondly, there is NOT a "Uston version" of HO2, never was.
"If you are using 4 and 5 and a whack of 2 3 6 & 7 are out you will be missing out. And keeping that second count is a waste of grey matter. Watch the discard tray, count the # of A you have seen per 1/4 deck (13 cards) and make adjustments to your bet. 4 per deck."
**Uston specifically said that the Ace-density per 1/4D method "IS OBSOLETE" (see Uston on BJ'85) and ASnyder even earlier (BJForum'83) likewise came to the same conclusion.
It will help you discover how easy it can be, depending on the shuffle, to track them.
**Poppycock!
The Uston-McGarvey version DOES NOT drop the bet when the deck is Ace poor which further increases the overall gain of the Hi Opt II.
**Not dropping the bet when the deck is Ace-poor totally negates any remaining value of the already inadequate Ace sidecount method that he just advocated. Bottomline is this - without a simultaneous 3-card secondary count overlay of As -2 vs 2s,5s +1 the HO2 will AT BEST perform on par with ZEN or RPC which require no Ace-adjustment, or UBZ2 which doesn't even require a TCadjust. The so-called 'UM' version described above will perform substandard. zg
Re: Hi-Opt II (REAL SIDECOUNTS)
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 05:08:13 (#1423)
The real sidecounts worth noting, due to the appreciable boost in gain to the PE (playing efficiency) are the 'bivaluate' 7s and 8s. zg
Question for Rob McGarvey
Posted by BjFool on 09-Dec-2002 19:29:02 (#1403)
Would you be willing to tell us about your new Hi-Opt III system, how is it shaping up?
Re: Question for Rob McGarvey
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 09-Dec-2002 19:38:08 (#1404)
It's not shaping up, it's complete. The 5 is +3 and the 9 is -1. The A is still +2 when rich. Gets you into the game quicker and out quicker when you are wonging in or out.
Ace +2
Posted by mark on 21-Feb-2005 09:40:44 (#12205)
Rob was describing his hi opt III.
When he said Ace is still +2 when rich, did
he mean that you add +2 to the true count for
every ace that is left over per one deck?
Not quite
Posted by Sonny on 22-Feb-2005 09:38:47 (#12213)
> Rob was describing his hi opt III.
> When he said Ace is still +2 when rich, did
> he mean that you add +2 to the true count for
> every ace that is left over per one deck?
Almost. You add +2 to the RUNNING count for every extra ace. If you have a two-deck segment with five aces in it you would add +2 to the running count before you convert to true count. Likewise if there were only three aces you would subtract 2.
-Sonny-
thank you Sonny. *NM*
Posted by mark on 22-Feb-2005 16:06:01 (#12218)
Re: Question for Rob McGarvey
Posted by BjFool on 09-Dec-2002 20:43:47 (#1408)
Tx Rob .How about when you're not wonging at all?
Re: Question for Rob McGarvey
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 09-Dec-2002 22:35:46 (#1412)
I find the RoR (SBA sim) goes up with the +3 for the 5 and the -1 for the 9, but so does the RoR...risk of reward. ;> If you ever lose 10% of your BR, you size down to protect yourself. Then you control your RoRuin and keep it to 0% Win 10% size up.
The level-3 beheemoth...
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 02:34:15 (#1416)
...that the Robster just discribed is neither practical or nor more powerful than the standard HO2 - Uston said of his own Ace-neutral/level-3 'UAPC' "its obsolete" (Uston on BJ'86) - of course I may be mistaken because I haven't compared exhaustive sims of these McGravey hybrids - no pro in the world would use them, and no novice should consider them. zg
Learning from the level-3 beheemoth
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 10-Dec-2002 10:39:18 (#1432)
I myself backed off of the Uston APC with it's 3 level count and stuck with Hi Opt II and have refined it ever since. All of these counts work, but what is most important to me is what we can learn from the effect each count has on the bottom line. Example: Hi Opt III, Uston APC, no matter, gets you into the game and out of it if you are wonging out. You can do the same thing by dropping out at -1TC with Hi Opt II instead of -2TC, and bet slightly more during + counts to get the exact same effect as these higher level counts can.
I miss Clarke Cant! *NM*
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 22:04:27 (#1476)
Re: Half a Bee-Moth
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 11-Dec-2002 11:16:51 (#1521)
The Mayor himself uses (do you still use this count Eliot?) a level three count, Wong Halves which uses tags of .5 , 1.0 , and 1.5. It is called halves because these level three numbers have been cut in half from 1 2 and 3.
Re: Half a Bee-Moth
Posted by The Mayor on 11-Dec-2002 18:09:07 (#1542)
Yes, I use halves -- but I play exclusively shoe games as well. Halves is not good on pitch games.
Re: Half a Bee-MothBALL
Posted by zengrifter on 11-Dec-2002 18:16:15 (#1544)
Halves is NONETHELESS a SINGLE-PARAMETER system - A BIG DIFFERENCE for someone who knows what they are talking about! zg
Re: Halves
Posted by T-Hopper on 11-Dec-2002 22:08:19 (#1550)
Halves is also nearly as strong as AOII in double deck games with bad penetration and a large spread. You just don't get to make that many big strategy variations in the first 52 cards.
The Great Indian Casino Sham
Posted by zengrifter on 09-Dec-2002 22:16:24 (#1411)
Click on Non-BJ board at left. zg
Re: The Great Indian Casino Sham
Posted by The Mayor on 10-Dec-2002 08:58:50 (#1430)
Great article -- click over there and read it!
Need help on CA No-Bust BJ Strategy
Posted by Ten_Seven(R) on 10-Dec-2002 04:46:46 (#1422)
Hi. I live in Northern CA and the cardrooms here offer a game called no-bust blackjack. From what I know it is very hard to beat the game due to the commission on every hand. However, I was wondering if anyone knows the basic strategy for the game and the ev?
Here's my limited understanding of the game based on observation and brochure:
Player vs Agent (assume the agent is the dealer)
8 deck shoe with 8 jokers.
Player recieves 2 cards face up and Agent receives 1 card and doesn't receive the 2nd card until all the players have played their hands
H17
DOA except no soft doubling; no doubling on joker hands
No DAS
Split any pair or ten-value cards once to form 2 hands; can't split hands with Joker
Split Aces receive 1 card
2 Jokers or Joker and Ace (called natural) pays 2 to 1
Joker with non-Joker(s) or non-Ace card(s) is consider 21
All other wins (including splits or double downs) pays even money or 1 to 1
there are no blackjacks in the game
Early surrender since dealer has no hole card; player can't surrender with a joker in his hand and player can't surrender when Agent is showing a Joker
Player must stand on 20 or more
Player must Hit or Surrender on 11 or less
Player has option on 12-19
Agent must stand on Hard 17 or more
Agent must hit Soft 17 or less
Now, the tough part:
Player wins if player doesn't go over 21 and the Agent busts by going over 21
Agent wins if player busts and agent doesn't bust
If both player and agent doesn't bust, the hand closest to 21 wins
If both player and agent have the same value, then it's a push
Agent with Jokers wins all (against player with Joker hand)
When both parties bust, i.e. go over 21:
(a) agent wins if closer to 21
(b) player has a push rather than a loss if player is closer to 21\
(c) agent wins all ties
Translation:
Negatives: 8D with 8 jokers, H17, DOA (no soft doubling), no DAS, No re-splits, Split Aces receive 1 card only. There is no 3:2 blackjack.
Positives: 8 jokers because all wins pay even money unless Player has 2 Jokers or Joker + Ace., which pays 2 to 1 so long as dealer doesn't have a joker (my understanding). Player has option of early surrender. If player busts and dealer busts, player has a push so long as player's value is closest to 21 and doesn't push with agent.
What a F*CKED UP BJ game! I'm interested because they have tournaments and I can invite my friends. I suspect an Joker / Ace side-count should help and the proper (ES) strategy.
You left out the HARDEST PART...
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 05:11:02 (#1424)
... THE ANTE! Seriously, the only way to gain an edge at this game is to be the banker, foggitabout it! Seek out Indian casinos that offer the real deal. zg
place to look
Posted by The Mayor on 10-Dec-2002 09:19:06 (#1431)
If you ask, he may have that information handy.
Great site to visit anyway.
--Mayor
u don't need the bankroll if u play against morons
Posted by chexican on 26-Jun-2005 11:12:44 (#13390)
I believe that the place you are referring to is the lucky derby in citrus heights, i turned 300 into 2500 in three hours banking that game today. There are MANY "amatuers" that play the game, and for that reason, i think that the banker has more than a 1.5% advantage. What I do is bring 1000 with me, if i lose it, i go home, so far, i'm i'm 3 for 3, and have made 4,000
What are you talking about????
Posted by phantom007 on 27-Jun-2005 00:17:18 (#13391)
If you are referring to a "Player-B/R'd" BJ game, then I do not think that you have it right.
Congrats. on your win!
