Female Player

[shadroch]

A cover play is not an intentional mistake. It is an intentional mis-play. Again,there is a big difference between those two,as well.
All mistake are accidental. Thats what makes them mistakes or accidents.
A competant player will make an occasional mis-play to gain cover.
A player who loses track of the count half the time will be making plenty of mistakes,having a large bet out in negative counts or the reverse,not using insurance properly,ect,ect. Fodder for the casino.

Apples and Strawberries.

 

[ScottH]

Something Scott, you have absolutely no experience in as of yet

Incorrect.

This slacker mentality you seem to display has no real place in AP if you plan to be good enough to make money.

I'm not a slacker, you just pulled that idea out of... well, you know where. I can work just as hard as anybody else here.

Also, I've made plenty of money for the amount of hours I've put in. See, when it comes to AP I am not one or two dimensional. I am pretty creative and find oppurtunities others would miss. I'll do just fine, but thanks for your concern.

 

[EasyRhino]

Just out of curiosity IH17, does your niece play fairly textbook when she's counting, or does she use much cover?

 

[Automatic Monkey]

This just simply isn't true. Your bankroll is sized on the varience you expect to play through as a counter. When you place your big bets at a time of disadvantage, this dramatically increases your varience. Increased varience leads to bankroll wipe-out.
It is true that you will still have an average advantage but as your bets will be totally out of proportion to you advantage you will not win in the long run.
This is the same problem that you'll have keying aces if you're not following the packet through the shuffle. Since you'll be betting big at the wrong time about 30-40% of the time, you need to be VERY careful how you're sizing your bet, as unfortunately the standard bet sizing doesn't account for the varience.
Advantage playing isn't a skill that you can afford to be sloppy with. On this one Bojack is 100% right. If you're not dedicated to being perfect, the chances are you're not playing a winning game.

RJT.

RJT.

Ah, that is a different subject entirely though. A counter can play and spread perfectly and get the same advantage as the computer does when running a sim, but if his bankroll isn't sized properly to his bets he will likely lose in the long term. However he is still playing with an advantage- I was using that term literally. Even the weakest legitimate systems provide an advantage in that sense, just not a very sustainable one.

Being I'm a part-timer with a good income outside of blackjack, risk of ruin isn't a big issue for me, what's more important to me is having a win rate comparable to my salary as an engineer. Going home with empty pockets once in a while isn't a big deal- it'll come back.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Monkey I must totally disagree with you on your point that its almost impossible for a bad counter to not have an advantage. There are far more bad counters out there getting whipped by the casinos than there are good ones beating them. Being a bad counter can give you a bigger disadvantage than a flat bet basic strategy player, especially if you use indice plays when not called for. Then its just plain deviating from BS which as you know will raise the disadvantage. Bad counters is just a general term, there are many things that would make someone a bad counter. Of course messing up the count is one thing, and depending if it is chronic, which in most cases it is if you are lax in how you approach training, it can be quite costly. I know you have spoken about how its okay to make a couple of mistakes, but that mentality breeds hundreds of mistakes per session which will destroy bankrolls. There are also other bad counter traits of misreading what heat really is, over emphasizing it and leaving a good game or using too many risk averse cover plays not knowing the cost of them. Also under estimating heat and getting tossed bringing your EV to a negative to 0 range. There are many more things that constitute a bad counter, a lot depend on what system you use. That in itself is a problem for most. Most bad counters never master their system before they play it. They get into bad habits, and never change regardless how many times they play.

I will give this true example of a team in the midwest. They were supposedly experienced card counters that wanted to maybe get a bit more edge so they hired some professional players to come in and coach them a bit. Counting the first time through the shoe the average count of the 4 players was off by 8. Their team leader was the best counter, he had been counting for 9 years, and he didn't get the count right once for a whole shoe for the whole training session. They were hi lo players that were awful with deck estimation. They only estimated to the deck and because of their low standards they were even off by whole decks until it got down below 3 decks. They were unorganized, had no real team structure, and basically thought that money will come to them by adding and subtracting 1 while playing. That might not matter to most but I find it alarming that people are actually practicing to be that bad. Anyway they were hard headed and felt like a lot here do that being too strict is totally overdoing it. It was more like a blow to their pride. Anyway 2 months later they were down more than 60% of their bankroll(they were down 30% when they first called) and calling for help, but this time they meant it. What happens next is totally up to them.

