Another good session at 6:5 single deck
- Thread starter AnIrishmannot2brite
- Start date
This cute little story has no more bearing then the poor misguided Irishman's. Who cares if someone wins or loses playing a few rounds of a bad SD game. It has no significance to the true outcome. Saying you saw some sap lose after watching him play a few rounds is as ignorant as Irish's claim to being able to beat this SD in the manner in which he plays it after an extremely small sample size. I suppose if you were to catch a bad beat playing a shoe game with great rules and pen, someone watching you could call you a sucker too. Or at least based on your rationale anyway.
By the way Irish, you got lucky. This game sucks, at least the way you're attacking it. I could not care less what you think about it however, so carry on earning your very appropriate name.
By the way Irish, you got lucky. This game sucks, at least the way you're attacking it. I could not care less what you think about it however, so carry on earning your very appropriate name.
Isolated Instance
I pointed out isolated instance, Maz but I have been observing the "going's on" around me in the casinos for years and years that substantiate the statistical data. To talk of YEARS of examples would comprise a bit too much to put in a single post on here. The actual point of the post might have been to ponder why anyone knowledgeable enough to be counting would try to beat this game. The point made might also be the simple statement in the first line of the post that I was astonished that any experienced player on here would advocate singledeck 6:5 in any favorable light.
I pointed out isolated instance, Maz but I have been observing the "going's on" around me in the casinos for years and years that substantiate the statistical data. To talk of YEARS of examples would comprise a bit too much to put in a single post on here. The actual point of the post might have been to ponder why anyone knowledgeable enough to be counting would try to beat this game. The point made might also be the simple statement in the first line of the post that I was astonished that any experienced player on here would advocate singledeck 6:5 in any favorable light.
Last edited:
I played his recommended "sim" for 3 decks. I didn't get any BJ's. It seems his system is perfect. The EV of 3:2 and 6:5 are exactly the same!!!!
1. Irish's sample is way, way too small.
2. He is using too much camo is such a bad game.
3. A 30:1 spread should be good with a tonne of indeces.
4. Since most Advance Counts have an ace side count or some way of exploiting the power of the ace, it is more important to have a massive spread, the ace is significantly less valuable than in 3:2.
5. A 50:1 spread would be able to get to this game. But who knows for how long.
1. Irish's sample is way, way too small.
2. He is using too much camo is such a bad game.
3. A 30:1 spread should be good with a tonne of indeces.
4. Since most Advance Counts have an ace side count or some way of exploiting the power of the ace, it is more important to have a massive spread, the ace is significantly less valuable than in 3:2.
5. A 50:1 spread would be able to get to this game. But who knows for how long.
I think we are getting all mixed up here.
bjcount is simming the irishman' s game, in which he didn't state what count he was using. I am assuming hi-lo. (he certainly didn't state mentor, AM, I know thats what you use to beat this game) He also doesn't have a 30-1 spread or even 10-1. He bets $100 off the top at roughly a 1.5% disadvantage. His next bet is $25, and then $10. Thats an average of $45 waiting or small bet. making his spread between 6-1 and 7-1.
Then we add in the fact that he raises his bet to $100 at count of +3, in which by my calculation, he is not yet playing at an advantage. At best close to even.
Also, he said one dealer consistantly dealt near to the last card. But on average penetration was 30 cards. There is no way he is not playing a losing game, unless he is employing techniques that he hasn't told us about.
bjcount is simming the irishman' s game, in which he didn't state what count he was using. I am assuming hi-lo. (he certainly didn't state mentor, AM, I know thats what you use to beat this game) He also doesn't have a 30-1 spread or even 10-1. He bets $100 off the top at roughly a 1.5% disadvantage. His next bet is $25, and then $10. Thats an average of $45 waiting or small bet. making his spread between 6-1 and 7-1.
Then we add in the fact that he raises his bet to $100 at count of +3, in which by my calculation, he is not yet playing at an advantage. At best close to even.
Also, he said one dealer consistantly dealt near to the last card. But on average penetration was 30 cards. There is no way he is not playing a losing game, unless he is employing techniques that he hasn't told us about.
Was betting up to $300.00 bucks in very positive situations. Such as +4 running count near the half deck mark.
