Recent content by Fun_at_21

This question can be filed under the "silly folder" of course. Still, I was wondering at what disadvantage the player is to the house if he always played just ONE way on EVERY hand without any freedom of extraneous moves. For example, I've read that a player who "mimics the dealer" by doing...

Yeah, I guess Murphy's Law can be alive and well even in Blackjack...LOL Or, on the other side, it seems all too common to watch a bunch of low cards or high quantity hands come out, only to lose 20-19 etc to the dealer on all those remaining face cards and aces...LOL Oh well. As mentioned, I...

That's true. I didn't mean to imply that ensuing hands would always work out just because I took note of a particular hand type and slightly changed my bet. Surely the cards will do what they do. In that sense, the cards don't know or care what real counters do either. Since one can be in an...

Oops... I just realized in my example above this that I had the good/bad thing mixed up. What I meant to say is that you could WIN a hand with a 21 but the hand may have been "bad" for the deck because you and the dealer exhausted three face cards and an Ace in the process. Obviously a 5 card...

Hi Elkobar, Thanks for the reply although I was thinking more in terms of "following the count" hand by hand based on if the last hand was beneficial to the deck (low cards/high quantity hands) or non-beneficial (several high cards came out). In such a scenario, one could actually win a given...

That's an intriguing idea. I never considered that! So in other words, if I was fortunate enough to have witnessned, say, five "positive hands" in a row and I had lightly raised my bet up from the $5 minimum in proportion on each hand, I might now be betting, say, $10-13 on this sixth hand. Now...

Ah yes. Thanks! That makes sense now. I figured it must be something right under my nose that I just wasn't getting. So I'd actually have to keep a "running count" of good hands VERSUS positive hands for this to vaguely work. As one would if they were literally counting the cards specifically...

I'm sure that's true but I'm still not quite sure why it wouldn't be following what the deck is doing each step of the way (at least semi-accurately). I can see how it would be inprecise to truly COUNTING the cards yet it also seems that in another sense, it would be more "manageable" or...

...Why are bets not simply raised or lowered SLIGHTLY on EVERY hand based on what cards have come out on just the previous hand? As opposed to raising or lowering "units" only when a "count" changes? My first thought is that no single hand in itself changes the advantage of the deck...

Thanks for the link! I admit that's a surprising result. How much variance is "bypassed" though if one is not OPTIMALLY betting with an Ace/Five count? My thought was I could keep my spread between just 1-4 or 1-5 units. Of course, I suspect that the strategy is less effective naturally, but...

Thanks for the reply. I have looked into some of those other counting systems but, for me, they still seemed a bit more difficult for me to grasp. I think the Ace / Five appeals to me simply because I can somewhat track those by simple "awareness" rather than having to count and think per se...

...then it is my understanding that I can (theoretically) get within 0.10% of the house edge on a S17, DAS, 6 deck game. If I read correctly? At that close a dead even point, wouldn't a simple ace/five awareness ON TOP of the perfect hand-dependant BS plays actually give you a miniscule edge...

Thanks qfit and renzey. You're right that the heart of my original post was in basically exploring how card counting "elements" might be vaguely/infrequently used to just help reduce a quality BS player's disadvantage. Although I should probably highlight that my curiosities with this are not...

Thanks! I wasn't sure if they were, indeed, interesting or just illogical...:) Or perhaps both? :)

Actually, you're correct on both counts - it was hypothetical AND I don't desire to go through the hard work of being a true serious counter! I think you may have me all wrong. Or perhaps I just gave the wrong impression bringing up the surface possibilities of counting and how an early deck...