Why play all?

M

MH1

Member
#1
#1
Hey guys,

Right now, I back count wonging in at +1 and out at -1. Looking forward to the next few years where I can add more money to my bankroll, is there any advantage to "playing all" vs. back counting? I mean, backcounting reduces variance, and increases EV. Playing all increases variance. I know there are players who play all, or at least play all and wong out at extremely negative counts. I am just wondering if there is any benefit to a play all approach vs. a back counting one. From the many sims I've run, it seems like you can make more money and reduce variance with back counting. I would love to hear from any one who uses a "play all" system and reasons why they do so!
 
S

shadroch

Well-Known Member
#2
#2
I generally play all because I only play at places that are "candy stores",
where wonging in and out would be detected quickly, and there is rarely an empty seat. That doesn't stop me from using the bathroom frequently( bad bladder) and getting up to smoke a few times an hour.
 
aslan

aslan

Well-Known Member
#3
#3
Play all is basically a lazy approach, although if you play at a 'candy store', as shadroch mentioned, it is a viable approach. Also, note that even at a 'candy store', shadroch practices a wong-out regimen, so it's not really play all at all. Keep doing what you're doing for the same reasons you cited. Where many if not most of us play, it is difficult to find games where you can back count, at least not with ease, as the casinos have a habit of closing down tables and pits to create a crowded table condition.
 
M

MH1

Member
#8
#8
hands/hr

Right, but if most of the extra hands you play per hour are negative EV, what's the point of playing them?
 
Jack_Black

Jack_Black

Well-Known Member
#9
#9
The key word you said is "most," not all. a 2x increase in hands/hr due to play all increases your winrate dramatically while the N0 and SCORE decreases, uhhhh, non dramatically. I'm too lazy to post my pictured results from CVCX. maybe someone with more ummph will do it?
 
Last edited:
T

The Chaperone

Well-Known Member
#10
#10
Jack_Black said:
The key word you said is "most," not all. a 2x increase in hands/hr due to play all increases your winrate dramatically while the N0 and SCORE decreases, uhhhh, non dramatically. I'm too lazy to post my pictured results from CVCX. maybe someone with more ummph will do it?
Click to expand...
Why again do you want to decrease your N0 and SCORE?
 
2

21gunsalute

Well-Known Member
#11
#11
MH1 said:
Hey guys,

Right now, I back count wonging in at +1 and out at -1. Looking forward to the next few years where I can add more money to my bankroll, is there any advantage to "playing all" vs. back counting? I mean, backcounting reduces variance, and increases EV. Playing all increases variance. I know there are players who play all, or at least play all and wong out at extremely negative counts. I am just wondering if there is any benefit to a play all approach vs. a back counting one. From the many sims I've run, it seems like you can make more money and reduce variance with back counting. I would love to hear from any one who uses a "play all" system and reasons why they do so!
Click to expand...
Wonging in and out is impractical at many places and downright impossible at others, due to both the rules and the traffic at such stores. It also makes you an obvious target for getting the tap.
 
Jack_Black

Jack_Black

Well-Known Member
#12
#12
The Chaperone said:
Why again do you want to decrease your N0 and SCORE?
Click to expand...
Whoops! I mean to say that there is an inverse relationship with winrate vs. game quality. So a 100% increase in hands/hr will increase your winrate by 50%. unfortunately, the downside to that is that your N0 will increase by 50%.
 
W

winnawinna

Well-Known Member
#14
#14
MH1 said:
Hey guys,

Right now, I back count wonging in at +1 and out at -1. Looking forward to the next few years where I can add more money to my bankroll, is there any advantage to "playing all" vs. back counting? I mean, backcounting reduces variance, and increases EV. Playing all increases variance. I know there are players who play all, or at least play all and wong out at extremely negative counts. I am just wondering if there is any benefit to a play all approach vs. a back counting one. From the many sims I've run, it seems like you can make more money and reduce variance with back counting. I would love to hear from any one who uses a "play all" system and reasons why they do so!
Click to expand...
I play "almost all". I never backcount and only wong out at extreme negative counts. Even that is rare. I usually lower my bet to table min or eliminate a hand....I usually play two hands to lower variance.
 
Friendo

Friendo

Well-Known Member
#15
#15
Good cuts heads up with fast dealer - I stay in

There are times when the count is terrible and I could wander over to the next fresh shoe, but I know that the dealer does not cut as deep and is not that as speedy. Further, if it's heads-up and the cut is deep, why bother?
 
W

winnawinna

Well-Known Member
#16
#16
Friendo said:
There are times when the count is terrible and I could wander over to the next fresh shoe, but I know that the dealer does not cut as deep and is not that as speedy. Further, if it's heads-up and the cut is deep, why bother?
Click to expand...
So true...if I have a dealer cutting 80%+ Im not going anywhere. Ill pitch my tent right there
 
aslan

aslan

Well-Known Member
#17
#17
winnawinna said:
I play "almost all". I never backcount and only wong out at extreme negative counts. Even that is rare. I usually lower my bet to table min or eliminate a hand....I usually play two hands to lower variance.
Click to expand...
One way to mitigate the damage of negative counts is to have two min bets, say, $5 and $10, the $5 bet being for for negative counts below -1. The bet spread would be based on the $10 min unit. But in most cases, I find nothing particularly challenging (other than overcoming inertia) about leaving the table in negative counts for one reason or the other.
 
C

chessplayer

Well-Known Member
#18
#18
This won't work. It is merely a different way of interpreting bet spread from your perspective, but the house will still interpret based on what the house sees
aslan said:
One way to mitigate the damage of negative counts is to have two min bets, say, $5 and $10, the $5 bet being for for negative counts below -1. The bet spread would be based on the $10 min unit. But in most cases, I find nothing particularly challenging (other than overcoming inertia) about leaving the table in negative counts for one reason or the other.
Click to expand...
 
aslan

aslan

Well-Known Member
#19
#19
chessplayer said:
This won't work. It is merely a different way of interpreting bet spread from your perspective, but the house will still interpret based on what the house sees
Click to expand...
Well, I've often done it. Interesting that you say it won't work. Mixing it up a bit helps if you feel you are being sweated. I have also done it with $10 and $25 as min bets, and there I do incorporate some camo because there there is more heat.
 
W

winnawinna

Well-Known Member
#20
#20
aslan said:
Well, I've often done it. Interesting that you say it won't work. Mixing it up a bit helps if you feel you are being sweated. I have also done it with $10 and $25 as min bets, and there I do incorporate some camo because there there is more heat.
Click to expand...
It will work but in most casinos its impossible to get a seat at least at the $25 tables. So I like playing all
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top