Playing $10 bets at $5 tables

[itsedmondfoo]

So i was thinking if i was willing to bet 10 dollars a hand, can i just go to $5 tables and bet 5 on neg count and on positive counts i bet as if $10 was my min unit?

For example:
TC Bet
-2 $5
-1 $5
0 $5
+1 $5
+2 $10
+3 $20
+4 $30

Would I limit my losses this way?

 

[21forme]

How many decks? What are the rules?

If it's a 2D game, you're OK as it's a 6:1 spread. On a 6 or 8D game, you'll still lose money.

 

[ihate17]

If you can get away with it

My minimum bet is most often $50 but the table I play on will often depend on the conditions available at the moment to me.

There will be times in a casino where the best penetration is offered on a $10 table while the pen given by the dealer on a $25 table is terrible. Combining that with the rare possibility that the $10 table has no other or very few other players, it is the place to play.
This situation has brought to me times where my spread might be 50-1 but I know that even a fantastic act will not let you spread like that, so my exit comes shortly after. I have had a few shoes where I may have begun it at $25, gone down to $10 as the count went down early and then as it rose just continuously upped it to about $500.

This does not really answer your question about limiting a loss. Wonging out would definately limit your downside, but the real question should be, am I playing a winning game? If your max bet is $30 sitting at shoe game with a $10 minimum you are not playing a winning game at all but at a $5 table yes, you will lose less over time but again your game is not a winning game. So, if your bankroll can afford it you should raise your max bet but if you can not afford to do this then wonging in at +2 should become your goal till at least your bankroll grows.

ihate17

 

[Bashful C. Stupid-Butt]

I would try this route...

Neutral: 25
-1 bet 20
-2 bet 15
-3 bet 10
-4 bet 5

+1 bet 30
+2 bet 35
+3 bet 40
+4 bet 45

Basically 5 bucks a point. Similar to what I used at $25 dollar table to take home $16,000.00 in a few short hours. Around 24. This was 25 bucks a point.

EDIT: I have to warn that this can BITE you quick if the count skyrockets early and the cards just don;t fall your direction. I have lost $1000.00 in 5 minutes or less a few times. Mostly at home though. I can only think of one time in the casino where this happened.

 

[Sonny]

I would try this route...

Neutral: 25
-1 bet 20
-2 bet 15
-3 bet 10
-4 bet 5

+1 bet 30
+2 bet 35
+3 bet 40
+4 bet 45

That seems pretty small to me. Your average bet in neutral/negative counts is probably around $22 and your max bet is $45. That's only about a 1:2 spread which isn't going to give you an advantage. You need to ramp more aggressively in positive counts or Wong out of negative counts (or both) to get a decent advantage. A small ramp like that is just going to slowly bleed away your bankroll.

-Sonny-

 

[Bashful C. Stupid-Butt]

It seems small to me too. It's a 5 dollar table. If you have the memory or some other legal tool, you could say drop from 25 neutral to 15 for -1 or even 5 or 10. There is a slight advantage my example has that you either missed or discounted. The bet = the count until the count drops to -5 and beyond. All you have to do is keep a running count and remember what your neutral bet was.

The big flaw is that if the count skyrockets early and you don;t get the cards, you can go broke real fast. The only other thing you can do is keep you bets low and try to ride out the losing hands.

I am no professional, just a winner.

 

[rukus]

I am no professional, just a winner.

just for now.

 

[Sonny]

All you have to do is keep a running count and remember what your neutral bet was.

So you’re using HiLo but using the running count to make your betting decisions? That might explain why those counts that “skyrocket” aren’t making you any money. The running count may be positive but the true count could still be negative/neutral. You are raising your bets when the house still has the advantage so obviously you are going to lose a lot more than someone using a traditional spread. I mean, why would you spread $5-$25 when the house still has the edge? Your max bet would probably have to be $200 or more just to be playing with an advantage. A $45 max bet isn’t going to make up for all the losing $20 and $25 bets that you’ve made.

The only other thing you can do is keep you bets low and try to ride out the losing hands.

Why not just bet the minimum, or better yet don’t play at all? It doesn’t make sense to be raising your bets when you are expecting to lose money. Whenever the house has the edge, bet as little as possible. If you want to use a small spread then you should be avoiding all negatve counts.

-Sonny-

 

[Spinner9]

Originally Posted by Bashful C. Stupid-Butt
I would try this route...

Neutral: 25
-1 bet 20
-2 bet 15
-3 bet 10
-4 bet 5

+1 bet 30
+2 bet 35
+3 bet 40
+4 bet 45

I am fairly new to counting and I can tell you that this spread is bad news. As Sonny said, why so much emphasis during negative counts instead of just the betting the minimum if <+1?

If your playing a double deck then your first spread looks ok. But I think your looking at it as if you were using a $10 base bet.......thats incorrect.... its simply a 6:1 spread using a $5 base like 21forme said. If you want to use a spread based on a $10 initial bet but bet $5 in the neg counts then your right that would be much better than betting $10 in neg counts.
If you are playing at shoe tables you shouldn't even be worried about neg count bets bc you shouldn't be at the table when the count is neg

 

[callipygian]

If it's a 2D game, you're OK as it's a 6:1 spread. On a 6 or 8D game, you'll still lose money.

If you Wong out at TC -1 or TC -2, a 2:1 spread is good enough to beat a shoe game. The problem with the OP isn't that the high bets aren't high enough, it's that the low bets aren't low enough.

Just out of curiosity, if you Wong out, does your spread count as infinity?

 

[moo321]

If you Wong out at TC -1 or TC -2, a 2:1 spread is good enough to beat a shoe game. The problem with the OP isn't that the high bets aren't high enough, it's that the low bets aren't low enough.

Just out of curiosity, if you Wong out, does your spread count as infinity?

With wonging out, 2 to 1 is still a very weak spread. Your hourly rate might be okay, but your risk of ruin will be much higher than you think. I'd recommend 1-8, even if wonging out, because it drastically reduces the variance.