True Count break even

[1357111317]

Now I have read that if you play basic stratagy perfectly you will win 42% of the hands but with doubling down, splitting etc your total win rate(amount of money won vs money bet) will be roughly 49% (My casino is split and double after split, pays 3:2 and hit of soft seventeen). What does the true count have to be so that your total win rate will be 50% or higher?

 

[callipygian]

What does the true count have to be so that your total win rate will be 50% or higher?

I believe the true count has to be +17 before you start winning more often than you lose. I'd guess it'd have to be +20 or higher before your win percentage breaks 50%.

 

[DonR]

As far as I know, and guys correct me if I am wrong, player's advantage goes up roughly by 0.5% with every increase in true count of 1. TC 0, gives the house an advantage of 0.5%. At Tc +1, you are roughly playing at 50-50 chance (with perfect basic strategy)...and so on.

 

[jaredmt]

you dont need to win most hands. you just have to win the right ones like doubles/splits/blackjacks and u gain ur advantage that way

but as DonR said, you're edge is even with the casino when TC = +1

 

[notorious546]

ya 17+?
can anyone explain that to me?
i understand the true count +1 thing.. adding .5% to out advantage

thanks!

 

[creeping panther]

357

Now I have read that if you play basic stratagy perfectly you will win 42% of the hands but with doubling down, splitting etc your total win rate(amount of money won vs money bet) will be roughly 49% (My casino is split and double after split, pays 3:2 and hit of soft seventeen). What does the true count have to be so that your total win rate will be 50% or higher?

There is a problem about trying to put these percentages into granite. There is always fluctuations both ways, usually the higher the count the greater chance the dealer will have a face or 10 up, even an ace, you must steel yourself to this inevitability and be able to deal with it. You need alot of skillz to win in this game, mental, physical, emotional, tactical, along with a good "count". If you have a tc of +5 and up you have to go into full attack mode and pray you are on your game and that you then get the cards you will NEED with the big bets out It can get very dicey, fast,, with nothing for sure, not in reality. It is not easy, it is not like in the movies.



CP

 

[1357111317]

you dont need to win most hands. you just have to win the right ones like doubles/splits/blackjacks and u gain ur advantage that way

but as DonR said, you're edge is even with the casino when TC = +1

Yeah thats what I meant, the break even point in terms of money not hand winning percentage.

 

[callipygian]

Yeah thats what I meant, the break even point in terms of money not hand winning percentage.

Okay, that's very different. Depending on the rules, the advantage will shift to you somewhere around TC +1.

Keep in mind though that even at TC +5 you will lose more hands than you win! The reason why you have the advantage is that you split more, you double more, and more of your splits and doubles will work.

Most of the time you win 42-44% and lose 48-50% of your hands, but your average win will be greater than your average loss. You get the advantage mostly because your average winning bet goes up, and only a little bit because your win percentage goes up.

 

[jack.jackson]

Okay, that's very different. Depending on the rules, the advantage will shift to you somewhere around TC +1.

Provided he spreads about 1:2, right? Meaning if he spread 1:2 in (all)positive counts then it would basically be a break-even game.

 

[callipygian]

Provided he spreads about 1:2, right? Meaning if he spread 1:2 in (all)positive counts then it would basically be a break-even game.

I'm not 100% sure, but off the top of my head, no, because 0 is the most common TC and your advantage is negative.

You have the advantage at TC +1 (or +2 in some cases) whether or not you bet more or not. If you Wong in at +1/+2, you can get an advantage without ever spreading your bet because you only play when you have the advantage.

 

[DonR]

Keep in mind though that even at TC +5 you will lose more hands than you win!

I'm not sure I understand this. At TC +5, playing perfect BS, you increase your advantage by about 2%. So in the long run, if you were only playing hands when TC was +5, you should be winning 52% and losing 48% of all these hands.

This is only speaking theoretically. Just like creeping panther said, there is a lot more to it in real life.

 

[jaredmt]

I'm not sure I understand this. At TC +5, playing perfect BS, you increase your advantage by about 2%. So in the long run, if you were only playing hands when TC was +5, you should be winning 52% and losing 48% of all these hands.

This is only speaking theoretically. Just like creeping panther said, there is a lot more to it in real life.

It looks like you're confusing "edge" with "win/loose ratio". the TC tells you that you're EDGE is about 2% at +5. but you still loose more often than you win.