And on the low end putting up only 10 bucks at negative count: -2 or lower.
This pattern consistently works on the strategy trainer (this forum) I just deduct for the lowered natural payout.
And on the low end putting up only 10 bucks at negative count: -2 or lower.
This pattern consistently works on the strategy trainer (this forum) I just deduct for the lowered natural payout.
Maybe a tad higher. With 10 bucks in the low end it represents a 30:1 spread.
I'll admit that my camouflage plays were lucky. No doubt about that. I started each new dealer with $100.00 clams right off the top and won most. That and some pushes. The second hand i always dropped down to fifty and later 25 dollars when I'd established a tendency of betting 100 to 300 bucks at various times.
My only criticism of this kind of scheme is that it is completely dependent upon heads up play. Even one extra player at the table kills it.
To me it was a matter of wasting all kinds of time at the shoe games where I'd back count for hours and not get many hands in. So flipping over to the 6:5 table heads up became a rational alternative..
But try the strategy trainer (deducting for the reduced natural payouts)! This will pan out.
I'll admit that my camouflage plays were lucky. No doubt about that. I started each new dealer with $100.00 clams right off the top and won most. That and some pushes. The second hand i always dropped down to fifty and later 25 dollars when I'd established a tendency of betting 100 to 300 bucks at various times.
My only criticism of this kind of scheme is that it is completely dependent upon heads up play. Even one extra player at the table kills it.
To me it was a matter of wasting all kinds of time at the shoe games where I'd back count for hours and not get many hands in. So flipping over to the 6:5 table heads up became a rational alternative..
But try the strategy trainer (deducting for the reduced natural payouts)! This will pan out.
What about measuring the comparison between 6:5 SD and 6 deck shoe game with a different ruler?
Run 2 sims - a 6 decker where a player will wong in at TC+2 with a 1-12 spread, and someone playing 6:5 SD with a 1-20 spread, not upping the bet until the count went to TC+3+ (HiLo). Set a win target (say double a bankroll of 600 units), and then divide the two answers by (20% (incidence) x 80 (hands per hour)) and 120 (hands per hour) respectively to see how many hours it would take to achieve it (if not tapping out first).
Haven't a scooby what the answer would be, but it would provide an indication of if, and by how much, the pos EV frequency of the single deck game offsets the disadvantage of the reduced BJ payoff, and to what degree.
Going back to the original posting, set the penetration to 75% for the shoe game, and 50% to the pitch game.
Run 2 sims - a 6 decker where a player will wong in at TC+2 with a 1-12 spread, and someone playing 6:5 SD with a 1-20 spread, not upping the bet until the count went to TC+3+ (HiLo). Set a win target (say double a bankroll of 600 units), and then divide the two answers by (20% (incidence) x 80 (hands per hour)) and 120 (hands per hour) respectively to see how many hours it would take to achieve it (if not tapping out first).
Haven't a scooby what the answer would be, but it would provide an indication of if, and by how much, the pos EV frequency of the single deck game offsets the disadvantage of the reduced BJ payoff, and to what degree.
Going back to the original posting, set the penetration to 75% for the shoe game, and 50% to the pitch game.
In the original post he said "usually dealt to 30 cards". There is a big difference between dealt to 30 cards and dealt to the last card.
I also don't see how you could figure his spread to be 15-1, with the betting pattern he is stating. Bets $100 of the top, if loses next bet $25, if loses, next bet $10 and sometimes he bets $40 for camo purposes. And these are all at neutral counts, where he is playing at a disadvantage.
I also don't see how you could figure his spread to be 15-1, with the betting pattern he is stating. Bets $100 of the top, if loses next bet $25, if loses, next bet $10 and sometimes he bets $40 for camo purposes. And these are all at neutral counts, where he is playing at a disadvantage.
Last edited:
The perfect game killer.
This thread and it's open discussion is the exact reason why games will continue to get worse.
Discounting the fact that finding a game dealt out to the last card would be rare indeed, getting away with a precise 1-10 spread without some heavy camo would most probably get you booted rather quickly.
