Cold Shoe
- Thread starter waveslider
- Start date
- Status
If you loose 3 hands in a row and about 20 cards are used during these 3 hands, it makes the shoe a loosing shoe. What happen if you remove the top card before playing and win 3 hands in a row, using 19 cards? The exact same cards will remain in the same order and the exact same cards will have been removed, so is it a hot or cold shoe now?
And today, I ran out of money. 
jimmyjim, Bojack made a point that I think is worth reiterating: If you're sitting at a table, and there is a positive count right in front of you, then you should play it. Always. If you leave in search of a different positive count, it will take you a while to find it, and you're just wasting time.
Now, sure, if you're trying to decide which of two tables to play at, and both offer the same game, are freshly shuffled, have the same number of other players, and the same pitboss, then you can avoid the dealer that's been clobbering you. However, even then, there are other criteria that are more important, like which dealer is faster, or which has the nicer set of cans.
jimmyjim, Bojack made a point that I think is worth reiterating: If you're sitting at a table, and there is a positive count right in front of you, then you should play it. Always. If you leave in search of a different positive count, it will take you a while to find it, and you're just wasting time.
Now, sure, if you're trying to decide which of two tables to play at, and both offer the same game, are freshly shuffled, have the same number of other players, and the same pitboss, then you can avoid the dealer that's been clobbering you. However, even then, there are other criteria that are more important, like which dealer is faster, or which has the nicer set of cans.
That explains your defensiveness. You can't always just take heed of the answers you do like. You have to take the good with the bad if you are going to be realistic.
Did the gambler's right "mental state" cause him to win or did winning cause the gambler to enter the right "mental state"? That's the rub.
If a dealer has taken you out of your comfort zone then you need to be mentally tougher. If that's not possible then blackjack may not be the right game for you. That is what separates wanna-be's from actual counters, can you keep playing even though you are getting beaten badly?
What if you leave this table with the "hot dealer" and go to another table but the "hot dealer" from the first table now comes to your new table? Do you leave? Is it the cards or the dealer?
If I am still within my budget for the day I would stay at this table with the + count even if I am losing. You never know when you will start winning. It could be the next hand you left.
Actually your statement is contradictory to what people have been saying on this board. The general consensus is that you will lose "something" by switching tables and that "something" is the statistical advantage you have by playing at a table with a + count. You would lose that statistical advantage by leaving even if you are losing big-time.
You may not find "pretty much the very same circumstances at another table". Tables, as you know, vary in their conditions. "Will" indicates absolute certainty. That is the great unknown. Sure you can find positive shoes at another table. A positive shoe could happen and eventually will but it may not happen WHILE YOU ARE AT THAT TABLE.
But James, in his great haste, has failed to mention that he nor anyone can 100% guarantee that you will find another shoe that night that is positive, that you will find conditions as favorable as the ones you just left. And no one can guarantee that you won't either, we are not mind-readers. I can't guarantee that things will change and you will start winning, James can't guarantee that you keep losing either. But the statisticaly edge lies with the shoe with the positive count.
Going into a table which one would you rather play on? A table where you know you have a 1.5 advantage over the house or at a table where the advantage/disadvantage is ?. That is one thing I can guarantee, that if a counter who stays at a table with a + count they would know they are playing with an advantage while if they switch table they wouldn't know anything about the current conditions.
Your new table may turn positive right off the bat, it may not turn positive for another hour. James can't guarantee that you will immediately find an advantage like the table you left. It might be better than the shoe you just left, it might be ten times worse. No one knows and that's part of the counters dilema, when to change tables, when to quit for the day, when to cash out, etc..
In the meantime, while playing and waiting for the table to turn positive, you were possibly playing at a disadvantage while the table you left definitely had an advantage, statiscally speaking of course, even though you lost your shirt.
In the end, it's your money, James is right on with that one. Play how you want but know that a good counter with vast blackjack experience and knowledge, wouldn't leave a positive shoe very often.
Did the gambler's right "mental state" cause him to win or did winning cause the gambler to enter the right "mental state"? That's the rub.
If a dealer has taken you out of your comfort zone then you need to be mentally tougher. If that's not possible then blackjack may not be the right game for you. That is what separates wanna-be's from actual counters, can you keep playing even though you are getting beaten badly?
What if you leave this table with the "hot dealer" and go to another table but the "hot dealer" from the first table now comes to your new table? Do you leave? Is it the cards or the dealer?
If I am still within my budget for the day I would stay at this table with the + count even if I am losing. You never know when you will start winning. It could be the next hand you left.
