Some questions for a beginner

[RJ33]

Hello,

I'm going to Vegas for a few weeks during the WSOP. I'm considering playing some blackjack during poker downtime but I have a few questions for you. I understand and can implement rudimentary card counting methods. I completely understand variance.

1) What kind of comps can I expect if I can find a $5 - $50 table?

2) The method I would probably use is a very basic one, adding +1 to the count when a 3,4,5,6 passes and subtracting -1 from the count when T,J,Q,K passes, then dividing the count by the number of decks left in the chute to decide what to increase my bet by.

I would also attempt to sit out or switch tables when the count is negative. I plan on playing at fairly full tables to achieve this. I know it's less profitable per hour but I more or less want to do this for fun/to pass the time/make a tiny bit of + expectation and hopefully get some comps.

Is this plausible? Is it profitable in the long run? Do they even have $5 at any decent casino? ( was hoping Aria )

Should I stick to poker?

Any insight would be wonderful.

Thanks.

 

[21gunsalute]

Add 2's to your + count and Aces to your -.

 

[tthree]

If you are just going to play basic strategy the above suggestion is good. That makes your count HILO. HILO is weak in double deck games. Playing efficiency is where most of your advantage is found there. For that you must use playing indices to modify your playing decisions with the true count. HILO is a strong count for shoe games were betting correlation is more important.

Your count is HIOPT I and is a very strong count if used with an ace side count and playing indices to modify play from basic strategy. This is your choice for single or double deck games if you learn some playing indices. To get the true count for betting temporarily add 1 to the running count for each surplus ace. If the aces are in deficit subtract 1 from the running count for each missing ace. This is done for betting only (not for index plays) before determining the true count. You continue counting with the actual running count after the temporary adjustment. (ie if you have played 2 decks you expect 8 aces. If you have seen 6 there are 2 surplus aces and you would temporarily add 2 to the running count when determining the true count.)

If you are not going to learn at least the illustrious 18 playing indices you might as well use HILO. If you can keep a side count of aces while counting and plan to use playing indices stick with HIOPT I.

Two very easy indices to use that don't require a true count conversion since they are 0 are 16 v T and 12 v 4. If the running count is not negative stand. If it is negative hit.

 

[21gunsalute]

HILO is weak in double deck games.

Totally disagree. There may be stronger counting systems for double deck but Hi-Lo should do just fine.

 

[zengrifter]

HiLo is entirely adequate for any#decks. zg

 

[tthree]

I never said it wasn't adequate. The OP was being encouraged to switch to HILO. I described properly the situation. Two thirds of the advantage possible in pitch games are from playing efficiency. HILO has about the lowest playing efficiency of any count. In shoe games two thirds of your advantage possible is from betting correlation. HILO has one of the best betting correlation. If he is going to play basic strategy the playing efficiency of a count doesnt matter so HILO is fine for pitch. IF he wants to incorporate index plays HILO is worse than HIOPT I with ace side count so why switch.

If he was going to play a shoe game with no ace side count he should switch to HILO. All correct advice until he is ready for a level 2 count.

 

[21gunsalute]

I never said it wasn't adequate. The OP was being encouraged to switch to HILO. I described properly the situation. Two thirds of the advantage possible in pitch games are from playing efficiency. HILO has about the lowest playing efficiency of any count. In shoe games two thirds of your advantage possible is from betting correlation. HILO has one of the best betting correlation. If he is going to play basic strategy the playing efficiency of a count doesnt matter so HILO is fine for pitch. IF he wants to incorporate index plays HILO is worse than HIOPT I with ace side count so why switch.

If he was going to play a shoe game with no ace side count he should switch to HILO. All correct advice until he is ready for a level 2 count.

The method I would probably use is a very basic one, adding +1 to the count when a 3,4,5,6 passes and subtracting -1 from the count when T,J,Q,K passes, then dividing the count by the number of decks left in the chute to decide what to increase my bet by.

I would also attempt to sit out or switch tables when the count is negative. I plan on playing at fairly full tables to achieve this.

That sounds he plans on playing shoe games, not pitch.

 

[zengrifter]

Two thirds of the advantage possible in pitch games are from playing efficiency.

Not by today's typical low-limit 2Ds. zg

 

[RJ33]

That sounds he plans on playing shoe games, not pitch.

Hi guys, thanks for all of the responses.

Yes, I would be playing shoe games, as that's all I've ever played before and that's what they run in my area. I will look up the playing indices and memorize them. From what I gather in this thread, it seems the method I plan on using for now would be slightly profitable (any estimates on a %?), but let me know if I have misunderstood something.

 

[bjcardcounter]

Hi guys, thanks for all of the responses.

Yes, I would be playing shoe games, as that's all I've ever played before and that's what they run in my area. I will look up the playing indices and memorize them. From what I gather in this thread, it seems the method I plan on using for now would be slightly profitable (any estimates on a %?), but let me know if I have misunderstood something.

