Here are all the comments posted on the site, with the most recent discussions listed first.
To participate in any of these discussions, you can reply on the article page.
Your basic strategy table doesn’t make sense for player 16 vs. dealer 10. If there is surrender it is “Rs” but if no surrender it is “H”. It should be Rh if there is surrender. That is what your printed cards say.
Both BJ software are very good training tools. I’m impartial to Deepnet software though because that’s what the developer of Speed Count and I used to optimize Speed Count. (Dan Pronovost) is the developer of Deepnet software and Speed Count.) I’ve personally used Dan’s Professional software bundle to do my own risk of ruin calculations, bankroll calculations, and blackjack simulator (playing millions of hands of BJ.) I also use the software when I teach Speed Count (and Hi Lo), specifically the basic strategy drills, the counting drills, and the simulator to show the affect of penetration and playing rules on your edge as a counter.
I can assure you that basic strategy is not some sort of scheme devised by the casinos. It’s simply a mathematically provable set of the optimal choices for each decision. My only affiliation with land-based casinos is extracting money from them as a player. 🙂
Actually, most internet casinos shuffle after every hand. If you play an online live dealer casino, you may find 4 decks being dealt out of 8.
In that case, counting works fine, although you will need a big spread to beat the poor penetration.
I have a question about penetration and keeping track of the TC
I play an eight deck game. The dealer probably discards about 3 1/2 decks when he shuffles and the player cuts . I am considering both the pros and cons of hi & lo and KO. With KO for example, the count starts at -28 ( 4-4*8). What I usually do is I start the count at 0. And say the RC is 28 ( including the 7s as +1), I now know that the shoe is getting warmer if it goes to +4 ( or in other words +32 -28), I raise my bet because now allegedly the deck is rich in high cards. Here where I am confused : if the dealer discards almost half of the shoe aka bad penetration, I rarely see a positive count as high as what I described . I am doing something wrong by not accounting for the bad penetration ?
Thanks all !! First time poster 🙂
Love this forum
Ken. I am interested in counting double blackjack. I purchased the advanced wallet cards. My issue is that the matrix under lesson 23 is inconsistent with your double deck basic strategy. For example, on the matrix it says if you have a pair of 2s and dealer has a 2 you should just hit (no number so doesn’t matter what the count is). On your basic strategy engine for double deck (leaving the default drop downs for everything but # of decks) it says for this same hand to split (split up to dealer having a 7 in fact). Is this a mistake and if so which one is right? Thanks,
The matrix from the GameMaster assumes you cannot double after split in the 2-deck game. If you change the engine settings to not allow DAS, the results will much more closely align with the matrix he provides. That was easy; it’s just a rule difference. If you dig deeper and begin to look at the index numbers themselves, it gets more complicated.
I am sure there are differences in the GameMaster’s index matrix numbers and the ones on my advanced card. Generating indexes involves making a lot of decisions on the conditions. I spent months fine-tuning my numbers, and my assumptions may be slightly different than his. In addition, his indexes were risk-adjusted in a few spots, and for the vast majority of players I think risk-adjusted indexes are misguided because most players do not actually bet the relevant percentage of their effective bankroll. Most players have a replenishable bankroll, whether they are willing to admit it or not. For that reason, I chose to not risk-adjust the indexes. (The effect of RA indexes is minimal and only a handful of decisions are even affected at all, so it’s not a big thing.) Another possible reason for discrepancies is the technology used to generate the indexes. There have been improvements since GM did his matrix (not in basic strategy, just index generation). I used CVData from QFIT to generate mine, in an iterative process that took many simulations for fine-tuning.
The bottom line is… For basic strategy, inputting the correct rules in the Strategy Engine will give you a chart that you can trust whenever there are differences vs other source materials. For card counting indexes, the situation is far more nuanced, but I am confident of the utility of the numbers published on my Advanced Strategy Cards.
First off, thanks so much for the quick reply; it makes sense (I didn’t know the acronyms well enough to see that I was looking at two different sets of rules).
So, I have basic strategy memorized although I never knew it varied for double deck so there are about 9 hands I have to memorize to be 100%. Now I am contemplating moving on to the index variation piece by using your cards. I am looking for guidance on cost vs. benefit. For all my purposes by the way I am dealing with Mandalay Bay or Palazzo, which means H17, Da2, das (except Aces), no surrender and I am starting with at least basic strategy and counting where I will up my bet by up to 8 times minimum (sometimes more).