Actually your statement is contradictory to what people have been saying on this board. The general consensus is that you will lose "something" by switching tables and that "something" is the statistical advantage you have by playing at a table with a + count. You would lose that statistical advantage by leaving even if you are losing big-time.
You may not find "pretty much the very same circumstances at another table". Tables, as you know, vary in their conditions. "Will" indicates absolute certainty. That is the great unknown. Sure you can find positive shoes at another table. A positive shoe could happen and eventually will but it may not happen WHILE YOU ARE AT THAT TABLE.
But James, in his great haste, has failed to mention that he nor anyone can 100% guarantee that you will find another shoe that night that is positive, that you will find conditions as favorable as the ones you just left. And no one can guarantee that you won't either, we are not mind-readers. I can't guarantee that things will change and you will start winning, James can't guarantee that you keep losing either. But the statisticaly edge lies with the shoe with the positive count.
Going into a table which one would you rather play on? A table where you know you have a 1.5 advantage over the house or at a table where the advantage/disadvantage is ?. That is one thing I can guarantee, that if a counter who stays at a table with a + count they would know they are playing with an advantage while if they switch table they wouldn't know anything about the current conditions.
Your new table may turn positive right off the bat, it may not turn positive for another hour. James can't guarantee that you will immediately find an advantage like the table you left. It might be better than the shoe you just left, it might be ten times worse. No one knows and that's part of the counters dilema, when to change tables, when to quit for the day, when to cash out, etc..
In the meantime, while playing and waiting for the table to turn positive, you were possibly playing at a disadvantage while the table you left definitely had an advantage, statiscally speaking of course, even though you lost your shirt.
In the end, it's your money, James is right on with that one. Play how you want but know that a good counter with vast blackjack experience and knowledge, wouldn't leave a positive shoe very often.
youre the cuteist thing i ever did see
reallllly love youre peaches, wanna shake youre tree
awww lovi dovi llovi dovi all the timeeee...
ohhh baby id sure show you a goood time...
cuz im a picker, im a grinner, im a lover and im a sinner
playing my music in the suuuuuun...
cuz im a joker, im a smoker, im a midnite toker...
sure dont want to hurt no one...
but for real. if youre going to a winning blackjack player, you cant be superstitious.
the idea in itself is absolutely ridiculous. we play by numbers, whether or not we win(short term, mind you) . you gotta look at the long term. you can have a great shoe, and a horrible one.the best exercise in discipline is one after another just to realize the way things go. if you cant handle the reality of the fact that this is a rollercoaster ride, then jump off.
btw, i was just jammin out. thats the best way to study your game.
reallllly love youre peaches, wanna shake youre tree
awww lovi dovi llovi dovi all the timeeee...
ohhh baby id sure show you a goood time...
cuz im a picker, im a grinner, im a lover and im a sinner
playing my music in the suuuuuun...
cuz im a joker, im a smoker, im a midnite toker...
sure dont want to hurt no one...
but for real. if youre going to a winning blackjack player, you cant be superstitious.
the idea in itself is absolutely ridiculous. we play by numbers, whether or not we win(short term, mind you) . you gotta look at the long term. you can have a great shoe, and a horrible one.the best exercise in discipline is one after another just to realize the way things go. if you cant handle the reality of the fact that this is a rollercoaster ride, then jump off.
btw, i was just jammin out. thats the best way to study your game.
It's been a while since i've posted now, but i think that something important has been missed by most of the posters here (ok, maybe not missed, just not stated implicitly) - hot and cold dealers/shoes do occur!
Now that as it may be, there is absolutly no way what-so-ever to predict when this is occuring or how long it will last based on past events. You can be taking the beating of a lifetime, through the highest counts you've ever seen, but that has no bearing what-so-ever on the next hand. Or the opposite - you could be winning hand after hand of low bets through horrendeous counts, it doesn't mean you should put a big bet out next cause the dealer's 'winning for the table'. There is no gambling god (so far as i'm aware) who predetermines whether a dealer is more likely to win or lose.
Now this fact is easy enough to prove. Set up a simulation where when you've played through 2-3 high count SD/DD games and taken a substancial beating, you walk away from that dealer. Now you have to factor in time consumption in finding a new deck and of course the fact that you'll play through more marginal/negative counts as a product of this will factor itself in. This will reduce you hourly expectation. That's a simple fact.