Your "MORONS" (our PLOPPIES) "pay for the flashing lights and fountains, and comps", in "casino-speak". May the Supreme Being just LOVE them to.....well, "DEATH" would not be productive for CC's/AP's, therefore, LOVE THEM TO PROFITS for the short-term, and lots of FREE RFBA for the long-term.
Our Stores must make PROFITS! CC's/AP's will exist ONLY if their HOST continues to exist and THRIVE as well. Therefore, may I suggest that Morons/Ploppies are nothing but the most welcomed INFESTATIONS!
THEY FEED THE HOST, while WE slowly NIBBLE at their PRIVATES!
So you have plowed into a group of Morons?!....then plow them over!
Or maybe you have just plowed into a "statical deviation"!!!!
BE CAREFUL!
phantom007.
With the typical player giving you a 3% edge...
Posted by zengrifter on 27-Jun-2005 18:57:31 (#13395)
... after the house collects its ante, you most certainly have NOT a guarantee of winning. Depending on what the average bet-size is, your RoR could be quite high.
I once lost 90u in a perfect hole-card read over 3hrs - my edge was 10%.
You may in fact be the moron. zg
Not only that...
Posted by Automatic Monkey on 27-Jun-2005 21:13:01 (#13397)
A player who plays perfectly has an advantage over the dealer before the ante and the "cooperation" has a basic strategy card and a bankroll that will blow you right out of your chair if you try to bank the game. Remember he is getting a cut of that ante kicked back so you are paying it and he's not. The game probably is backcountable in some way but you can drive to Nevada and back before you get a chance to jump in.
Re: Need help on CA No-Bust BJ Strategy
Posted by Gambleholic on 10-Dec-2002 11:50:36 (#1435)
A partner and I ran some simulations on this game (30 million hands for each removal using KO count). The result is: this game lends the bank an almost 1.5% advantage (1.44 to be exact). The effects of blackjacks are muted (through substantially less frequency), while busting is still harsh (because the bank wins all ties and only PUSHES when you beat them). We estimated the pivot point was about 7. Considering this was an 8-deck shoe, you'd have a lot of waiting to do. There are a few deviations for BS from normal BJ, but simply put, this game is beatable IF you have the bankroll and the stomach to bank >$300/round (safe estimates). Do you have at least $50,000 to put into this venture? More importantly, can I borrow some? ;-)
REAL SIDECOUNTS... for BjFool and S.Donelow
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 05:23:00 (#1425)
...require a multi-parameter adjustment, as first suggested by Gordon'76, Griffin'79, and elaborated at length by Jalib'83 - due to the waning 1-2D games these sophisticated bivaluate approaches may not be worth the effort, but this is the theory and application.
Michael Hall talks Multiparameter (paste entire URL)
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=multiparameter+counts&start=10&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=1991Sep29.043150.15862%40walter.bellcore.com&rnum=19
Google Groups / Multiparameter Counts -
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=multiparameter+counts&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&start=0&sa=N
Ted Forester talks Multiparameter -
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=1036
Oops correct links -
Posted by zengrifter on 11-Dec-2002 03:18:51 (#1502)
M'Hall's multiparameter report(paste entire URL) -
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=How+to+Beat+Single+Deck+Blackjack&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=1991Sep29.042855.15699%40walter.bellcore.com&rnum=1
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=How+to+Beat+Single+Deck+Blackjack&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=1991Sep29.043457.15935%40walter.bellcore.com&rnum=2
Rodeo offers cover oppty *LINK*
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 05:48:07 (#1426)
Mid December offers an excellent oppty for counters to disguise as dumb sh*tkickers! zg
----------------
Rodeo Spells Relief for Vegas Hotel Operators
Las Vegas Gaming Wire
by Chris Jones
LAS VEGAS -- Although the competition will take place exclusively at the Thomas & Mack Center, the Wrangler National Finals Rodeo's economic impact will be felt by businesses throughout the Las Vegas Valley.
Now in its 18th run in Southern Nevada, this year's event, which runs through Dec. 15, is expected to sell nearly 99,000 room nights at local resorts while generating a nongaming economic impact of more than $34.6 million.
"The National Finals Rodeo is always a great event for boosting our December revenues and occupancy levels," said Erika Brandvik, spokeswoman for the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority. "It's probably the premier example of a special event that drives people to this city."
The authority is anticipating total ticket sales of 174,000 over the 10-day event, a slight increase compared with last year's 172,500 tickets sold. The rodeo is also projected to bring in 39,000 visitors compared with the nearly 38,600 visitors who took part a year ago, Brandvik said.
continued (click link)
The Battle of the Counter Army
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 10-Dec-2002 13:26:48 (#1439)
In their quest to crush the casino armies, all the great counter generals got together and created the most sophisticated weapons of destruction the casinos had ever seen. They built great engines of destruction, running on precision quarter-deck tank treads, guided with the latest shuffle track navigation software, with huge side count mounted cannons ready to fire multiple purple chips, the great counter army drove into battle.
When the casino troops first saw the great advantage machines, their first thought was to run in fear. They wanted to quickly push the button to the big '86 bomb. Mutual Assured Destruction, banning and disbarment from the battle field, the ultimate weapon. But, wait! The casino troops quickly noticed that the counter army's battle machines were so complicated and sophisticated that many of the troops didn't know how to operate them correctly. They were so busy matching their side counting cannon to their playing efficiency multi-level seekers, they didn't have time to fully utilize their machines.
The counter troops drove their tanks in circles, running into each other, and when trying to fire their massive cannons, it often resulted in blowing themselves up. The casino troops just stood by and watched the counter armies massive machines destroy themselves and slowly grind to a halt. At nightfall, a few casino troops marched down to the battlefield and shot any counter survivors in the head.
The counter generals withdrew in defeat. "More sidecount cannons are needed!", declared one. "Unbalanced multi-level hand signals will solve the problem", muttered another. They set about designing an even more complicated machine, one that would approach 99% playing efficiency on the dastardly 14 Vs 8 battle situation.
While the rest of the generals were busy running billion hand simulation of side count blocks, two troops snuck away from the group with a few recruits. They were General HiLo and his assistant Corporal KO. Nobody really missed them, after all, General HiLo had graduated dead last from his class at West Point, and Corporal KO's performance was deemed even worse. Together their plans always seemed very one-dimensional. "14 vs 7? They don't know if they should split or surrender!", all the other generals used to joke.
Ignoring the jeers, General HiLo and Corporal KO began drilling their small band of recruits. Soon with a little training, these soldiers could march for miles and miles, for days on end, without getting the least bit tired or weary. Close order drills, multiple marching formations, not carrying all the extra baggage of the other fighting systems, they could quickly carry out all sorts of tasks, without breaking ranks or stride.
Soon, came the day for battle. The General issued each of his recruits with a single red brick. "What?", protested the recruits, "Where are the flashing hole card aiming devices? What are we going to do without shuffle tracked ace density guidance systems?" The General would hear none of it. "You are disciplined troops, be prepared to lay your life on the table", was all he said. And so the HiLo troops marched into battle (in single file, naturally).
When the casino army saw the counter army marching towards them, they didn't even take notice. They had sophisticated eye-in-the-sky weapons, just waiting to detect the massive counter machine's return. "HA-HA!", laughed one casino trooper, "They don't have any side count cannons!" "Cannons hell, they don't even have 9 rank slingshots", agreed another. And so the HiLo troops were allowed to march right up to within arms reach of the casino army. Eyeing the huge brick-like bulge in the counter's pockets, the casino army turned its head to yell up at management about Christmas Bonuses, considering the huge bankrolls they were going to steal from these unarmed fighters. But it was too late, the instant the casino army took its eyes from the counters, they quickly pulled the bricks from their pockets, raised them above their heads, and mightily brought them down, smashing the casino army's pointed little heads like overripe watermelons.
On the march back from the battlefield, loaded down with massive amounts of gaudy casino gold jewelry, the army passed by the counter generals. "More simulations!", cried one general. "Mount that ace-tracking shuffle cutter onto that unbalanced platform wing", hollered another. The army took no notice. They had heard the next battlefield was primarily blue in color, and so they were busy changing into blue uniforms, in order that they may once again march right up to the opposing army, and crudely smash their pointed heads with their simple bricks.
****
This story was inspired by some recent events in the Afghan war. On the same day that a guidance system on a B-1 Stealth Bomber had failed, and 8 billion dollars worth of plane was ditched into the Indian Ocean, a B-52 bomber dropped one of the first daisy-cutter bombs onto the battle field.
The B-52s last major design improvement was done sometime in 1951. The cost of the planes have all been fully depreciated, probably sometime in 1963. If anything fails on the plane, you fix it by wrapping some bailing wire around it, and if that doesn't work, slap some duct tape on it.
The daisy-cutter bomb is basically a big 2000-pound M-80 firecracker strapped to a wooden skid. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't light a big fuse with a GI-issue windproof Zippo lighter, before they push them out the back of the plane. The sophisticated satellite guided cruise missile costs about 1 million dollars a shot. The daisy cutter bomb costs $8000.