First of all, assuming penetration of about 66% (deck + 1/3rd deck) and varying bet up to 8 times, about what are my odds (i.e. 1.5%)? Second, if I completely incorporate the index variation piece, what impact does that have on my odds? Lastly, is there an in between that you recommend that is a starting point for my next trip to Vegas that would provide me the most bang for my mental buck? For example maybe I skip the ones where I have a pair as those are a lot less common I think than soft hands and the rest or maybe I just disregard all the ones where the variation starts above 3 or below – 3 because those are less common counts. If you have a suggestion please make it and let me know if you can about what improvement to my odds that might offer vs. just counting with basic strategy.
Last question, how much leverage do I get by upping my bet by more than 8 times? I usually pay $25 minimum and sometimes find myself doing two or three hands each with a $200 bet when the count is high towards the end of the two deck shoe (in particular when there are a bunch of Aces left). While this has risk of being asked to leave for counting I wonder if this is actually more impactful in terms of my odds then worrying about the index variations in the first place, thoughts?
Bet sizing is far more important than strategy changes. I would recommend that you not worry about indexes at all yet. When I started, I played a year or two without any strategy variations at all. The huge majority of your profit comes from bet variation. Once bet variation is solid, you can expect strategy changes to add maybe 20% to your win rate. You’ll know you are ready when counting and just varying your bet starts to get boring. 🙂
Yes, increasing your spread will have a much more dramatic impact on expected win than learning and using all the strategy variations. The advantage of card counting comes primarily from betting more when you have the advantage. Changing your strategy based on the count is just the icing on the cake. Focus on building your bank and increasing your spread first.
Basic strategy will reduce the house edge, but not eliminate it. In typical games, your long-run expectation will be to lose around half a percent of your total action.
Your basic strategy table doesn’t make sense for player 16 vs. dealer 10. If there is surrender it is “Rs” but if no surrender it is “H”. It should be Rh if there is surrender. That is what your printed cards say.
Well, it’s complicated. Both the card and the chart are correct, in their own way.
Read the explanation here: The confusing situation with 16 vs Ten.
dang, that makes sense. thank you
Thank you.
I agree. I use ReKO. It was mainly to calculate how weak Speed Count is.
Hi there – how would you rate Casino Verite software versus DeepNet Technologies’ Professional Blackjack Bundle for Windows?
I’m down to the two and wondering if you have experience with the other to shed some light on it?
Thanks!!
I haven’t tried the DeepNet software, but I bet Henry Tamburin could compare the two. I will see if I can get him to reply here.
Both BJ software are very good training tools. I’m impartial to Deepnet software though because that’s what the developer of Speed Count and I used to optimize Speed Count. (Dan Pronovost) is the developer of Deepnet software and Speed Count.) I’ve personally used Dan’s Professional software bundle to do my own risk of ruin calculations, bankroll calculations, and blackjack simulator (playing millions of hands of BJ.) I also use the software when I teach Speed Count (and Hi Lo), specifically the basic strategy drills, the counting drills, and the simulator to show the affect of penetration and playing rules on your edge as a counter.
I always wonder if the casinos actually put out the basic strategy plays to learn for their gain. Are you affiliated with any casinos?
I can assure you that basic strategy is not some sort of scheme devised by the casinos. It’s simply a mathematically provable set of the optimal choices for each decision. My only affiliation with land-based casinos is extracting money from them as a player. 🙂
Hi,
What about cutting the decks half? Many internet casinos cut the 8decks to half. Does that nulify card counting also?
Actually, most internet casinos shuffle after every hand. If you play an online live dealer casino, you may find 4 decks being dealt out of 8.
In that case, counting works fine, although you will need a big spread to beat the poor penetration.
I have a question about penetration and keeping track of the TC
I play an eight deck game. The dealer probably discards about 3 1/2 decks when he shuffles and the player cuts . I am considering both the pros and cons of hi & lo and KO. With KO for example, the count starts at -28 ( 4-4*8). What I usually do is I start the count at 0. And say the RC is 28 ( including the 7s as +1), I now know that the shoe is getting warmer if it goes to +4 ( or in other words +32 -28), I raise my bet because now allegedly the deck is rich in high cards. Here where I am confused : if the dealer discards almost half of the shoe aka bad penetration, I rarely see a positive count as high as what I described . I am doing something wrong by not accounting for the bad penetration ?