Using RPC w/ no side counts, 1-10 spread, heads up, dealt to 5 cards left, provided a win rate of over 6 units/ hr, straight counting. If I could find that game and get away with the spreads, I'd take that over most if not all of the decent 6 deck game available. The SCORE well exceeds ICNT's figure.
That was one of the scenarios the OP presented. The second one, dealing out 30 cards.... well just write a check and donate it to Ronald McDonalds House.... at least you'll get a tax deduction out of it instead of a max lose deduction of 3 grand and a carry over to the next year.
To each their own.
You guys with the software should run the scenario.
BJC
This thread and it's open discussion is the exact reason why games will continue to get worse.
Discounting the fact that finding a game dealt out to the last card would be rare indeed, getting away with a precise 1-10 spread without some heavy camo would most probably get you booted rather quickly.
Using RPC w/ no side counts, 1-10 spread, heads up, dealt to 5 cards left, provided a win rate of over 6 units/ hr, straight counting. If I could find that game and get away with the spreads, I'd take that over most if not all of the decent 6 deck game available. The SCORE well exceeds ICNT's figure.
That was one of the scenarios the OP presented. The second one, dealing out 30 cards.... well just write a check and donate it to Ronald McDonalds House.... at least you'll get a tax deduction out of it instead of a max lose deduction of 3 grand and a carry over to the next year.
To each their own.
You guys with the software should run the scenario.
BJC
Last edited:
The rules for Blackjack games aren't made with counters in mind. Thus an open discussion of 6:5 payout is irrelevant to casino planners. Saying the "reason why games will continue to get worse" is absurd.
Counters aren't a profit maker as much as other players. If casinos really wanted our business they would offer 2:1 naturals.
If we leave the games because all they offer is 6:5 single deck or 60% pen show games? Well then we do not affect the casinos bottom line at all.
The strategy trainer here regularly deals out to about 35 cards or a 68% depth on single deck. Following a scale of
$50 to $100 first bet camo (less as the second and third decks get dealt)
Then $25 when deck is largely neutral.
$10 when it is -1 or lower and then
$50 @ +2
$100 @ +3 to +4
$200 - $300 + 5 or higher.
Will win. Running count numbers included. I don't convert to true count in single deck except when half the deck nears. Another advantage of single deck play: Less head work.
I'm offering the concept only as an alternative to long long back counting sessions at shoe games, or shoe games with lousy pen.
Keep your eyes open for heads up play at single deck . Do some hit and run then return to the shoe game back counting. Or leave for the buffet.
Counters aren't a profit maker as much as other players. If casinos really wanted our business they would offer 2:1 naturals.
If we leave the games because all they offer is 6:5 single deck or 60% pen show games? Well then we do not affect the casinos bottom line at all.
The strategy trainer here regularly deals out to about 35 cards or a 68% depth on single deck. Following a scale of
$50 to $100 first bet camo (less as the second and third decks get dealt)
Then $25 when deck is largely neutral.
$10 when it is -1 or lower and then
$50 @ +2
$100 @ +3 to +4
$200 - $300 + 5 or higher.
Will win. Running count numbers included. I don't convert to true count in single deck except when half the deck nears. Another advantage of single deck play: Less head work.
I'm offering the concept only as an alternative to long long back counting sessions at shoe games, or shoe games with lousy pen.
Keep your eyes open for heads up play at single deck . Do some hit and run then return to the shoe game back counting. Or leave for the buffet.
Your sample size playing with the trainer is way too small as the N0 for 6:5 SD, your rules, dealt to 68% probably is in the range >100,000,000 hands if you even can sqeak out a profit.
Your stating that somehow you articulate around a 1-30 spread based on your intuition and not the TC.
What I am saying is that based on your rules, a 1-10 spread, and proper counting abilities you can kill the game. Your OP says, "Penetration varies but usually is pretty good. One guy consistently dealt near to the last card! " & "However I pulled in a profit of $1462.00 as it was in the two hours of real play time."
Which dealer type would you expect to make all the money on?
Those that do not know by now will eventually learn if they keep reading this. It may be in books but books don't have a search bar to make it easy to find information.
This post went far beyond a simple discussion on 6:5 bj.
but I'm not the one boasting "...mannot2brite".