The 25 million dollars of cruise missiles fired on the opening day of the war, caused the enemy to retreat into mountain strong holds where they vowed to fight to the death. Three daisy cutter bombs dropped outside one region of Afghanistan, caused a whole city to immediately surrender.
1 cruise missile = 125 daisy cutters. 1 B-1 Stealth Bomber = Several squadrons of B52s.
****
BjFool and S.Donelow take note!
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 16:01:28 (#1449)
AbeM, what about bangers, glims, and irradiated decks? zg
Re: BjFool and S.Donelow take note!
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 10-Dec-2002 16:38:02 (#1453)
Those things you mentioned, along with nicotine colored daub, are more along the lines of covert sys-ops, as opposed to outright armed action.
It's Obvious that...
Posted by SammyBoy on 10-Dec-2002 16:23:08 (#1452)
General HiLo and Corporal KO are Marines! This is a great post, you are truly a talented writer!
I am recommending the post for pub in...
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 21:40:03 (#1473)
BJForum (Abe, are you really The Bishop?) zg
Re: The Battle of the Counter Army
Posted by BjFool on 10-Dec-2002 16:52:04 (#1454)
thank you Abraham for a well put advice, a word to the wise is sufficient as they say.
point taken...but not digested yet....i've got a lot more ruminating to do before I can reach the same conclusions as you gentlemen.
p.s. Knowledge is a great thing, the more you have the better, our good judgement depends on it. I'm not convinced just yet that too much knowledge is probably detrimental when it comes to real play, it all depends on how you organize it and how you exploit it.
BjFool,
Re: The Battle of the Counter Army
Posted by LTC on Vacation on 10-Dec-2002 20:46:34 (#1468)
One note the daisy cutter is usually dropped by a c130 turbo prop. The weapon is considerably large and from what Janes states in its web site is not drooped from the heights that the B52 works from. The daisy cutter was originally developed as a jungle clearing device in Viet Nam. It was used successfully in the gulf war to clean out Iraqi trenches. Also accuracy is not the bombs strong point due to being dropped by parachute. It is essentially a liquid gas weapon. Now the bunker busters are LAZER GUIDED and can be dropped by an F-16. This one is delivered from medium to high altitudes for speed concerns in order to puncture the concrete or rock crusts of bunkers etc.
I agree with the theme of your story and that is Keep It Simple Stupid, KISS. The Marines are famous for not changing things that work fine. Fun story.
Beautiful Post
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 10-Dec-2002 20:39:54 (#1467)
Keep it simple.
Re: The Battle of the Counter Army
Posted by Steephen on 16-Dec-2002 15:03:48 (#1791)
Very well written, Imaginative and Entertaining.
Dealer Mistakes
Posted by SammyBoy on 10-Dec-2002 13:32:29 (#1440)
Last night I had a dealer hit and bust a hard 17 thinking he had 16. The last time I played the dealer stood on 16 thinking she had 17. Last night it helped me, the time before it hurt me but helped everyone else at the table. I kept my mouth shut both times. It's amazing that they could make these type mistakes.
Re: Dealer Mistakes
Posted by kyzr on 10-Dec-2002 13:58:03 (#1442)
Last weekend I during a high count I had 8 units out ($40). Dealer had an ace up. There was a PC watching, so for various reasons I "insured for less" ($4!!). The dealer had the BJ and paid off my $4 insurance bet, but never took my original bet from the circle. Luckily the PC had left by then. That was at the end of the shoe and she then gave me the cut card, so maybe is was on purpose. I was the only player at the table that had given her a tip.
That 8 unit swing took me from a small loss to a small win...
With small stakes and a shoe game...
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 21:22:16 (#1470)
...YOU DON'T NEED COVER!! zg
Re: With small stakes and a shoe game...
Posted by kyzr on 11-Dec-2002 23:56:45 (#1555)
My post was poorly worded. The play was not made for cover. Guess it should have said:
"There was a PC watching, AND for various reasons..."
I mentioned the PC to illustrate how close the dealer came to making the error right in front of her boss.
Sorry for the confusion
Re: Dealer Mistakes
Posted by BradRod on 10-Dec-2002 15:08:29 (#1444)
i've seen many dealer mistakes in playing.
one time after being paid 3:2 for my blackjack i put down my next bet waiting for the other players' hands to be played out. the dealer busted and paid the table including the bet that i had out with no cards next to it. i felt i needed to point this out to him and he could not understand the part about that being my bet for the next hand, he as much as insisted on paying it. i relented.
another time i pulled for a whole string of cards to a 15 against the dealer's bust card. the dealer called out 18 as the he laid the last card down. i counted again and got 15. so, i was standing either way. i asked the dealer "are you sure ?" he counted again and got 18. at this point this caught the attention of everyone at the table. i said to the dealer.. "ok if you say so". getting some smiles and winks from the other players.
the dealer turns his hole card and pulls one to make 17, he counted my cards again and paid me, after tucking the cards in the discard tray he asked me "what did you have again ? " i replied "whatever you said i had."
ihad a dealer pay me three greens for a bet of 3 red.
At the risk of going on too with this posting, the best mistake was one that i made.
i had just checked in a purple (500) for a stack of quarters, put my bet down, one other player at the table. This player was overbetting wildly. losing a fortune and was very loud and disturbed about it. He put down a bet of 3 black chips. the dealer called out to the floor person, TABLE MAX. this other player starts protesting, what do you mean table max, i only have 300 there. max is 500. the player keeps protesting the point on and on real loud as the dealer dealt and played the hands out. the guy lost. the dealer called out table max paying out. the guy blew his stack saying what do you mean paying out table max as he was picking up his chips, he was so angry he walked away still screaming. all this had held my attnetion start to finish so, that i was not even sure what my hand was but when i looked down there were purple chips sitting side by side in my betting circle. i couldn't stop laughing and had to quit playing for a while.
Re: Dealer Mistakes
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 10-Dec-2002 15:15:25 (#1446)
"i had a dealer pay me three greens for a bet of 3 red."
We must have had the same dealer. I got a 3 green for 3 red payoff on a
17 vs 17 push. I guess if you are going to mess up, mess up big.
Re: Dealer Mistakes
Posted by hammer on 10-Dec-2002 15:44:58 (#1447)
My best was a sweet looking thing that was overly friendly and
paid me even when I busted. A few other patrons
caught on then I left swiftly.Heavy tipping too.( a rarity ) never turn
away a gift horse away.
Dealer error THINKFAST!
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 16:07:55 (#1450)
CardCounter.Com
Main Message Board
Dealer error THINKFAST!
Posted By: zengrifter
Date: 10/26/02 4:09:32 p.m.
In Response To: Honesty in BJ (ZOD)
Dealer error THINKFAST!
My last trip provided a rash of dealer errors that were exploitable only by thinking fast - like the dealer hard 20 that was then hit with 2 Aces while I
stood on 99 with a maxBet - as the dealer called the PC over I yanked my 9s up and started scratching - had the PC seen my cards tucked he likely would NOT have called it a dead hand.
Same dealer/table w/ 2 maxBets out I was dealt 1 card to each, whereupon I found an 8 on one and a 10 on the other, dealer showing 10 - careful to keep them seperate the dealer called a floorgal who did not respond - dealer then attempted to push them together to make 1 hand whereupon I pushed them appart again (in a playful manner) and requested a PC, who upon arriving said "deal him 2 more cards." I now held 8-4 on the 1st hand and PC asks if I want to play it - "no" - 2nd hand is 10-10 - "yes" --keeping the cards
seperate was key.
At the Hshoe recently 2 ploppies invaded my heads-up game and somehow I was dealt 3 cards which I quickly glanced at 8-3-5 - I kicked back the 5 in front of my bet and when the dealer got to me he asked "whats this?" "I dunno." He quickly burned it stating that if he calls the suits over it will be a dead
round.
I had more of these incidents in 14 days of play then I can recall in any previous 200 days of play.
Be alert for dealer errors and THINKFAST! (like when the dealer fails to burn a card after shuffle, common at Barona, if you don't like your hand...) zg
HERE'S ONE
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 18:38:57 (#1461)
CardCounter.Com
Main Message Board
Re: Mixed sentiments HERE'S ONE=
Posted By: zengrifter @ CC.com
Date: 10/26/02 7:41:13 p.m.
HERE'S ONE (a 1-time per club/yr) = I'm at 3rd base, face-down pitch, I spread to 2hands but I'm only dealt 1hand by dealer-error - I push the cards apart WITHOUT FIRST LOOKING, 1card to a bet (I do this quickly while the dealer is occupied at 1st base, remember I haven't looked at them and I did have both bets out properly) In most clubs the PC will instruct the dealer to deal another card each and then give me the option to play or FREE SURRENDAR (ie, dead hand) each. This is a move that I learned from the several times that a dealer DID deal 1card per spot. zg
Re: HERE'S ONE
Posted by BradRod on 12-Dec-2002 19:38:05 (#1573)
ZG,
I have never played any face down games as you described in this and your other post in this string. One question though. Even though you were able to perfrom the manuevers you described while the dealer was distracted ---- I can't even tuck some chips away off the table without the dealer eying my movements. Aren't you concerned about the surveillance camera ?
