newby looking for direction/ books

Warlord

Warlord

Well-Known Member
#1
#1
I have been playing BJ for years on and off and do allright on instinct.

I am now interested in CC and thus have been practicing through the deck counting HL (~40 seconds clean) and working on the basic skills. I carry a deck everywhere and practice. I know this is the basis and want to spend lots of time so that I can easily carry a count.

If there is one book to start with what would it be? I was looking at getting Wongs "Professional BJ" is this a good start?

I have also started (just) reading through the sticky material.

One Q I have (that I am sure will turn up in my readings)
? Does BS ever change depending on the count? i.e. if the count is high and I have a hard 12 and dealer is showing a 7, do I still hit even though there are a high number of 10's in the remaining deck thus I stand to bust more so than if there is a (-)count.

tia for any guidance/advice.
 
R

razzle

Member
#2
#2
BS is the foundation. You need to be able to play it without thinking. There is really no such thing as playing by instict when playing serious black jack. And yes when counting cards you modify BS depending on the count, each individual counting system usually illustrates at which counts you will modify your play.
 
B

BJinNJ

Well-Known Member
#3
#3
Professional BJ is xlnt for...

Hi/Lo count.

Other good books, and you should read more than 1, are:

Blackjack Bluebook II (several counts)
Blackbelt in Blackjack (several counts)
Blackjack Blueprint (also Hi/Lo)
Million Dollar Blackjack(dated?)
Blackjack for Blood

BJinNJ :cool:
 
E

EyeHeartHalves

Well-Known Member
#4
#4
My Top Four Recommendations

BJinNJ said:
Hi/Lo count.

Other good books, and you should read more than 1, are:

Blackjack Bluebook II (several counts)
Blackbelt in Blackjack (several counts)
Blackjack Blueprint (also Hi/Lo)
Million Dollar Blackjack(dated?)
Blackjack for Blood

BJinNJ :cool:
Click to expand...
I agree with my fellow New Jersian on most of these. Especially, Professional Blackjack--this is a must read for Hi-Lo. Even if you already knew and understood Hi-Lo, there are certain insights that only true professional gambler can communicate to you. (Yes, I'm extremely biased Wond Discipal.)

Book 2 (in my recommendation of blackjack books for the Hi-Lo player--order sensitive): Blackjack Attack by Don Schlesinger.

Book 3: Blackbelt in Blackjack by Arnold Snyder.

Book 4: Blackjack Blueprint by Blaine. This should be good enough for the Red Chip Hi-Lo player. You may also want to consider picking up CVData (software) at this point. If you are going to move up to or jump right into Green Chip play, it's a must. Also, I'd recommend about a dozen more books before that venture.

I'm going to have to disagree with BJinNJ's sixth pick of Blackjack for Blood. Awesome cover--worthless content for 2008. As far as the rumers I've heard, Bryce Carlson is an awesome professional gambler which is really, really difficult to do. I find it much more admirable than being a good author.

PS: Feel free to ask more questions--you should have hundreds.

--Halves
 
E

EyeHeartHalves

Well-Known Member
#5
#5
Snap,

I just contradicted myself, didn't I??? Well, I can take a punch as well as I can throw one so let the beat-down begin:eek:

Wong was a great pro. gambler and an awesome author--Carlson is a great pro. gambler but was a poor author. Does this clear up any confusion as to what I just said:confused:
 
Warlord

Warlord

Well-Known Member
#6
#6
thanks for the replies/suggestions.

I think I will start my BJ book collection with Wongs prof BJ. and go from there.
 
B

Bojack1

Well-Known Member
#7
#7
EyeHeartHalves said:
I just contradicted myself, didn't I??? Well, I can take a punch as well as I can throw one so let the beat-down begin:eek:

Wong was a great pro. gambler and an awesome author--Carlson is a great pro. gambler but was a poor author. Does this clear up any confusion as to what I just said:confused:
Click to expand...
Wong was a great pro as far as having the knowledge to play, he did not however ever play for big money. He wasn't ever what was referred to as a money player. I'm not saying he couldn't have been, but it is a very common misconception that Wong made any serious money actually playing blackjack. His fame amongst the gambling insiders and those he associated with did him in as a player more than his actual table play ever did. As a matter of fact there are a good many pros that are authors as well that made surprisingly much smaller amounts playing then one would expect. Taking nothing away from their knowledge but some of these more famous players were better teachers and team leaders than actual players.
 