Basically what I'm saying you have to be good at this game to beat it. You can not be just going through the motions not caring about a couple of mistakes here and there. That only means you are making a boatload more than you realize. I'm sure this does not pertain to ihate17's neice, but it is absolutely a false statement that a bad counter will win at this game. Maybe once in a while, but than again same goes for the ploppy.

Well you are going to have to show me the math to convince me. A High-Low player who is lousy at deck estimation is still going to be playing more accurately than a KO player (non-true count adjusted) who plays perfectly. Are there any doubts that KO works?

A shoe player that has a problem with indices can and should be using Counter's Basic Strategy. This outright eliminates the problem, giving up a little bit of an edge, and it has been proven ad nauseam that all you give up is a little bit with CBS. Sophisticated teams have been having their gorillas use CBS. Not that I would use it because I'm good at indices, but these problems you describe all have such easy fixes that I can't imagine not one player on a team being able to figure out KO with CBS before they go bankrupt.

Finally I don't get the reasoning behind making a few mistakes meaning you are making a lot more. To me, a few mistakes are a few mistakes, and a lot are a lot. Remember this is not like training for a sport where you can "go out there and give it 110%" and get positive results. No one can make more than their EV, no matter how hard they try. This was one of the hardest things for me to accept when I first started advantage play, because I've a long history of herculean efforts, but I did and it has benefited me in other areas of life too.

P.S.- Eureka! Maybe that is a natural advantage women have in advantage play, they're not brought up in this football-hero-110% mindset and are more able and willing to work around individual and global limitations within a given system.

 

[RJT]

Finally I don't get the reasoning behind making a few mistakes meaning you are making a lot more. To me, a few mistakes are a few mistakes, and a lot are a lot. Remember this is not like training for a sport where you can "go out there and give it 110%" and get positive results. No one can make more than their EV, no matter how hard they try. This was one of the hardest things for me to accept when I first started advantage play, because I've a long history of herculean efforts, but I did and it has benefited me in other areas of life too.

The reasoning is simple, if you are making mistakes at home where everything is in your favour - you're comfortable, there are no distractions comparible to the casino, no pit boss giving you the evils ect ect - then when you get to the tables and you have all these other constraints, you're going to exponentially multiply the number of mistakes you are making.
As has already been said, playing a perfect game doesn't always mean playing every hand in an EV perfect way. It means that the only time you don't you know that you're making a mis-play and know exactly how much you're giving up for that mis-play.
Scott, having read a fair amount of your posts, you have come across with the views that it's ok to be a bit sloppy with your game and that you intend to play professionally on several occasions. These are not two views that go well together.
I know Bojack through some mutual friends of ours and can verify his skills - he is probably one of the best players in the world today. High praise i know, but the check-out procedures he uses are very tough and this has shown through in the profit levels that he and his team are acustomed to.
I also know and have advised several other teams, who have not been so dilligent with their skills checks. Not one of these teams has been profitable for any great length of time.
His frustration and attitude comes from knowing what it takes to be a professional player, but having this constantly flat out denied by many of the message board experts. This attitude is not only damaging to themselves but damaging to the new posters on the board who then feel they can set lower standards for themselves than you really can if you want to play for your living.
Quite frankly, i agree and sympathize with these frustrations. As i believe Bojack stated in another thread on pretty much the same topic - you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

RJT.

 

[supercoolmancool]

Casinos don't care if you are undercapitalized. If you are playing with an advantage it still hurts them and they won't let you play probably even if they knew you didn't have the bankroll.

 

[RJT]

Casinos don't care if you are undercapitalized. If you are playing with an advantage it still hurts them and they won't let you play probably even if they knew you didn't have the bankroll.

It doesn't hurt them at all! If you are undercapitalized the vast majority of times you lose all you money! That's it, unless you have a good positive swing at the start and then readjust your unit accordingly. And as we are discussing being undercapitalized due to the increased varience of sloppy play, you wouldn't even be aware of the fact that you were undercapitalized in the first place. If you don't have the money to play through a negative swing you are no more of a threat to the casinos than a ploppy.
The casinos don't have any way of telling whether or not you're undercapitalized, and that's something entirely different. So yes they will bar anyone they even suspect of being a capible counter, and as such end up barring many people who would in the end have given up large sums of money just due to varience.