Brad.
Re: HERE'S ONE - YES
Posted by zengrifter on 12-Dec-2002 20:33:12 (#1581)
"Aren't you concerned about the surveillance camera?"
------------
Yes, I am and that's why - a) its a 1-time/year move, and b) I don't look at my cards, just seperate them sight unseen - thus I have 'plausible deniability' zg
any correlation between dealer 'mistakes' and tips
Posted by Steve on 12-Dec-2002 19:42:44 (#1574)
The most common mistake that I have seen is when your bet is either paid off for a BJ or removed because you busted and then you replace your bet to be ready for the next hand and the dealer busts and then pays off everybody, including you, even though you either were already paid or you busted. I've seen this error quite often.
I am wondering if there is any correlation between the size of tips and the frequency of dealer "mistakes" that benefit the player.
I have an interesting story to relate from a small casino in biloxi, I was playing 21 + 3 and was winning, I always tip good if I am winning, when you use multiple parameters and side counts your higher win rate allows you the luxury of tipping big (just kidding), anyway, I put out a tip on the blackjack hand and the dealer moved it to the +3 hand and then proceeded to deal me a 4 and 6 of diamonds and then his up card was, you guessed it, the 5 of diamonds. A straight flush. I forget the payout for this bet, but I think it was 9 to 1, and the tip bet was one green chip, for a total "tip" of $250.
I asked some of my friends about this and they said "run, don't walk, away from that casino, the dealers obviously cheat". I don't know about that, I'm not sure how a dealer can cheat when dealing out of a six deck shoe. I don't know if it is possible to deal seconds out of a shoe or not, I've never seen anyone do that. I just thought it was wierd that the dealer moves the tip bet to the +3 hand and then deals me the highest payout hand possible. Coincidence? Or, too wierd to be a coincidence?
Steve
All too easy?
Posted by Calib Vincent on 10-Dec-2002 13:59:50 (#1443)
I just don't get this online BJ thing! Isn't it just too easy to run a parallel perfect play computer and take bank? I am REALLY suspicious about gambling money on the internet. Surely they can monitor whether you're counting and refuse to pay up?
What are some reliable sites that are easy to beat? (I understand if you don't want to spread the word, but a discrete personal e-mail to help me out would be much appreciated).
Thanks,
cjv@pandora.be
Re: All too easy?
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 10-Dec-2002 20:22:22 (#1466)
I didn't believe it either. I read Bill Haywoods book beat web casinos and gave it a try first for a $25 bonus. I have been playing online ever since. They simply figure that you would not download a casino to play it for the bonus $ then never come back to play them again. For every 1 disciplined player there are dozens of ploppy's, just like in a real casino and that's how they make their money. Maybe we should talk about that on the non-BJ board? I don't want to "wear out my welcome" here.
Re: All too easy?
Posted by Z on 10-Dec-2002 22:20:48 (#1478)
You can't count a 5 deck game that is shuffled after each hand...
Z
Re: All too easy?
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 10-Dec-2002 22:31:40 (#1481)
The advantage is not achieved by counting. The advantage comes from the fact that they will often give you a $100+ bonus for a $100 deposit. All you want to do is play even with the house for the required # of hands then leave with your deposit and their bonus bucks.
which coupon book is best
Posted by hammer on 10-Dec-2002 15:10:10 (#1445)
going in a few days to Veggie...
like the idea of the rodeo cover....
who has the best coupons -presume las vegas advisors...
www.casinoperks.com *NM*
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 15:51:35 (#1448)
Re: which coupon book is best
Posted by joe_r_black on 10-Dec-2002 18:27:02 (#1460)
Heard the coupons wouldn't be as good starting in January for the LVA coupon book. Anyone else heard anything?
We are holding our breath...
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 21:55:09 (#1474)
...but the casinoperks are good and offer a few advantages - they are for casinos different than LVa, they can be played multiple same session/day, they can be legally purchased several times per year (once monthly for locals), for starters. zg
Insurance???
Posted by SammyBoy on 10-Dec-2002 16:14:10 (#1451)
Does anyone know what the success rate should be for insurance? At least in the short run I am insuring successfully less than 50%. I've played 550 hands, insured 11 times and the dealer had BJ only 3 of those times. I'm taking insurance only when the count is +1 or above and this is a single deck game. I realize 550 hands is a very small sample, but what should my success rate be when taking insurance? Thanks in advance.
Re: Insurance???
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 10-Dec-2002 19:25:01 (#1463)
"Does anyone know what the success rate should be for insurance? At least in the short run I am insuring successfully less than 50%. I've played 550 hands, insured 11 times and the dealer had BJ only 3 of those times. I'm taking insurance only when the count is +1 or above and this is a single deck game. I realize 550 hands is a very small sample, but what should my success rate be when taking insurance? Thanks in advance."
A small sample yes, but I think you are taking insurance too early. You should consult your tables to find what index # you should be taking insurance. For most single level systems the # is +2 for single deck, +3 for multi. At that point it becomes a positive play, and is worth about 30% of all deviations from basic strategy based on index numbers. This is why it is first on the table, followed by 16 v 10, etc.
Re: Insurance???
Posted by BradRod on 12-Dec-2002 20:28:12 (#1580)
"At that point it becomes a positive play, and is worth about 30% of all deviations from basic strategy based on index
numbers. This is why it is first on the table, followed by 16 v 10, etc. "
I thought 16 v 10 started at TC of 0< and insurance @ +3< from Ill 18 ??
Re: Insurance???
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 13-Dec-2002 09:07:12 (#1615)
Yes, Insurance at +3 for multi deck is the first indice with the highest gain, then 16 v 10 up at anything above 0, etc. The Ill 18 stacks these variances in the order of the gain they will give you, so one should learn them in that order. Afterwards, I would suggest mixing them up like the Mayor does to perfect your skills.
Re: Insurance???
Posted by Z on 10-Dec-2002 22:09:38 (#1477)
Hm, let me attempt some very simple math. Insurance is a sidebet on whether the hole card is a 10 or not. If it is you win 1 unit if not you lose .5. A deck of 52 cards has 16 tens and 36 non-tens. If you were to just bet whether a card is a ten or not you'd win 16 times 1 unit (16 units) and lose 36 times a half a unit (18 units). This is why insurance is a bad bet as far as the basic strategy player is concerned. Let's force the count (using HiLo) to be 1TC by the dealer's A and say 5,6 for you. This would leave the 16 tens and 33 non tens left in the deck. We'd then win 16 units and lose 33 half units or 16.5. Sorry, that's still not good enough. 2TC as per Rob would do it though... Hope this is a valid explanation...
Z
Very Valid!
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 10-Dec-2002 22:23:38 (#1479)
Nice and simple explanation Z.
Re: Insurance???
Posted by The Mayor on 10-Dec-2002 22:25:57 (#1480)
It is reasonable to lose 2 insurance bets for every one you win. After all, it pays 2-1. Thus, out of 12, you "ought" to win 4. 3 is close enough.
But, you are insuring at too low a count. Even for single deck, the count has to be more like 1.7 or so. Round it up to 2.
On the first hand out of a fresh deck, dealer shows an Ace, you are playing two hands.
If you have no T's in either hand, then there are 47 remaining cards, 16 of which are T's, and 31 are non-T's. The odds are 31-16, but insurance pays 32-16 (2-1). Good for you!
If you have 1 T in one of the two hands, then there are 47 remaining cards, and 15 are T's and 32 are non-T's. Then the odds are 32-15 with you as the dog, but insurance only pays 30-15 (2-1). Bad for you!
Re: Insurance???
Posted by SammyBoy on 11-Dec-2002 10:34:11 (#1518)
Mayor,
According to the indices you have for Single Deck, it says take insurance at +1 for HiLo. Am I reading this wrong?
You are not reading it wrong --- It is wrong.
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 11-Dec-2002 15:22:56 (#1529)
For some reason, the HiLo H17 1 Deck numbers the Mayor gives suck.
Here are good numbers:
Insurance +2
9 V. 2 +1
9 V. 7 +3
10 V. A +3
10 V. T +4
11 V. A -2
12 V. 2 +3
12 V. 3 +2
12 V. 4 0
12 V. 5 -2
12 V. 6 -3
13 V. 2 -1
13 V. 3 -2
15 V. T +5
16 V. 9 +5
16 V. T +1
T-T V.5 +5
T-T V.6 +4 (and since you know these two,
double down on soft 20 vs 5 & 6 at the same values: +5 & +4)
Also these are useful:
A-8 V.4 +2
A-8 V.5 +1
A-8 V.6 -1
Thanks ADM! *NM*
Posted by SammyBoy on 11-Dec-2002 16:38:46 (#1534)
Re: You are not reading it wrong --- It is wrong.
Posted by The Mayor on 11-Dec-2002 18:12:59 (#1543)
The Hi-Lo numbers I give are from Wong's professional blackjack analyzer software -- I think the values are truncated, hence 1 for 1.7 (insurance), etc.