But there is no short term money. I have lost almost 50% of my max bets.

 

[RJ33]

But there is no short term money. I have lost almost 50% of my max bets.

Yes, I just want to be +EV. I understand there are massive swings.

 

[zengrifter]

1) What kind of comps can I expect if I can find a $5 - $50 table?

If comps maximizing factor into your game, you could do far better by COMP-COUNTING than card-counting. Card counting in
your stated parameters could make you $10/hr + $5/hr comp. Comp counting could be good for $35+/hr COMP with lower ROR. zg

 

[Tarzan]

One fine day at the poker tables...

I was playing some poker one day and was at the table with a young guy that looked barely old enough to be in the casino but he certainly LOOKED the part of the whole "poker pro look". He was wearing his ball cap (with a WSOP logo on it), wearing sunglasses indoors and trying to "look the part" to the best of his ability. It was quite impressive looking.

Anyway, he pushed and gouged and played pretty well all things considered. He would do a few odd things such as play cards that a lot of people wouldn't, taking chances... he was a "risk taker". He took down a pot from me at one point... I shrugged and said, "I'm not much of a poker player; I play a lot of blackjack though." He almost muttered under his breath, "I wish I'd never HEARD of that game." I couldn't help myself and said jokingly, "Yes, well I guess it can be tough to try to bluff the blackjack dealer into folding, that's for sure!" I at least ended up getting my money back out of him after seeing how many hands he was playing and getting the opportunity to see the sorts of cards he was playing but in the overall he was stacking up chips and doing well.

I think you can be a great poker player and not such a great blackjack player. You can also be a great blackjack player and not such a great poker player. They are very different games.

 

[Gamblor]

Hey Tarzan, I think I played against that guy too, glad you tagged him for me. Or there's similar types of players to him in AC :grin: Their aggressive betting does push me out of hands like where I have AJ and he has KQ suited, and a garbage flop comes up. Didn't mind too much as he had the flush draw and likely to win anyway.

I just wait around for a very strong hand against a player like this, and slow roll em. Alas my plans were thwarted when the table was broken up. The other thing to do is to not get pushed out on decent/strong hands, if not outright aggressively re-raise with such hands.

Of course the best thing to do is not play against players like this, its at best an even money game, and look for a table of fishes if there aren't any at the table.

 

[LovinItAll]

Of course the best thing to do is not play against players like this, its at best an even money game, and look for a table of fishes if there aren't any at the table.

It's situational, of course, but I disagree with the above statement. If the guy is involved in too many pots, he's waiting to be expolited.

Playing $5/$10 ring games during the WSOP, I always seem to end up playing with online players who simply run out of patience due to the pace of the game. Yes, you'll take some hits when they hit (and I certainly don't consider them dead money), but overall, they're good for the game and +EV, imo.

In NLHE @ $10/$20 and above, it's a different story. The players' skillsets are typically much stronger, so caveat emptor.

L.I.A.

 

[Gamblor]

It's situational, of course, but I disagree with the above statement. If the guy is involved in too many pots, he's waiting to be expolited.

Playing $5/$10 ring games during the WSOP, I always seem to end up playing with online players who simply run out of patience due to the pace of the game. Yes, you'll take some hits when they hit (and I certainly don't consider them dead money), but overall, they're good for the game and +EV, imo.

In NLHE @ $10/$20 and above, it's a different story. The players' skillsets are typically much stronger, so caveat emptor.

L.I.A.

Yes highly situational. From Tarzan's general description seems to possibly be good decent player (winning ~ good). If its just a super aggressive online guy, then yes could take advantage.

The good ones will be smart enough to stop aggressively raising when they see you absorbing the bets, and matching the board to your hand and playing style. So these people are tough to crack, might be worthwhile to speculate with mediocre starting two cards (when appropriate) and catch them by surprise. But in general, don't play with good players, sometimes our ego gets in the way of good sense.

 

[LovinItAll]

Yes highly situational. From Tarzan's general description seems to possibly be good decent player (winning ~ good). If its just a super aggressive online guy, then yes could take advantage.

The good ones will be smart enough to stop aggressively raising when they see you absorbing the bets, and matching the board to your hand and playing style. So these people are tough to crack, might be worthwhile to speculate with mediocre starting two cards (when appropriate) and catch them by surprise. But in general, don't play with good players, sometimes our ego gets in the way of good sense.

Don't want to hijack this thread, but playing a style that isn't exploitable is probably one of the most important things in NLHE. Positionally dependant openings for the same amount, etc. make it very difficult for a good player to put someone on a tight range. Fortunately, at lower stakes, the players just don't play that way.

You're right, of course: why play in a tough game if there's an easier game two tables away? Once a player moves beyond 2/5, though, the problem is a lack of games, even in LV.

Good cards ~ L.I.A.