So to answer some questions:
This hurts you as you will spend time finding another game and playing through more marginal/negative expectation hands to find another positive count. You have to remember that when you have a 2% edge that means that you can expect to win 51 and lose 49 out of every 100 bets you place (a little oversimplified, but serves for the purpose). This doesn't depend on which table you are sitting at. This is just what the wins and losses will average out to in the long run. So if they clump together this is perfectly normal and completely unpredictiable.
No. If they sample enough shoes they will find another positive shoe. But that takes time and as your winnings in blackjack are base on how many hands you can play with an advantage in how short a space of time, this will reduce how much you can expect to earn per hour. Even in SD/DD games, there in no way to guarentee walking straight into another +ve count. In fact as you mentioned earlier, with the no mid-shoe entry rule you are walking away from an advantageous situation to guarentee that the next hand you play will be at a disadvantage.
James, i find it interesting that you are so dismissive of the Maths behind the game. If you've gone to the effort of actually learning a counting system, surely you realize that the same 'formulas' that you place so little worth in - the ones that shows you why card counting works - are the bases for the conclusions i've stated above and the ones that justifies why ploppies only affect your mental state, not your wins or loses?
Just to draw this to a close - wave - no one here can give you any worthwhile advice on sitting through losing streak. There's no worthwhile advice to give except to follow the count and grit your teeth. You are no more likely to win by moving to another table than you are by playing the next hand here, in fact if you have a positive count, you are less likely to win.
If we want to decend into the superstitions of ploppies effecting your long term, or hot and cold dealers, ask yourself this question ; why do the people that believe in these essentially random and non-valid pricipals never come to the conclusion that they are just 'un/lucky' that night? It's just as rational as the dealer being hot or cold, but human nature wants to blame external forces for results or events that we don't like. The idea that it might be our fault is not pleasent, and in truth - as long as you are sticking with your count system - not true, but it is just as rational and plausable as the topics of discussion we've had here.
Good 'luck' :joker:
RJT.
Now that as it may be, there is absolutly no way what-so-ever to predict when this is occuring or how long it will last based on past events. You can be taking the beating of a lifetime, through the highest counts you've ever seen, but that has no bearing what-so-ever on the next hand. Or the opposite - you could be winning hand after hand of low bets through horrendeous counts, it doesn't mean you should put a big bet out next cause the dealer's 'winning for the table'. There is no gambling god (so far as i'm aware) who predetermines whether a dealer is more likely to win or lose.
Now this fact is easy enough to prove. Set up a simulation where when you've played through 2-3 high count SD/DD games and taken a substancial beating, you walk away from that dealer. Now you have to factor in time consumption in finding a new deck and of course the fact that you'll play through more marginal/negative counts as a product of this will factor itself in. This will reduce you hourly expectation. That's a simple fact.
So to answer some questions:
This hurts you as you will spend time finding another game and playing through more marginal/negative expectation hands to find another positive count. You have to remember that when you have a 2% edge that means that you can expect to win 51 and lose 49 out of every 100 bets you place (a little oversimplified, but serves for the purpose). This doesn't depend on which table you are sitting at. This is just what the wins and losses will average out to in the long run. So if they clump together this is perfectly normal and completely unpredictiable.
No. If they sample enough shoes they will find another positive shoe. But that takes time and as your winnings in blackjack are base on how many hands you can play with an advantage in how short a space of time, this will reduce how much you can expect to earn per hour. Even in SD/DD games, there in no way to guarentee walking straight into another +ve count. In fact as you mentioned earlier, with the no mid-shoe entry rule you are walking away from an advantageous situation to guarentee that the next hand you play will be at a disadvantage.
James, i find it interesting that you are so dismissive of the Maths behind the game. If you've gone to the effort of actually learning a counting system, surely you realize that the same 'formulas' that you place so little worth in - the ones that shows you why card counting works - are the bases for the conclusions i've stated above and the ones that justifies why ploppies only affect your mental state, not your wins or loses?
Just to draw this to a close - wave - no one here can give you any worthwhile advice on sitting through losing streak. There's no worthwhile advice to give except to follow the count and grit your teeth. You are no more likely to win by moving to another table than you are by playing the next hand here, in fact if you have a positive count, you are less likely to win.
If we want to decend into the superstitions of ploppies effecting your long term, or hot and cold dealers, ask yourself this question ; why do the people that believe in these essentially random and non-valid pricipals never come to the conclusion that they are just 'un/lucky' that night? It's just as rational as the dealer being hot or cold, but human nature wants to blame external forces for results or events that we don't like. The idea that it might be our fault is not pleasent, and in truth - as long as you are sticking with your count system - not true, but it is just as rational and plausable as the topics of discussion we've had here.