--Mayor
Exact number is close to +1.5 *NM*
Posted by T-Hopper on 11-Dec-2002 22:02:57 (#1549)
San Diego Blackjack
Posted by darksun on 10-Dec-2002 16:54:08 (#1455)
Looks like it's time for my second BJ outing.
I'll be in San Diego this weekend and blackjack is on my agenda.
I'm looking for a little insight regarding the blackjack conditions at the Golden Acorn and Barona.
Thanks,
Re: San Diego Blackjack
Posted by hammer on 10-Dec-2002 17:24:09 (#1456)
try valley view for decent dd.
Re: San Diego Blackjack
Posted by joe_r_black on 10-Dec-2002 18:25:07 (#1459)
What are the rules and penetration at Valley View?
Re: joe black/ s.d
Posted by hammer on 10-Dec-2002 18:40:09 (#1462)
hey did you get your code name from that same Brad Pitt movie
anyways
valley view-dd,das,25-1000.
pen-varies
dealer keeps on tokes,many will show burn card,
golden acorn also same rules except 10 min...but worse pen.always
ask to see burn they usually let it go.
Re: joe black/ s.d
Posted by joe_r_black on 10-Dec-2002 21:15:31 (#1469)
Yes the name is from the movie. Just call me death!
Re: San Diego Blackjack
Posted by hinoon on 10-Dec-2002 17:29:47 (#1457)
I can't say for the San Diego area...but for the casinos around LA (The Bicycle, for instance, and the Hollywood Park), I'd stay away.
These casinos play "no bust" blackjack, AKA 22. I think there's a law or something that prohibits casinos in the area from playing "21"...so they get around the law by playing 22. That messes with the statistics in a BIG way...and I'mnot sure anyone has run the optimum play for "no bust" blackjack.
Also, many of these casinos are not set up against the house. Players take turns being the house, and play against each other.
As a caveate, this info is pretty incomplete...Vegas is just too close for me to bother with the local casinos and their odd rules for me to have really inquired much past the, "what the hell is 22??" stage. I've actually been meaning to ask on this board if anyone had any thoughts on CA casinos.
Good luck.
Re: San Diego Blackjack
Posted by darksun on 10-Dec-2002 17:41:19 (#1458)
san diego blackjack is vegas style fortunately. Vegas would be ideal but I have no choice but to patronize SD casinos due to my age.
Those LA games are NOT BJ!...
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 21:24:54 (#1471)
...anymore than online-bonus grifting is! zg
That was what I thought...good to know. *NM* *NM*
Posted by Hinoon on 11-Dec-2002 03:27:52 (#1503)
the pro the blonde and more....
Posted by hammer on 10-Dec-2002 22:34:09 (#1482)
Perched on the edge of his chair, resting a hand precariously low on the blonde's back (she's an escort rented for the evening), Ron appears to be concentrating on everything in Caesars but the cards. He's joking with the dealer, splashing his $500 and $1,000 chips in messy piles, casting lascivious glances at the seductively clad women strolling past. You can see what the pit boss is thinking behind his obsequious smile: "What a fool."
For nearly an hour Ron bets the minimum, seldom changing the size of his bets despite the occasional richness of the deck. He is, however, letting his comely companion play a spot every so often, in effect doubling the amount he is wagering. In a few rounds, Ron and his lady are up several thousand dollars. A crowd begins to form around the table. You can hear people whispering, "He's betting a thousand a hand" and "Look at all those chips." Everyone is mesmerized by the magnitude of his wagering--everyone, that is, except Ron, who appears more interested in working his fingers into the blonde's dress.
A large crowd, according to Ron, provides good cover. The casino is loath to boot out a customer--especially one who's betting so big--in front of other patrons. When five hands in a row produce a disproportionate number of low cards, Ron makes his move.
Looking like a bitter drunk who's miffed at losing his last three hands, Ron covers four different spots with $2,000 each. The pit boss takes a step closer to the table. The woman, seemingly on her own volition, takes a handful of chips and stacks them on the other spots. She looks at Ron for approval. "What the f-" he yells. "You feel lucky? Go ahead! Go ahead; it's only money!" The table is loaded with four $5,000 bets. He's successfully increased his wager nearly twentyfold--and the deck is clearly in his favor.
The dealer has an eight up. The woman, peeking at the cards, reveals Ron's hands: a 20, a blackjack, a 12 and a 19. Ron hits the 12 and busts; naturally he stands on the others. The dealer flips over her hole card, a 10. He wins three out of four, including a blackjack: $12,500 profit.
Ron must be tempted to return to a minimum bet; the deck is no longer rich. Instead, to the crowd's delight (and no doubt the pit boss's, too), Ron yells, "Let it ride! What the hell, double the son of a bitch!" His escort stacks the chips into $10,000 columns. The pit boss grins. The dealer takes a deep breath. And before a card can be dealt, Ron spills his drink all over the table.
The woman shakes her head. "That's bad luck," she says, pulling back the bets. "I know," Ron says to nobody in particular. "The cards are getting cold." Pushing the dealer two $100 chips, Ron gathers his tokens and stumbles to the next table.
For the next six hours, well into the wee hours of the morning, Ron continues to work. Shortly before the sun rises on Las Vegas, when the all-night gamblers start to drink black coffee instead of whiskey, Ron quits. He's up nearly $90,000. "I gotta stop," he says to the dealer. "My luck is changing." Ron leaves one last $100 tip and smiles at the pit boss. "You can never be too superstitious," he announces. "Especially when it comes to cards."
the correct way to post an article ...
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 23:37:23 (#1487)
hammer - the correct way to post an article is to include title and authoe and date and link, along with a para or two, please repost this excellent Michael Konik article from Cigar Aficianado in the correct manner, gratzi! zg
Thanks...
Posted by The Mayor on 10-Dec-2002 23:50:35 (#1491)
The point is, that copyright material should not be posted here in total without the author's consent, and in any event, a reference to the original should be given.
We'll let this one go "as is" since you tagged the reference ...
Thanks for your knowledge base, ZG
--Mayor
Re: the pro the blonde and more....
Posted by SammyBoy on 11-Dec-2002 13:47:32 (#1524)
The real kick in the groin is when the dealer ends up with a blackjack in that high count situation, and not the kind that you can insure.
Many indices learned fast, how? GOLDBRICKS!
Posted by zengrifter on 10-Dec-2002 23:44:40 (#1489)
CCCafe Message 405 of 17612
Many indices learned fast, how?
by zengrifter 11/29/99 3:09am
Beyond the 'I-18' and 'Fab-4' (ie, the 'Catch22') indices, learning an additional 50-75 indices will add another 15% - 25% gain to your expectation... but how does one learn all those numbers?
Contrary to the BJ literature of today and the supreme emphasis placed on learning just 25 or so indices - 1) an extra 15% - 25% gain IS very meaningful to BR growth, and 2) learning those indices is EASY!
The secret to learning them - remember when you learned almost 200 multiplication and division tables? Still remember them? How'd you do it?
Most of us used FLASH CARDS - make your own with the dealer's total above, your total below, and the correct strategy number in the lower left corner where it will be covered by your left thumb (lower right corner for southpaws).
First arrange the cards in order, then when you can go in order rapidly knowing the index without hesitation, reverse the order. When you can go in either direction without hesitation, mix 'em up and reshuffle them periodically. When you can blow thru them in any order without hesitation you are ready.
An average memory player can learn 50+ indices using flash cards in about 4 hours. ZG
Re: Many indices learned fast, how? GOLDBRICKS!
Posted by The Mayor on 10-Dec-2002 23:48:30 (#1490)
I certainly use flash cards -- and know about 50 indices for my play (I used 1/2's). I don't have them in any special order, and never did. I would learn one, when I got it, I added a second one. When I got both, I added the next. Each time I add cards, I shuffle the cards and randomly go through them then shuffle, etc.
Now, to review for a trip, I go through the cards, and any I don't immediately recall I put into a pile, and go through those roughly as above until I have relearned them. Then I through them all toghter and go thru them until I feel sick. I can get my indices up to speed in about 30 minutes now before a trip.
--Mayor
Re: Many indices learned fast, how? GOLDBRICKS!
Posted by Pal on 11-Dec-2002 14:59:35 (#1526)
According to the BJA, the Illustrious 18 caputures 80% of the possible gain from playing efficiency. In a shoe game, the total possible gain from using all the indices is about .3%. therefore, even if you learned all the indices, wouldn't it would only contribute an extra .06%? Therefore, unless your average advantage is less then .4%, your will be adding less then 15% to your overall bankroll.
I dont have the book on me so my numbers may be off, also there is a good chance my logic is somehow wrong, but i am trying to find out the true value of indices, since your opinions on the the I18 is very different then Don's.
Re: Many indices learned fast, how? GOLDBRICKS!