RJT.

 

[sagefr0g]

......... No one can make more than their EV, no matter how hard they try. This was one of the hardest things for me to accept when I first started advantage play, because I've a long history of herculean efforts, but I did and it has benefited me in other areas of life too.
.........

maybe but i wonder. the EV you refer to is i believe the EV a computer is able to realize and it becomes our EV when we mimic the computer. the thing i wonder about is would a person with a high degree of understanding of the game and the skill to apply that understanding be able to achieve higher EV consistantly.
example that this may be possible. a player applying situational advantage methods as the situation arises. say counting, slug tracking, ace sequencing and hole carding.

 

[EasyRhino]

I'm pretty sure Monkey takes into account the EV of the "fancy stuff" when he's employing those techniques, as well, even when he's getting clobbered by variance.

I'll also back up the viewpoint that having a few mistakes that you catch means that there may be a greater number of mistakes that you don't catch. This is due to the simple fact that a person making mistakes is not usually the best person to be checking for errors.

Of course, there's also a different mindset between a true professional player (of which there are like, what, 4 on this board?) and recreational doofuses such as myself.

But I think we're getting distracted from the real point of this topic: we need pictures of IH17's hot niece to verify her skills.

 

[sagefr0g]

But I think we're getting distracted from the real point of this topic: we need pictures of IH17's hot niece to verify her skills.

good point!
perhaps we should set up a poll and force IH17's hand.
maybe ban him from the site for a while if he doesn't comply :joker:

 

[ScottH]

Scott, having read a fair amount of your posts, you have come across with the views that it's ok to be a bit sloppy with your game and that you intend to play professionally on several occasions. These are not two views that go well together.

I've been saying that you don't have to play perfect to play a winning game. I was never describing my own play. I have always played really well, as I practice until I can play without making any mistakes. I never just say, "Well, that's good enough because I still have the advantage." I always squeak out any extra edge I can get, in any situation.

 

[ScottH]

Casinos don't care if you are undercapitalized. If you are playing with an advantage it still hurts them and they won't let you play probably even if they knew you didn't have the bankroll.

Being undercapitalized DOES NOT affect your advantage AT ALL. It just increases your risk. Even pros on this page are saying being udercapitalized will cause you to lose your advantage, I'd like to see someone prove that.

Like you said, supercool, casinos dont care how much money you have, if you play with the advantage you are a threat. Let's say there are 2 players. Both play the same stakes. Player A has a 50,000 dollar bankroll and player B has a 1,000 dollar bankroll. They both go into the casino with 1,000 dollars and play at the same betting level. They are both an equal threat to the casinos on that particular day, the person with the 50,000 bankroll doesn't have any better advantage than the one with 1,000. They both expect to win the same amount from the casino on that day.

 

[SystemsTrader]

Being undercapitalized DOES NOT affect your advantage AT ALL. It just increases your risk. Even pros on this page are saying being udercapitalized will cause you to lose your advantage, I'd like to see someone prove that.

Ok I will take a shot at it. Let's say you are having a bad day at the casino and because you are undercapitalized your trip bankroll is running low. Now the situation calls for a max bet. You end up spreading to four hands and now you have no more money it is all on the table. Now you end up with three of those hands calling for a double down. But since you are undercapitalized and have no more money you cannot double so you have just lost your advantage.

 

[RJT]

Being undercapitalized DOES NOT affect your advantage AT ALL. It just increases your risk. Even pros on this page are saying being udercapitalized will cause you to lose your advantage, I'd like to see someone prove that.

You can have a 50% advantage, but if you over bet your bankroll, you're still going to lose it. Pros size their bankroll (including trip bankrolls) to ensure as far as they can that they will never run out of funds. And as ST just pointed out this stops them losing advantage.
Bottom line - It doesn't matter if you have an advantage if you're taking too big a risk. You'll end yourself in the same place as every other degenerate. If you can't grasp this, go back to the books as this is a crucial factor. ADVANTAGE MAKES NO DIFFERENCE IF YOU ARE OVERSIZING YOUR BETS.
And trip bankrolls are a different story to overall bankrolls. Of course you are overbetting the bankroll you have in your hands when you walk into the casino, but that's with the assurance that if you do bottom out you can lay your hands on more and continue to play at the same (or close) level.