Good 'luck' :joker:
RJT.
Lets not be too hard on these guys.
I remember when someone recommended I read The Blackjack Zone. I thumbed thru it and didn't think there was anything in it for me,an experianced player.Then I took the quiz and got several wrong.Even then I scoffed and figured the author was sloppy and had a bunch of typos in the quiz.
If your education comes from sitting at tables"learning" from other players,it is easy to see why someone might think the ideas voiced here are nuts.
I remember when someone recommended I read The Blackjack Zone. I thumbed thru it and didn't think there was anything in it for me,an experianced player.Then I took the quiz and got several wrong.Even then I scoffed and figured the author was sloppy and had a bunch of typos in the quiz.
If your education comes from sitting at tables"learning" from other players,it is easy to see why someone might think the ideas voiced here are nuts.
EasyRhino said:
And today, I ran out of money.
jimmyjim, Bojack made a point that I think is worth reiterating: If you're sitting at a table, and there is a positive count right in front of you, then you should play it. Always. If you leave in search of a different positive count, it will take you a while to find it, and you're just wasting time.
Now, sure, if you're trying to decide which of two tables to play at, and both offer the same game, are freshly shuffled, have the same number of other players, and the same pitboss, then you can avoid the dealer that's been clobbering you. However, even then, there are other criteria that are more important, like which dealer is faster, or which has the nicer set of cans.
jimmyjim, Bojack made a point that I think is worth reiterating: If you're sitting at a table, and there is a positive count right in front of you, then you should play it. Always. If you leave in search of a different positive count, it will take you a while to find it, and you're just wasting time.
Now, sure, if you're trying to decide which of two tables to play at, and both offer the same game, are freshly shuffled, have the same number of other players, and the same pitboss, then you can avoid the dealer that's been clobbering you. However, even then, there are other criteria that are more important, like which dealer is faster, or which has the nicer set of cans.
See this is the problem with most of the posters on this forum. A huge majority of them have this penchant for reading a statement wrong, failing to understand it then compounding that failure with adding what turns out to be moronic advice!!!!
Here is my statement on when to leave a table..
Now i dont know why the so called "long time" members some how summarized this statement to mean that i am talking about just one shoe.
Because i did make it very clear that we are talking about multiple shoes with positive counts that have all backfired on you.
Yet a majority of this idiot posters will rant on and on about one shoe!!!!
If i am playing single deck or double deck did it occur to you that i only get about 2-3 hands with a nice sized positive count...(may be four hands if you are lucky)
And in your great wisdom if i get up and leave after losing about two of these hands i am going to suffer from greatly because i skipped out on the last two hands..(and this is really a hypothetical scenario i am using to illustrate the fact that most of you here will make blanket statements that dont help out anyone because of the fact that you fail to recognize the fact that different players play different games?) So my Br is going to be greatly hurt because i missed out on two final hands left in the meagre SD or DD?
Do yourself and all those who read this forum.
-Understand that multideck blackjack is completely different from playing single deck or DD (so Rhino, dont go about lecturing noobs on how they lost some statictical edge because they bailed out the last two hands of a SD...)
And you Rhino have really no defense of ignorance because i did specify that we are talking about SD and DD games!!!!
-Learn to read and comprehend before running that formulaic diarrhaea..
Because if we apply the words of wisdom (or lack there of) from Shadroch to my very clear statement about losing multiple shoes even with postive counts, they can all see that its is monumentally stupid for one to sit through several more shoes..(for the ignorant...that means more than one shoe with a positive count) in hopes that the tide will change!!!
Here ago again with the mundane!!!!
First lets talk about a players mental state. If you sit down at a table, you are trying to keep a good count, doing multiple calculations in your head and trying to memorize all this stuff, while a cocktail waitress is bothering you, the dealer demanding for a decision on your play etc etc.
If another tangent in thrown into this otherwise previously organized chaos, it does not bode well for the novice counter (or even expert in this case)
Its really absurd to argue that your mental status is some irrelevant voodoo aspect of your game.
If you or any other so called experts would like to argue this i will simply respond by saying, If mental status if irrelevant are you then saying that its ok for people to consume mind altering drugs...After all, the "right mental state" is completely irrelevant, especially in a game where you have to do several calculations in your head...
that makes so much sense man.
And it gets only more bizarre from there.... I have several people who thought that they were "mentally tough" go on serious losing streaks and burn money they couldnt afford and were almost reduced to tears!!!!