Posted by zengrifter on 11-Dec-2002 21:00:44 (#1546)
See this post and accompanying thread -
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=1250
The Bishop on Side-Counting
Posted by zengrifter on 11-Dec-2002 00:00:29 (#1493)
Here is a vintage article by ASnyder that emphasizes what I've been saying about the over-hyped level-2 Ace-neutral type counts, as well as the inefficiency of Ace-adjusting by estimation of Ace-density per 1/4D - once again, if you use AO2, HO2, UAPC or the like, you will NOT obtain the higher SCORE value that a PC-sim will indicate - so work SMART not hard! zg
-----------------
Can Side-Counting Make You a SUPER COUNTER?
by Arnold Snyder
BJF Vol. IV #3, September 1984
http://www.bjrnet.com/thop/sidecount.htm
I've spent the past 4 years advising players to streamline their card counting strategies. Computer tests and mathematical analyses have shown time and again that the most important factors affecting the card counter's win rate are the game conditions - the number of decks in play, shuffle-point, hands per hour, etc. Given like conditions, the more complex systems rarely significantly outperform the simpler systems. This is especially true in multi-deck games. My angle on beating the tables has been to exploit those games which are the easiest to beat, rather than struggle to get an edge in a tough game.
Most card counters, because they are not full-time pros, do not have enough time to dedicate to the memorization and practice required for the more difficult systems. Yet, casual players who can recognize which games are more exploitable, can do quite well as blackjack players if they can accurately apply a simple count strategy.
One of the major simplifications a player can employ, with little effect on his win rate, is to quit attempting to side-count aces. Many card-counting systems provide ace adjustment advice, but maintaining two separate counts, and then utilizing this information with precision, is not an easy task for most players. In multi-deck games, a side-count of aces will rarely increase a card counter's win rate by more than 1/20 of 1%. Even in a deeply dealt single-deck game, a side-count of aces is not worth more than 1/5 of 1% to a counter's win rate.
continued - http://www.bjrnet.com/thop/sidecount.htm
Re: The Bishop on Side-Counting *LINK*
Posted by T-Hopper on 11-Dec-2002 00:14:22 (#1495)
> Here is a vintage article by ASnyder that emphasizes what I've been saying
> about the over-hyped level-2 Ace-neutral type counts, as well as the
> inefficiency of Ace-adjusting by estimation of Ace-density per 1/4D - once
> again, if you use AO2, HO2, UAPC or the like, you will NOT obtain the higher
> SCORE value that a PC-sim will indicate - so work SMART not hard! zg
Yes you can! See the link below. Start your ace SC at +4 * Decks. Subtract 1 point from the side count for each ace seen. Add primary and secondary counts together and calculate the unbalanced true count. Your pivot (neutral deck TC) will be +4.
If you are using a multi-level count, multiply the numbers above by 2 or 3.
Re: The Bishop on Side-Counting WHOA!
Posted by zengrifter on 11-Dec-2002 15:23:48 (#1530)
>Yes you can! See the link below. Start your ace SC at +4 * Decks. Subtract 1 >point from the side count for each ace seen. Add primary and secondary counts >together and calculate the unbalanced true count. Your pivot (neutral deck TC) >will be +4. <<
-------------------
Whoa! The subject is the antiquated 1/4D Ace-density-estimate that Robster is pushing - do you agree or disagree with Snyder and Uston as to the value of THAT method?
As a side note, please take a moment to reiterate slowly the above method - are you saying that the method you described will afford similar gain as the 3-card Ace secondary count that Snyder describes?
Another question of relevancy - which would perform better - HO2 w/ 20 indices and an Ace-density per 1/4D bet adjustment -or- HiLo w/75 indices and NO sidecount. Which would likely be easier to employ? zg
Re: The Bishop on Side-Counting
Posted by ElementX on 11-Dec-2002 00:21:40 (#1496)
As a user of the AOII, I've struggled with the neutral ace concept. The theory is that the ace has little value in making or breaking a hand, but at the same time it is advantageous for the player, so I'm somewhat confused. Mayor abd anybody else, what do you guys make of this. Are counts like AOII not effective because of this?
ElementX
Re: Ace Value *LINK*
Posted by T-Hopper on 11-Dec-2002 00:31:30 (#1497)
The ace's value to the player comes almost entirely from the 3:2 bonus paid to the player but not the dealer on a blackjack. If BJ pays even money, you would simply use an ace-neutral count and ignore aces completely.
The bottomline -
Posted by zengrifter on 11-Dec-2002 01:05:03 (#1499)
IF you effectively adjust for Ace-density per 1/4D as Carlson and others advocate, what you lose in terms of potential single parameter betting efficiency will leave you with the same and no better gain than if you worked less hard with a level-2 Ace-reckoned count like RPC, ZEN, or EBJ, #indices being equal - thus a count like ZEN w/no Ace bet-adjustment will perform on par with AO2 w/Ace-adjustment-per-1/4D, yet be easier. (see tags comparison below)
(tags 2-A)
HO2 - 112211 0 0-2 0
AO2 - 112221 0-1-2 0
Zen - 112221 0 0-2-1
One possible solution that could ease your transition back to the 'work-smarter' sector is to immediately switch your 9 and Ace tag values BUT KEEP your current AO2 indices. zg
isn't the ace worth more at higher counts?
Posted by s_donelow on 11-Dec-2002 08:07:38 (#1506)
I would agree that at low counts knowing the density of aces isn't worth much, knowing that the odds of getting a blackjack on my table minimum bet are higher than normal because there are a couple more aces in the deck than there sould be doesn't excite me much.
I would imagine, though, that knowing the density of aces at high counts is extremely important for four reasons, more blackjacks and more opportunities to double down on soft hands, and as a negative modifier on doubling down on 11 vs aces and tens, and as a positive modifier on doubling down on 10 vs tens and aces.
Is there any way to calculate the value of knowing the density of aces at high true counts, say TC > 5, instead of the "average" value of this information because, as I said earlier, knowing the density of aces when the count is low isn't very helpful.
When I am going to be putting out large bets I want all the information I can get to advise me on what that bet should be and how to play the hand.
I have been using side counts for years and I just don't get why certain authors say they are "hard". Perhaps I just find making calculations in my head easier than most, I dont know.
Steve
Re: isn't the ace worth more at higher counts?
Posted by Rob McGarvey on 11-Dec-2002 09:48:49 (#1516)
You are a smart man. How would you play BJ if every card left was an A and a 10?? Everything in between that and a new shuffle has a proper bet size attached to it. What I think some of the guys are saying is that for new players they should not go after a count with a side count. I agree. They also think it is not worth the extra effort $$ wise since, A: some players can't handle it and will flop their EV #'s, and B: it simply is not worth it $$ wise. It is every single players responsibility to themselves to make their own decisions about what they are capable of and whether or not it is worth the extra $$.
Re: ace worth more IRRELEVANT
Posted by zengrifter on 11-Dec-2002 15:15:58 (#1528)
>>You are a smart man. How would you play BJ if every card left was an A and a 10?? Everything in between that and a new shuffle has a proper bet size attached to it. << -Robo
-------------------
A "smart man" should also recognize that most long-time knowledgable pros do NOT use a Ace-neutral count w/Ace-adjustment betting anymore for the reasons that I have posted ad-nauseum (in order to offset the antiquated advice being offered by some less-in-the-know posters) zg
Re: ace worth more IRRELEVANT
Posted by Steve on 11-Dec-2002 22:48:50 (#1553)
yet again, you do not answer my questions with facts but just give your opinions. My question was, what is the ace worth at higher counts, with the presumption that since you are going to be placing a relatively large bet and the density of the aces left can make a difference both on the amount of this bet and on the decision to double down or not on several double down plays, that the value of the ace in this case may be large enough to make it worthwhile.
If your answer had been: "even in that case the Ace is still only worth .1% (or whatever the number was that you used in your argument before)" then that would have been an answer to my question. But to say just because other people don't use it means you shouldn't do it, that isn't an answer. And then to say because someone would pose this question means that they are not "in the know", well I guess I don't understand what that means then.
I guess I'm just not "in the know" enough.
Steve
Spreads
Posted by Cyrano on 11-Dec-2002 00:37:44 (#1498)
I'll be going to Reno next weekend and was wondering if someone can tell me a little about spreads and where to go for good games in Tahoe, Reno, and CC. I'll be playing UBZII count in SD and DD games, red-chipper (min bet $5). Can someone tell me REALISTIC max bet spreads for both SD and DD games with no cover and a limit of 1 hour? I simmed the 1-4 spread George C. advocates and $5/hour really didn't appeal to me. Thanks.
s.donelow's cover strategies??
Posted by zengrifter on 11-Dec-2002 01:40:18 (#1500)
**My responses are embedded -
From: s_donelow
Subject: cover strategies??
The reason I stopped playing blackjack in the casinos after playing
pretty much full time for many months was the paranoia of the casinos
in regards to "counting". Even trying lots of "cover" techniques,
mostly concerning my behavior, joking, laughing, bringing several
very attractive ladies with me, pretending to be a "hic", etc,
eventually the casinos figure out what I am up to for the simple fact
that if you watch a counter's betting patterns long enough then you
know that he is counting.