I read somewhere that the most you could possibly win is 50% (someone correct me if im wrong) but youd have a pretty big edge at that point

 

[jack.jackson]

TC won/lost Zencount!

 

[DonR]

Oh, it does look like I got it wrong. I actually thought that the edge would be the same as your win/lose ratio in the long run.

I am still confused. Here's a quote from Gamemasteronline:

"For each increase of 1 in the true count as figured by the Hi / Lo counting method, the player's advantage increases by about .5% in the average Blackjack game. If the casino has an edge over the basic strategy player of .40% (6 decks, double on any first two cards, double after splitting pairs, dealer stands on A-6), it takes a true count of just about 1 in order to get "even" with the house. Being even means that the player who utilizes proper basic strategy will win as much as s/he loses -- in the long run -- at a true count of one. A true count of 2 gives the counter an edge of .5% over the house; a true count of 3 gives the player an edge of 1% and so forth."

Doesn't this mean that a player is expected to "win as much as s/he loses", with regard to the number of hands? So, what is the definition of an edge?

 

[sagefr0g]

Oh, it does look like I got it wrong. I actually thought that the edge would be the same as your win/lose ratio in the long run.

I am still confused. Here's a quote from Gamemasteronline:

"For each increase of 1 in the true count as figured by the Hi / Lo counting method, the player's advantage increases by about .5% in the average Blackjack game. If the casino has an edge over the basic strategy player of .40% (6 decks, double on any first two cards, double after splitting pairs, dealer stands on A-6), it takes a true count of just about 1 in order to get "even" with the house. Being even means that the player who utilizes proper basic strategy will win as much as s/he loses -- in the long run -- at a true count of one. A true count of 2 gives the counter an edge of .5% over the house; a true count of 3 gives the player an edge of 1% and so forth."

Doesn't this mean that a player is expected to "win as much as s/he loses", with regard to the number of hands? So, what is the definition of an edge?

those edge's are only approximate.
you'll win and lose just about the same percentage of hands regardless of the count. the thing is though you'll have more blackjacks, successful double downs and successful insurance bets when the count is positive while having more money on the table.
if you have a greater edge than the house you should win more money than you'll lose against the house in the long run, not necessarily win more hands.
i think technically, edge is expected value, it's like your a money favorite when you have the edge, especially in the long run. and your mainly the favorite because of the better chances for getting that 3:2 blackjack payoff, being able to double down while the dealer can't and being a favorite for the insurance bet.

 

[DonR]

Okay, I think I finally got it right. So, the percentage is actually in money you are expected to win in the long run, when you have the edge, not in the number of hands you win (which pretty much stays the same, with some slight variations, as per that table from jack, jackson). The bottom line, I guess, if you have the edge of 2% for example, that means that you can expect to win $102, for every $100 you bet.

Thanks!

 

[callipygian]

The bottom line, I guess, if you have the edge of 2% for example, that means that you can expect to win $102, for every $100 you bet.

Yes. Mathematically, this is how the two are related.

(Expected Value) = (Win Percentage)*(Win Amount) - (Lose Percentage)*(Lose Amount)

 

[Thunder]

What I find interesting is that some places say you should raise your bet when the TC=+1 Others say +2. Personally, I go with anything over +1 such as +1.1 You have the edge over the casino as a basic strategy player when it's over +1 assuming 6 decks, S17 doa, split up to 4 hands. Counting will only help to further increase that edge if I'm not mistaken.

 

[callipygian]

What I find interesting is that some places say you should raise your bet when the TC=+1 Others say +2. Personally, I go with anything over +1 such as +1.1 You have the edge over the casino as a basic strategy player when it's over +1 assuming 6 decks, S17 doa, split up to 4 hands. Counting will only help to further increase that edge if I'm not mistaken.

It depends on your game. Most shoe games have EV's of less than -0.5% at TC 0, which means that EV at TC +1 is actually still negative. You definitely don't want to raise your bet there. Even games which have a positive EV at TC +1 need not to have bets raised, because the extra variance that you assume by raising your bet probably isn't worth the EV.

Basically, raise your bets at TC +1 if you have an advantage and a large bankroll; if you're at a disadvantage or if you have a smaller bankroll, wait until TC +2.

 

[DonR]

Since only "8D, S17, split up to 4 hands" games are available to me, should I actually wait until TC reaches +2 to raise the bet? In a lot of these shoes that doesn't even happen.