E

EyeHeartHalves

Well-Known Member
#8
#8
Bojack1 said:
Wong was a great pro as far as having the knowledge to play, he did not however ever play for big money. He wasn't ever what was referred to as a money player. I'm not saying he couldn't have been, but it is a very common misconception that Wong made any serious money actually playing blackjack. His fame amongst the gambling insiders and those he associated with did him in as a player more than his actual table play ever did. As a matter of fact there are a good many pros that are authors as well that made surprisingly much smaller amounts playing then one would expect. Taking nothing away from their knowledge but some of these more famous players were better teachers and team leaders than actual players.
Click to expand...
I thought Wong made "a lot" (as in life-changing--put a down payment on a house kind-of-a-lot) during the seventies when he knew how to back-count shoe games before writing about it? I thought I remember reading that in one of my books by another author but like I said, I'm extremely biased. His blackjack play may be more "mythical" than "legendary" but his writing is definitely full of fact.
 
E

EyeHeartHalves

Well-Known Member
#10
#10
Hey Warlord,

I just checked the Atlantic City BS chart on that site you linked for us. It has one major flaw a couple of minor flaws. I spotted them within a couple seconds because THAT CHART IS THE DEFAULT CHART FOR SHOE GAMES.

THE MAJOR FLAW: Notice that on soft hands or any hand for that matter, it simply says D when you're supposed to double-down. What if you can't D? Well, it's assumed/implied that when you can't D you would hit instead. However, a clarification needs to be made in the case of soft-18 vs. 3, 4, 5 and 6. The website simply put more 'D's here. If D means "double-down" or "hit" if not allowed to D, this website is wrong. IN THE CASE OF SOFT-18, IT SHOULD READ "D/S" OR "D*" OR ANYTHING TO DENOTE THE FACT THAT YOU SHOULD STAND AS OPPOSED TO HIT WHEN YOU ARE UNABLE TO DOUBLE.

MINOR FLAW: According to the simulations I've seen, you shouldn't D a soft-13 vs. dealer's 5. My BS says to hit in Atlantic City but this is very trivial and my simulation may actually be incorrect. My sim said to wait until a TC of +1 before doubling that hand.

Also, as part of BS in a "dealer hits soft-17" game, it is sometimes correct (depending on other rules) to "D/S" with soft-19 vs. dealer's 6.
 
Warlord

Warlord

Well-Known Member
#11
#11
I was not using the charts but the game. I suppose the game is based on the charts?

I like the game format because you can play it fast.
I DO NOT want to spend time using it if it is flawed though!
Can you check out the flash game and tell me what you think, and or recommend other good BS training tools.

I have also been using this BS chart/map, which seems like a good one that can be adjusted depending on game.

Thanks again, you guys are helpful.
 
E

EyeHeartHalves

Well-Known Member
#12
#12
Warlord,

I just played about a hundred hands on that FIRST site and that situation that I mentioned never arose. (i.e.: There was never a situation where I had a "multi-card soft-18" versus a dealer's 3 through 6.) So, I still don't know if the game actually "knows" that you should stand in this situation because it never arose.

THIS IS ALSO THE BEST REASON TO PRACTICE BASIC STRATEGY WITH CUE CARDS OR (AS I PREFER) BY WRITING IT OVER AND OVER AGAIN ONCE PER DAY, CHECKING YOUR RESULTS ONLY IMMEDIATELY AFTER YOU WRITE IT OR TYPE IT.

When you practice it with playing cards (whether that's by hand or on the computer), you won't see enough variety of hands and situations. YOU NEED TO HAVE 100% ACCURACY WITH THE ENTIRE CHART--NOT 100% OF 20%(?) OF THE CHART!!!
 
Last edited:
E

EyeHeartHalves

Well-Known Member
#13
#13
Your second link to a BS chart.

THIS SECOND CHART IS CORRECT FOR NORTH AMERICAN "S17" SHOE GAMES.

Notice how it differrentiates (not sure if that's actually a word but...) a soft-18 double-down from all the rest???