**Tis true that a good act will not go as far as it used to. Perhaps do to your physical demensions, as well as the isolation in which you have developed your skills, I would say that you are playing too long per session - when you are in a gabling venue, 1hr per shift per day is max, and even that goes way beyond what most valid authors advocate.
So, I have been thinking about ways to mask the betting patterns. I
want to propose several ideas about this, ways to mask betting
patterns and get everyone's feedback in terms of what this will do to
edge, risk of ruin, etc.
One idea that I had was to use four different values as the "unit"
and then keep switching between them. I will give a simple example,
using the counting system of choice for the game being played make
the bet be one unit for true counts <= 2 and one "unit" X true count
(I know, I know, ideally it should be the true count -1, but I don't
want that complication) for counts > 2. Now I have three
different "units", one red chip, one green chip, and one black chip.
Assume that I am playing at a table with a minimum of $5 and a
maximum of $2000 (I found games like this at Biloxi). Every time I
go to bet I switch units, so the first time I have to bet the count,
I bet the count in black chips, the next time I bet the count I bet
the count in green chips, the next time I bet the count in red chips,
then I start over, cycling through black, green, red. At the shuffle
I change the order of the "units" from black, green, red to green,
red, black, and at every consecutive shuffle I change the order until
I get back to black, green, red.
**This is what Richard Reid calls "multi-tiered' betting in his new counting tutorial 'Dynamic BJ' http://www.extremebj.com which I am in the process of reviewing for CC.com - interestingly, I had this as an original (my universe) idea when I was just strting out in the 70s though I never used it much. The tiered approach that you suggest is too extreme, however, and will add too much variance to the process. Reid advocates a less extreme approach along with the means for 'randomizing' the teirs throughout a given shuffle (contrary to TH's advice), and for calculating the range of your betting tiers.
The purpose of all of this is, of course, to make it difficult for
the pit to figure out what your betting pattern is. Now, of course,
in my example I used one chip as the "unit", in practice I would make
the unit something more difficult for an observer to catch onto the
pattern with, say three red, three green, two black, or some mixture.
I have a couple of questions:
First, would this actually fool anyone?
Second, is there a fallacy in my reasoning?
**Yes and no - as pointed out the range of your tiers is too extreme and the switch from one tier to the other should be randomized pursuant to one of a few techniques that Reid suggests.
This is the second cover strategy I want to talk about. it combines
a simple progression with the count. The minimum bet is 2 units
(I usually use red chips for this), if you win you press half the winnings,
if you lose you go back to the minimum. You keep the count and alter
playing decisions accordingly. Now, you bet either the count or the
next step in the progression whichever is higher.
I make some modifications to basic strategy when playing this way.
If the count says I should be betting less than the current bet, the
current bet being higher because of the progression, and I get a
double down I either do not double down or I double down for less,
but in no case do I double down so that I have more than the bet the
count would call for after the double down. As an example, say the
true count is 3 and I am using a 10 dollar unit and the current bet,
because of the progression, is $45 and I get a double down hand, the
most I will do is double down for less for $15 because the total bet
called for by the count if I had been betting the count and doubled
down accordingly would be $60.
**(((bong))) Really bad logic here SD
I make similar modifications for splitting decisions. Depending on
the cards to be split I may not split at all if the current bet is
way higher than the bet called for by the count.
**(((BONG!!))) It would appear that your psuedo-progression cover is severly flawed if it regulary causes you to bet "way higher than the bet called for by the count"
I don't see how anyone could keep up with your true count betting
pattern if they were watching the progression most of the time so I
think this is excellent cover. The real question is how much does
this cover cost?
**Possibly mucho!
**A twist on your spuedo progression can be borrowed from Carlson's BJBlood - he advocates a neg-progression during neg-counts (for cover) which nonetheless equate to the correct AVERAGE neg-count betsize.
**If you are playing handheld games in the south you may be able to glean some additional tricks from these previous posts -
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=299
http://www.cardcounter.com/main.pl?read=147
**zg
Newbie w/UBZ2 (wise choice)
Posted by zengrifter on 11-Dec-2002 03:05:11 (#1501)
**My responses are embedded
From: JJ
My name is JJ and I have been reading your posts on cardcounter.com. I was wondering if I may ask you about card-counting and playing. I would like to learn and have decided on UBZII as the count to use since I'm in NorCal and Tahoe and Reno would be the two places I'd frequent.
**There are some excellent games in Reno, Sparks, Tahoe, as well as in N.Cal - Clearlake for one. Another excellent place for BJ that is off most players radar is Wendover and the adjacent Jackpot NV though those venues are closer to SLC. I would advize you to get a current issue of CBJN or a Trackjack.com subscript so that you may perform your own games-recon.
Specifically, do you know much about that system and can you tell me what your opinion is on UBZII? Do you suggest any changes for me in terms of indices or count?
**UBZII is one of the top3 counts going in my estimation - it will perform on par w/most practioners use of HO2 and AO2 WITH NEITHER Ace or TC adjustments!
I am a red-chip player (with a starting bankroll of between $500-1000). I figured if I run out, I'll just wait another month before I start again (lifetime bankroll).
**Clearly you have done your homework, there is nothing wrong with a 'cumulative' approach to playing capital.
I'll mostly be playing single/double decks. Do you have any suggestions for my bet-spreads? I understand you don't think a 1-4 for SD (for AOII) is adequate enough.
**Actually, a 1-4 can be sufficient, depending on the rules, %pene, etc. (A02 Blood cook recommends 1-2 which is NOT sufficient for most 1D games today. I generally try to get down double the spread I feel is adequate for a given game - in a good 1D game where I feel that 1-4 will suffice, I will use 1-8, etc. but this of course is mediated by my act and other factors.
I understand that most counters are secretive as far as protecting their ID (it was a little easier to track you down since you have a profiles section on cardcounter.com which pointed to yahoo). Thank you very much for your time and I'm sorry if I've intruded.
**I've been thoroughly 'Griffinized' so my name used within the casinos is always different now.
**I am taking the liberty to post this communique to CC.com, please do not be shy about continuing the confersation there... though anything of a confidential nature you may certainly write me here again. zg
Clearlake--Good choice!
Posted by Cyrano on 11-Dec-2002 04:41:20 (#1504)
Must be a wine enthusiast (Fetzer wineries, among others)! Beautiful scenery.. good BJ.. I'm in Heaven. ;-)
--JJ
Re: Clearlake--Good choice! ADI DA
Posted by zengrifter on 11-Dec-2002 15:29:31 (#1531)
My Guru Adi Da Samraj has an ashram there - Mountain of Attention near the Harbon Hotsprings nudist colony - as a member of the Adidam 'Sacred Gambling Guild' (yes we tithe %winnings) I can worship the divine and gamble at the same time. zg http://www.adidam.com
Grosjean case
Posted by Cyrano on 11-Dec-2002 06:31:22 (#1505)
Mayor,
I was reading your board when I noticed the copies of legal documents for the Grosjean (Beyond Counting fame) case. From what I surmised, I guess he is trying to set a precident to stop the Griffin Agency from distributing info, hence "slandering" card counters and prevent illegal back-rooming. There must be dozens of these cases every year. Is there a particular reason why this is of particular interest? Do you think if this case succeeds, that life as a counter will be different?
what Griffin does
Posted by Steve on 11-Dec-2002 08:23:38 (#1507)
Griffin lists thousands of players as "21 cheats", these players don't actually cheat, of course, but they count cards. Griffin views card counting as "cheating". When Griffin sends a casino information labelling a player as a "cheat" sometimes they include how the person cheats, e.g. marking cards with ink, bending cards, etc., but they don't always indicate how the person cheats, particularly with "21 cheaters". The employees of a casino have almost no leeway in how they implement the policies of the casino they work for, the policy will say "if a player is listed by Griffin as a cheat, they are immediately barred and escorted off premises", the fact that Griffin doesn't say how the player cheats and lumps card counters in with "cheaters" and calls counters "21 cheats" is not taken into account. So, if your name and picture are in the Griffin book then you won't get to play anywhere for very long. Obviously, Griffin's actions are damaging to counters.
Now, if you think that only "high rollers" get into Griffin you are mistaken. It is quite easy for a player to end up in Griffin. Any pit critter, at any time, can call Griffin up and ask for info on you, they will have the eye in the sky get your smiling face on camera and the Griffin agent will be looking at your face and then will try to match you with their database, either against your picture or the information the pit critter has on you, guess what, though? If there is no match and the pit critter told Griffen that they thought you were "cheating", Griffin will add you to their database as a "21 cheat"!! And, since casinos view counting as cheating they won't have to specify how you are "cheating", the Griffin agent knows anyway that you are a counter, but they don't care.
I have worked as a consultant to the casino industry, I am a computer consultant, not a gaming consultant, but I have been in the survellience room working on the computer system when this was going on, so I have seen it with my own eyes.