This so called mental toughness is the very credo of loser compulsive gamblers who develop tunnel vision and are caught up in the grip of game so much so that they will burn through every penny on their person in that instant.
Dont friggin lecture me about being mentally tough. It takes a person with a strong mental constitution to push back from a table after a losing session and either opt to call it quits and leave to fight another day, of finding another table to exploit.
Dude...I may be a novice poster on this forum...Do yourself a favor and dont assume that i am a novice when it comes to playing BJ...I have played enough to know bullshit when i see it..
Doesn't the term "shoe" imply a multi-deck game? When you say you are playing a shoe game that means you are saying you are playing more than single or double deck.
Then James goes on in this post about how he means single or double deck. Contradicts himself in the very same post!!
Get your terminology right first, James.
Speaking of terminology- what is "dood"?
Attacks and incomplete sentences, sentences with no train of thought. What a way to start my Monday.
He lost his train of thought in mid-sentence!!!!
Take it easy Biggame, don't get excited.
Biggame"stream of consciousness"James!!!
Then James goes on in this post about how he means single or double deck. Contradicts himself in the very same post!!
Get your terminology right first, James.
Speaking of terminology- what is "dood"?
Attacks and incomplete sentences, sentences with no train of thought. What a way to start my Monday.
He lost his train of thought in mid-sentence!!!!
Take it easy Biggame, don't get excited.
Biggame"stream of consciousness"James!!!
I'm done with this guy.Everyone here is an idiot,only BGJ knows how to play. What an awful coincidence that he happens to be the only losing player here.
Let me think for a moment. Should I heed the advice of the successful longtime players who have tons of books and simulations on their side,or go with the guy who has dropped $15,000 in the last few months,and has no plan,except walk away from hot dealers and avoid ploppies. Tough call,indeed.
Let me think for a moment. Should I heed the advice of the successful longtime players who have tons of books and simulations on their side,or go with the guy who has dropped $15,000 in the last few months,and has no plan,except walk away from hot dealers and avoid ploppies. Tough call,indeed.
Biggamejames,
Fisrt of all, please calm yourself down. I had to remove several personal attacks from your last post and your use of vulgar language only makes you seem crude. I know how frustrating it can be when people don’t seem to understand your way of thinking, but please try to be civil about it. Also, pay close attention to what other people are saying. You have overlooked quite a bit of good advice in this thread.
Yes. If you only play 2/3rds of the positive hands then you are giving up 2/3rds of your profit. And, since those positive situations only occur 25-30% of the time, you will be playing proportionally more negative hands than positive. This will increase your disadvantage, increase your variance, increase your risk of ruin and increase your N0. That means your overall profits will suffer, your negative fluctuations will be higher, your chances of losing your entire bankroll will be greater and it will take you much longer to have a reasonable chance of seeing a profit in the long run.
As others have pointed out, you’re just wasting your time and money. You are spending about 75% of your time waiting for those positive hands, but then sitting out many of them just because you believe that you can change a “cold streak” by not playing or fix a “hot dealer” by walking away. You’re going to be missing out on winning hands just as often as you skip over losing ones.
As you can see, walking away from (or sitting out of) positive hands can easily hurt you enormously. And, despite what you might think, it does not offer any advantage at all. It is just superstitious.
-Sonny-
Fisrt of all, please calm yourself down. I had to remove several personal attacks from your last post and your use of vulgar language only makes you seem crude. I know how frustrating it can be when people don’t seem to understand your way of thinking, but please try to be civil about it. Also, pay close attention to what other people are saying. You have overlooked quite a bit of good advice in this thread.
Yes. If you only play 2/3rds of the positive hands then you are giving up 2/3rds of your profit. And, since those positive situations only occur 25-30% of the time, you will be playing proportionally more negative hands than positive. This will increase your disadvantage, increase your variance, increase your risk of ruin and increase your N0. That means your overall profits will suffer, your negative fluctuations will be higher, your chances of losing your entire bankroll will be greater and it will take you much longer to have a reasonable chance of seeing a profit in the long run.
As others have pointed out, you’re just wasting your time and money. You are spending about 75% of your time waiting for those positive hands, but then sitting out many of them just because you believe that you can change a “cold streak” by not playing or fix a “hot dealer” by walking away. You’re going to be missing out on winning hands just as often as you skip over losing ones.
As you can see, walking away from (or sitting out of) positive hands can easily hurt you enormously. And, despite what you might think, it does not offer any advantage at all. It is just superstitious.
-Sonny-
- Status