Thanks all !! First time poster 🙂
Love this forum
For these charts on whether to hit, split , double , or stand is the determining count the true count or running count
Always the true count.
Ken. I am interested in counting double blackjack. I purchased the advanced wallet cards. My issue is that the matrix under lesson 23 is inconsistent with your double deck basic strategy. For example, on the matrix it says if you have a pair of 2s and dealer has a 2 you should just hit (no number so doesn’t matter what the count is). On your basic strategy engine for double deck (leaving the default drop downs for everything but # of decks) it says for this same hand to split (split up to dealer having a 7 in fact). Is this a mistake and if so which one is right? Thanks,
The matrix from the GameMaster assumes you cannot double after split in the 2-deck game. If you change the engine settings to not allow DAS, the results will much more closely align with the matrix he provides. That was easy; it’s just a rule difference. If you dig deeper and begin to look at the index numbers themselves, it gets more complicated.
I am sure there are differences in the GameMaster’s index matrix numbers and the ones on my advanced card. Generating indexes involves making a lot of decisions on the conditions. I spent months fine-tuning my numbers, and my assumptions may be slightly different than his. In addition, his indexes were risk-adjusted in a few spots, and for the vast majority of players I think risk-adjusted indexes are misguided because most players do not actually bet the relevant percentage of their effective bankroll. Most players have a replenishable bankroll, whether they are willing to admit it or not. For that reason, I chose to not risk-adjust the indexes. (The effect of RA indexes is minimal and only a handful of decisions are even affected at all, so it’s not a big thing.) Another possible reason for discrepancies is the technology used to generate the indexes. There have been improvements since GM did his matrix (not in basic strategy, just index generation). I used CVData from QFIT to generate mine, in an iterative process that took many simulations for fine-tuning.
The bottom line is… For basic strategy, inputting the correct rules in the Strategy Engine will give you a chart that you can trust whenever there are differences vs other source materials. For card counting indexes, the situation is far more nuanced, but I am confident of the utility of the numbers published on my Advanced Strategy Cards.
Ken,
First off, thanks so much for the quick reply; it makes sense (I didn’t know the acronyms well enough to see that I was looking at two different sets of rules).
So, I have basic strategy memorized although I never knew it varied for double deck so there are about 9 hands I have to memorize to be 100%. Now I am contemplating moving on to the index variation piece by using your cards. I am looking for guidance on cost vs. benefit. For all my purposes by the way I am dealing with Mandalay Bay or Palazzo, which means H17, Da2, das (except Aces), no surrender and I am starting with at least basic strategy and counting where I will up my bet by up to 8 times minimum (sometimes more).
First of all, assuming penetration of about 66% (deck + 1/3rd deck) and varying bet up to 8 times, about what are my odds (i.e. 1.5%)? Second, if I completely incorporate the index variation piece, what impact does that have on my odds? Lastly, is there an in between that you recommend that is a starting point for my next trip to Vegas that would provide me the most bang for my mental buck? For example maybe I skip the ones where I have a pair as those are a lot less common I think than soft hands and the rest or maybe I just disregard all the ones where the variation starts above 3 or below – 3 because those are less common counts. If you have a suggestion please make it and let me know if you can about what improvement to my odds that might offer vs. just counting with basic strategy.
Last question, how much leverage do I get by upping my bet by more than 8 times? I usually pay $25 minimum and sometimes find myself doing two or three hands each with a $200 bet when the count is high towards the end of the two deck shoe (in particular when there are a bunch of Aces left). While this has risk of being asked to leave for counting I wonder if this is actually more impactful in terms of my odds then worrying about the index variations in the first place, thoughts?
I really appreciate it.
Kind regards,
Thanks!
Bet sizing is far more important than strategy changes. I would recommend that you not worry about indexes at all yet. When I started, I played a year or two without any strategy variations at all. The huge majority of your profit comes from bet variation. Once bet variation is solid, you can expect strategy changes to add maybe 20% to your win rate. You’ll know you are ready when counting and just varying your bet starts to get boring. 🙂
Yes, increasing your spread will have a much more dramatic impact on expected win than learning and using all the strategy variations. The advantage of card counting comes primarily from betting more when you have the advantage. Changing your strategy based on the count is just the icing on the cake. Focus on building your bank and increasing your spread first.
Basic strategy will reduce the house edge, but not eliminate it. In typical games, your long-run expectation will be to lose around half a percent of your total action.