Also, I was talking to a pit supervisor of a casino in Biloxi trying to find out what level of play I needed to play at to get air fare, lodging, and meals comped 100% and the woman went on and on about how they use face recognition and player information databases to keep out "21 cheats" and "teams". I never quite understood why she went into all of this with me, I asked her though how many players were in these databases, and she said "thousands", probably "tens of thousands".
This is one of the reasons, but not the only reason, that Grosjean is going after Griffin and why this case is so important. Griffin dispenses inaccurate and blatantly false information which makes it so that players cannot pursue what may be their livelihood or at least a favorite pasttime. Most casinos accept anything that Griffin says as the gospel and don't try to validate the information. Also, Griffin obtains this information illegally because you never gave them permission to get your picture and you never gave the casino permission to share your confidential information with Griffin.
Steve
Wow...
Posted by Cyrano on 11-Dec-2002 09:29:01 (#1514)
Thanks for the detailed posting. It really sheds some light on some of the grey areas. What do you hope will happen if he wins? Get rid of the Griffin book altogether? Since he wasn't counting cards, this case isn't explicitely involving card counters. Do you think the court will make a distinction for all advantage players?
why the Grosjean case is important
Posted by Steve on 11-Dec-2002 22:41:17 (#1552)
No, the Griffin book won't go away. I'm not sure what benefits can come to players if Grosjean wins. Illegally detaining players and threatening them and handcuffing them and assaulting them, knowing that the police will not follow up on a charge of illegal detention, that becoming a thing of the past, that may be all we can hope for.
Casinos will continue to illegally provide personal information on players to Griffin and Griffin will continue to give out erroneous information. Griffin will continue to label players "cheats" who are not cheating but are skilled players instead. I don't think anything that anyone can do will change that. Illegal detention, that is another matter.
Steve
superb post Steve...n.m *NM*
Posted by hammer on 11-Dec-2002 10:28:16 (#1517)
Re: superb post Steve...n.m
Posted by sighguy on 11-Dec-2002 15:12:04 (#1527)
Superb post? There was so convoluted that I got whiplash reading it. I've seen the Griffin books and there's a distinct difference in them between "21 cheats" and "21 counters". While Grosjean picking up the hole card isn't illegal (as long as a device or a bud as the dealer isn't used to "help" in that effort) per se, the presumption is always going to be that cheating is occurring once hole card play is detected. I can't help but believe that Grosjean and Russo are well aware of that fact and should consider it part of "doing business". The way I read all these posts is this: "We (advantange players) can organize attacks against the casinos and we're the 'good guys' - Casinos attempting to organize to protect against advantage players are the 'bad guys'"
I agree that "back-rooming" card counters is wrong (although that's taken on the proportion of an urban legend, since no one can seem to ever give specific proof of it occurring), I have no such compunction against making cheaters lives as miserable as possible.
Lay off the hard stuff for a while
Posted by Abraham de Moivre on 11-Dec-2002 15:58:28 (#1532)
>>>I've seen the Griffin books and there's a distinct difference in them between "21 cheats" and "21 counters".
So do you think that everyone labeled in the book as "21 Cheat" is an actual cheat, or do you think some counters could be mis-labeled?
"Uh, Pardon me sir, before we kick you out, were you counting or cheating? We need to make sure for the book."
>>> I can't help but believe that Grosjean and Russo are well aware of that fact and should consider it part of "doing business".
So, was being followed to another casino, and being detained there, a part of 'doing business'?
Having chips confiscated and handcuffed and detained at the other casino, 'doing business'.
Having to post bail and hire lawyers on trumped up charges the casinos knew where false, 'doing business'.
>>>the presumption is always going to be that cheating is occurring once hole card play is detected
The 'presumption of cheating'? The casino can 'presume' anything they want. However, when they start making verbal threats, physical intimidation, false charges, etc., etc. then they have indeed crossed a line.
>>>I have no such compunction against making cheaters lives as miserable as possible.
I agree totally. The casino went out of its way to illegally harrass Grosjean. They used illegal means to cause him harm. They were 'cheating'. The casino should be nailed to the wall.
Re: superb post Steve...n.m
Posted by T-Hopper on 11-Dec-2002 21:50:08 (#1548)
I agree that "back-rooming" card counters is wrong (although that's taken on the proportion of an urban legend, since no one can seem to ever give specific proof of it occurring)
Some casinos try to do this after almost every routine backoff. I don't know where you get your information from.
what made my post so convoluted?
Posted by Steve the Convoluted on 11-Dec-2002 22:34:50 (#1551)
I'm curious as to what made my post so convoluted. Are you saying that Griffin doesn't use face recognition technology? Or, are you saying that Griffen doesn't put people into their books as "cheats" when they have no real evidence to back up that claim? Or, are you saying that Griffen doesn't give out knowingly false or incomplete information? Or, are you saying that Griffen doesn't illegally obtain the pictures and the information on players that is in their books, since the players never gave the casinos permission to pass personal information onto Griffen, and the player never gave Griffen permission to take their picture? Or, are you saying that handcuffing and assaulting a player for "card bending" when the casino knew full well that the player was not bending cards, easy enough to check this out, just look at the tape of their play that the eye in the sky has, is "fighting the cheaters"? Or, are you saying that a player being followed into a casino and then lied to about the gaming commission's involvement and then the player having his money stolen and having to spend time in jail and having to hire lawyers to fight charges which were never actually brought in the first place is "fighting the cheaters"?
The casino did not suspect Grosjean and Rosso of hole card play, they accused them of bending cards because the information that Griffen supplied claimed that Rosso was a known cheat who uses card bending.
Is this post also convoluted?
Steve
Question
Posted by The Mayor on 12-Dec-2002 11:16:22 (#1564)
You said: "I've seen the Griffin books"
Rumor has it that you work in survelience, I am just curious about this, and what you are willing to share here?
Thanks!
--Mayor
Re: Question YES!
Posted by zengrifter on 12-Dec-2002 11:53:58 (#1565)
YES! Any surviellance pros are INVITED to be OPEN here (both sides can LEARN)!
zg (ps - the last time we made this offer 'Lifesabet' stopped posting and instead now spams his own new site at less-informed venues like the you-know-whoCafe)
Superb Post But Not Entirely Accurate
Posted by Buick Riviera on 11-Dec-2002 11:32:46 (#1522)
Also, Griffin obtains this information illegally because you never gave them permission to get your picture and you never gave the casino permission to share your confidential information with Griffin.
The above statement simply isn't true. You never need anyone's permission to take their picture and publish it any fashion you wish so long as the subject of the picture is in a place open to the public where there is no expectation of privacy. That's why voyeurism pics are illegal and pics taken inside a casino are not. Anyone who walks in a casino knows that their picture is being taken from the moment they set foot in the place.
Where the legal problem might lie is the labeling of the subject of the picture as a cheat. Even then, it isn't illegal in the sense that anyone goes to jail for slander or libel. It just means that the victim is entitled to some money but only to the extent that is necessary to compensate for the dimished reputation of the victim. Thus those that go in with a tarnished reputation to begin with end up receiving relatively little money.
Finally, as to Grosjean at least, expect the casinos to present a "public figure" defense (remember Faldwell v. Flynt and the movie "Absence of Malice"?). Grosjean is a well known "public figure" in the gaming community and if so deemed by the court, slander or libel can't be found, absent malice.
The defense of absence of malice is a no brainer for the casinos: "We treat everyone this way not just Grosjean. We harbor no malice towards him."
These cases are very difficult to prove and even if succesful often do not return significant awards. That's why most lawyers, regardless of location, won't take them. Don't expect precedent from this case. Don't even expect this case to go to trial.
Instead expect Grosjean, et al. to not gamble, becaues they are advantage players, and simply settle this matter before it ever goes to trial.
Buick
Re: Grosjean case
Posted by The Mayor on 11-Dec-2002 08:29:40 (#1508)
This case is in regards to two very high-profile advantage players. Grosjean and Russo are very well known, most who are harrassed are more anonymous.
The case is unique in that they were not counting, they was using more advanced methods.
I do not believe there are dozens of such cases per year, I hear about a few each year, and it is very hard to get a lawyer to take such a case. For the most part, there is not enough evidence, in this case there is plenty to go around.
Finally, the damages the plantiff's are seeking have been explicitly not limited by the judge, so good fun lies ahead.
--Mayor
Re: Grosjean case
Posted by Cyrano on 11-Dec-2002 09:00:17 (#1510)
It sounded like their method was spooking the hole card. But there's more at stake than just money, no? Unless, they can somehow bankrupt Griffin.. ;-)Grosjean is a high-stakes player, but I've never heard of Russo. Is he also published? What's his specialty?
*********
This case is in regards to two very high-profile advantage players. Grosjean and Russo are very well known, most who are harrassed are more anonymous.
The case is unique in that they were not counting, they was using more advanced methods.
I do not believe there are dozens of such cases per year, I hear about a few each year, and it is very hard to get a lawyer to take such a case. For the most part, there is not enough evidence, in this case there is plenty to go around.
Finally, the damages the plantiff's are seeking have been explicitly not limited by the judge, so good fun lies ahead.
--Mayor
English
Français
Italiano