BJC
Your stating that somehow you articulate around a 1-30 spread based on your intuition and not the TC.
What I am saying is that based on your rules, a 1-10 spread, and proper counting abilities you can kill the game. Your OP says, "Penetration varies but usually is pretty good. One guy consistently dealt near to the last card! " & "However I pulled in a profit of $1462.00 as it was in the two hours of real play time."
Which dealer type would you expect to make all the money on?
Those that do not know by now will eventually learn if they keep reading this. It may be in books but books don't have a search bar to make it easy to find information.
This post went far beyond a simple discussion on 6:5 bj.
but I'm not the one boasting "...mannot2brite".
BJC
my $0.02
I've learned my lesson about 6:5, if anyone remembers my questions arising from it. Yo Irish, it is possible, but it is hard work. Even then, it is not worth the effort. Well, it is the subjectivity of "effort" that is really the cause of antithesis for you.
Here is how I would beat it, but I still won't play it.
hi opt 2, ace side count, maybe 100 indexes. heads up only. 1-50 spread, but don't start the ramp up until +4TC. ramp TC1-5. example: $10 for <+4TC, then $500 at +5. only play good pen. Even after all that, N0 and SCORE are pretty pathetic.
that was my conclusion after a few sims. What about you? How did you come to your strategy?
I've learned my lesson about 6:5, if anyone remembers my questions arising from it. Yo Irish, it is possible, but it is hard work. Even then, it is not worth the effort. Well, it is the subjectivity of "effort" that is really the cause of antithesis for you.
Here is how I would beat it, but I still won't play it.
hi opt 2, ace side count, maybe 100 indexes. heads up only. 1-50 spread, but don't start the ramp up until +4TC. ramp TC1-5. example: $10 for <+4TC, then $500 at +5. only play good pen. Even after all that, N0 and SCORE are pretty pathetic.
that was my conclusion after a few sims. What about you? How did you come to your strategy?
Last edited:
Strategy? I just kept winning after experimentation.
Took me a while to develop the plan of attack and it involves a few camouflage plays to disguise a huge betting spread. The first few "high off the top" give me the opportunity to bet bigger when past the halfway point. Then the dealer is used to me betting high right off the top. Or ramping bets up and down at any given time. That and a few free camo plays like flipping a coin before hitting my stiff hands and I just look like an irrational gambler, rat holing chips on bathroom trips, and putting my red or black chips on the bottom. Always capping with a few greens. The stack never varying greatly in height.
Look, the main thing is that I hate back counting shoe games. It's just not my style. And after taking a small beating at a lousy shoe game last Spring I happened to notice a 6:5 game with no players. So I jumped in and kept ramping my bets ever higher when the count went up. It worked just so long as no one else joined the table. I wasn't using any camouflage at that time either. I succeeded largely because I went unnoticed. An extra fast dealer helped too though i was worried what with all her experience she might notice my play more carefully. But I was in and out quick enough.
It isn't for everybody i realize. takes patience to find the open table an a strong resolve to leave when someone else joins.
Therein lies the main problem: Finding the lone table.
Took me a while to develop the plan of attack and it involves a few camouflage plays to disguise a huge betting spread. The first few "high off the top" give me the opportunity to bet bigger when past the halfway point. Then the dealer is used to me betting high right off the top. Or ramping bets up and down at any given time. That and a few free camo plays like flipping a coin before hitting my stiff hands and I just look like an irrational gambler, rat holing chips on bathroom trips, and putting my red or black chips on the bottom. Always capping with a few greens. The stack never varying greatly in height.
Look, the main thing is that I hate back counting shoe games. It's just not my style. And after taking a small beating at a lousy shoe game last Spring I happened to notice a 6:5 game with no players. So I jumped in and kept ramping my bets ever higher when the count went up. It worked just so long as no one else joined the table. I wasn't using any camouflage at that time either. I succeeded largely because I went unnoticed. An extra fast dealer helped too though i was worried what with all her experience she might notice my play more carefully. But I was in and out quick enough.
It isn't for everybody i realize. takes patience to find the open table an a strong resolve to leave when someone else joins.
Therein lies the main problem: Finding the lone table.