Also, it uses colors. Colors are always good. They trigger different brain activity than non-color. This (colorized) brain activity can be more easily stored as a long-term memory.

--Halves
 
Warlord

Warlord

Well-Known Member
#14
#14
Scenario:

I am playing 1 deck.

Count is -1 with 1/4 of deck left.

I am dealt 3 & 6 (now count is +1)
Dealer is showing 9

I hit and get a 2 (count is now +2) and I have a hard 11.
I hit again and get a 3 (count is now +3) and I have 14.


Basic Strategy says to hit a 14 with a dealer 9 showing but the count is now +3 with ~25% of the deck left.

Do I hit following BS or stick assuming the chance of a 10 is probable at this point?


TY
 
jack.jackson

jack.jackson

Well-Known Member
#15
#15
Bojack1 said:
Wong was a great pro as far as having the knowledge to play, he did not however ever play for big money. He wasn't ever what was referred to as a money player. I'm not saying he couldn't have been, but it is a very common misconception that Wong made any serious money actually playing blackjack. His fame amongst the gambling insiders and those he associated with did him in as a player more than his actual table play ever did. As a matter of fact there are a good many pros that are authors as well that made surprisingly much smaller amounts playing then one would expect. Taking nothing away from their knowledge but some of these more famous players were better teachers and team leaders than actual players.
Click to expand...
Ive actually heard, that Dr.Thorp was'nt even that good of a player.
 
jack.jackson

jack.jackson

Well-Known Member
#16
#16
Warlord said:
Scenario:

I am playing 1 deck.

Count is -1 with 1/4 of deck left.

I am dealt 3 & 6 (now count is +1)
Dealer is showing 9

I hit and get a 2 (count is now +2) and I have a hard 11.
I hit again and get a 3 (count is now +3) and I have 14.


Basic Strategy says to hit a 14 with a dealer 9 showing but the count is now +3 with ~25% of the deck left.

Do I hit following BS or stick assuming the chance of a 10 is probable at this point?


TY
Click to expand...
That play was probably pretty close, w/a TC of +12. However Im confident, (but not sure), that it was'nt high enough to justify standing.
 
Last edited:
S

shadroch

Well-Known Member
#17
#17
Warlord said:
Scenario:

I am playing 1 deck.

Count is -1 with 1/4 of deck left.

I am dealt 3 & 6 (now count is +1)
Dealer is showing 9

I hit and get a 2 (count is now +2) and I have a hard 11.
I hit again and get a 3 (count is now +3) and I have 14.


Basic Strategy says to hit a 14 with a dealer 9 showing but the count is now +3 with ~25% of the deck left.




In the real world,the chances of finding a 3-2 game that deals 75% of the cards is quite unlikely. Learn your BS perfectly,then worry about hands like this.
Click to expand...
 
Warlord

Warlord

Well-Known Member
#18
#18
shadroch said:
In the real world,the chances of finding a 3-2 game that deals 75% of the cards is quite unlikely. Learn your BS perfectly,then worry about hands like this.
Click to expand...
I played 1 deck last night that was 1-2, stateline Tahoe and they dealt 75% of the deck. That is why I am running the same scenario using the appropriate table from here

Of course I was playing very late when there were no other players burning the deck.

And I certainly am concentrating on getting BS down solid, but as I run across these situations I like to address them and learn from them.

thanks again for the replies.
 
jack.jackson

jack.jackson

Well-Known Member
#19
#19
Though not exact, probably very close appoximation of the remaining 13 cards. Avg. Considering your hand was 3,6,,2,3 vs 9. Note: Since you held two threes, I asumed these to be depleted.

1/2
1/4
1/5
1/6
1/7
1/8
6/XXXXXX
1/A

Hi-l0/-3=+3

Standing would cost you -55.06

While hitting would only cost you -50.18

Source/Kcs cdca program
 
C

cardcounter0

Well-Known Member
#20
#20
Basic Strategy says to hit a 14 with a dealer 9 showing but the count is now +3 with ~25% of the deck left.

There is not an index for this play, simply because HiLo does not count the 7 and that is important with hands of 14.

A general rule of thumb is you don't hit stiffs with a TC of +16 ~ +18 or more, you "only" have +12.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top