RJT.

 

[shadroch]

Hey,Scott

Not trying to pick a fight,just offering you some food for thought.
When someone consistantly backs the wild musings of a newbie and argues with the seasoned pros,isn't it possible they are on the wrong side of the argument for a reason.

 

[Preston]

Casinos don't care if you are undercapitalized. If you are playing with an advantage it still hurts them and they won't let you play probably even if they knew you didn't have the bankroll.

Do you realize how strongly you have to be betting to really make a dent?

The casino my wife works at told her during orientation that the place grosses an average around $1,000,000 per DAY.

Now I took the time to figure out estimated production costs based upon their handbook (which listed employee position salaries) Figuring All tables were open and all cashier windows running. And I figured that to be between $250,000 per day in operating costs (VERY high estimate)

So that leaves a profit of $750,000 a day. Are your winnings coming anywhere close to that? If not than you are not much of a threat.

Maybe my math's a bit off.. but I honestly don't think casinos are really sweating counters. They just want to pocket more money.

 

[supercoolmancool]

How can a casino rationalize paying a dealer to deal to someone playing even just a break even game let alone with an advantage. RJT said if you overbet, then you will lose. Well yah but the casinos will lose too. They have to.

Do you realize how strongly you have to be betting to really make a dent?

The casino my wife works at told her during orientation that the place grosses an average around $1,000,000 per DAY.

Now I took the time to figure out estimated production costs based upon their handbook (which listed employee position salaries) Figuring All tables were open and all cashier windows running. And I figured that to be between $250,000 per day in operating costs (VERY high estimate)

So that leaves a profit of $750,000 a day. Are your winnings coming anywhere close to that? If not than you are not much of a threat.

Maybe my math's a bit off.. but I honestly don't think casinos are really sweating counters. They just want to pocket more money.

 

[RJT]

RJT said if you overbet, then you will lose. Well yah but the casinos will lose too. They have to.

No they don't. Take Scotts example of player A and B. Say both of them are skilled players and really are playing with the advantage. Now with a $50000 bankroll player A can play with a $100 unit. A bit risk heavy for my taste, but let's go with it. So player B also plays with a $100 unit.
Now a 10 unit swing is an every day occurance. In fact when playing it would be unusual if you didn't see a 10 unit swing several times during the one day (depending on how long you play of course) and a 10 unit swing is all that it'll take to wipe out the trip bankroll for player A and the whole bankroll for player A. So at some point over the day there is a high chance that both players will be wiped out. At that point player B is out of the game. Variences claims him and he has no oppertunity to win it back. Player A however comes back the next day with a new wad of cash and plays to win what he lost back.
Oversizing is a bankroll killer. If you can't play on, you can't win.

RJT.

 

[EasyRhino]

The casino can't really tell if a player is undercapitalized or not. They have to treat every AP like a threat.

However, I think there are circumstances where being short-stacked can erase your advantage, simply by case of ruin. Let's say you're betting triple-Kelly-fraction. You invariably bust out. You go home and never play again. The casino has just won all of your money, and you join the ranks of losers.

"But wait!" you say, "I'm just recreational! My bankroll is replenishable!". Well, you're not really betting triple-Kelly anymore. It's harder to define for a replenishable bankroll, but if you definine the bankroll as the amount you're willing to lose over a lifetime, then triple-Kelly betting is going to HURT when you lose.

However, as long as you have enough chips to split and double down a couple of times, you're not really over betting as much, or giving up much of an advantage (you might have to cut your play short in a hot shoe, which would hurt a little at the edges).

So, if the casino had a choice of black-chip card-counters, either one with a bankroll of $100,000, or ten with a bankroll of $10,000 (not playing in a team), they're going to pick the ten short-stacked loners each time. Because some of them are going to lose their money and be knocked out of action.

The casino can afford to ride out the winning streaks of civilians, for all but the very largest whales. It can also afford to ride out underbanked advantage players. But once you've got a player who has legitimite enough skills to gain an advantage, and enough money to stick with it, then they become a legitimate threat.