Can I Add These 2 Deviations?

Zexika

Active Member
#41
KewlJ said:
And now a couple of my own thoughts on things said in this thread.

Number of card counters: I don't track my play by hours, I track by an estimate of rounds played. And I play roughly 80,000 rounds a year. Using the traditional 100 rounds per hours that would be 800 hours, but I don't come close to 100 rounds per hour....not on average. I play short sessions and exit aggressively on negative counts. Even sometimes tracking a second table and jumping immediately to a new game, I probably average 50 rounds an hour when all the moving around and traveling to the next casino is added in. So that would be 1600 hours a year. I wouldn't be surprised if it is even more. Both these numbers 800 and 1600 hours (or even more) are surely greater than most professional players play.

And in all that time, now finishing my 15th year, and 10th in Vegas, I probably see 3-5 card counters a year playing my level (green to mid black), or higher. I see a larger number playing red chip level at some of the lower limit tables that I am forced to play. But reasonable money....not many.

Next: I want to respond to the comment about splitting 10's being "valuable" to the blackchipper. On paper..yes. That includes simulations. It looks like significant value. But one of the most important things....maybe the single most important thing that my experience has taught me, is that most pit people aren't as smart as we think they are. Most are just working folks doing their job and they aren't as knowledgeable about card counters as maybe pit folks once were when they were players or former players themselves. There are really like 3-4 things pit people today are looking for.

1.) of course a spread. But a spread itself doesn't mean much. Many players vary bets. It is the retreating back to the small wager that is the give-away.

2.) A very small number of plays, played differently. 16 vs 10 (which happens to be the most common hand if I am not mistaken), Insuring a blackjack, and splitting 10's. These 3 plays are really the ones that pit people know that card counters play differently at different times. Sharp pit people may look at 12 vs 2 or 3 as well, but it is those initial 3 that signal card counter to most pit people.

You will note that the often talked about splitting 10's is among them. To me, any discussion of their value has to be measured against the big tell that it is. That momentary "value" has to be measured against longevity and the ability of many future hours. When you include that, it becomes not so "valuable".

And by the way, all 3 of these common things that almost all pit people know to look for can be taken care of by playing card counter's basic strategy and not varying how these hands are played. ;)

what's card counter's basic strategy??
 

BoSox

Well-Known Member
#42
KewlJ said:
. I track multiple tables about 50% of the time and am actually able to jump directly to a more advantageous count and situation, half of that time, maybe less than half (not exactly sure how to track that).
Players definitely need to opine on this one subject as it should be discussed because you have mentioned it often. I realize that you play short sessions for longevity purposes which is great for those players who have that luxury. Say for example you average 30-minute sessions. During that short time frame, you would rather keep a low profile and try not to even be noticed. The only thing missing in your game is that you do not have ropes attached to the ceiling and fly through the air Wonging in and out of shoes as Johnny Weissmuller would. Just from my own opinion on this concept is that it stands out way too much, just begging to be reviewed after the session, along with everything else you do, to be used for future reference.
 

KewlJ

Well-Known Member
#44
BoSox said:
During that short time frame, you would rather keep a low profile and try not to even be noticed. The only thing missing in your game is that you do not have ropes attached to the ceiling and fly through the air Wonging in and out of shoes as Johnny Weissmuller would. Just from my own opinion on this concept is that it stands out way too much, just begging to be reviewed after the session, along with everything else you do, to be used for future reference.
I though you had left this forum Bosox. ;) Welcome back.

So your description of my play is very inaccurate. So much so that it sounds like a description of one of my multi-personality detractors who intentionally distorts things I do and say. :rolleyes: What you are describing would draw mega attention and I go out of my way to do the opposite.

But I think I would rather not correct that distorted description in public. It works to my advantage to let that stand. But I will PM you a bit later when I have more time, just for your benefit.
 

21forme

Well-Known Member
#46
BoSox said:
The only thing missing in your game is that you do not have ropes attached to the ceiling and fly through the air Wonging in and out of shoes as Johnny Weissmuller would.
Bosox - you are being silly. I believe I introduced KJ (via email discussion) to the concept of counting 2 tables at once (either backcounting two, or playing one and watching an adjacent table) some time between 10-15 years ago. In any case, without getting into specifics, it can be done and can be quite natural moving from one table to another.

As an aside, the tables don't have to be adjacent to each other. KJ and I both played a casino in AC with a mirrored ceiling over the pit. This made it possible to count a table across the pit.
 

KewlJ

Well-Known Member
#47
21forme said:
Bosox - you are being silly. I believe I introduced KJ (via email discussion) to the concept of counting 2 tables at once (either backcounting two, or playing one and watching an adjacent table) some time between 10-15 years ago. In any case, without getting into specifics, it can be done and can be quite natural moving from one table to another.

As an aside, the tables don't have to be adjacent to each other. KJ and I both played a casino in AC with a mirrored ceiling over the pit. This made it possible to count a table across the pit.
21forme, a few years ago when I joined that other forum that you dislike so much, I mentioned that I track a second table when the opportunity presented itself. I got a lot of blowback and challenges. One guy wanted to film me doing so....like I would do that. :rolleyes: The same guy then ran out to a strip casino in the middle of the night and took blurry pictures with his cell phone of a blackjack table, meant to show that you can't see the cards at the next table. Even after I explained that you look at pips and paint, not numbers on cards, they still didn't get it.

That is when I reached out to other counters via this site and emails. You reminded me of a conversation we had many years prior via email. We also discovered that we had the same experience in AC at the location you mentioned. I believe it was Sands right....closed for over a decade now :(possible Claridge or Resorts though, I can't remember now).

Richard Munchkin, Don S and bigplayer all confirmed that they had counted a second table at times during their careers. I was also told of some other notable players that did. I mean I thought I was doing something fairly unique, but it turns out many successful players before me did so as well. ;)

But what I learned from that experience is that you can never convince the doubters, who have decided it can't be done. I am just a little surprised that BoSox seems to have joined that camp. And these doubters do use distorted descriptions like BoSox did. Jumping from table to table like Tarzan. I mean come on.
 
Last edited:

Raven

Well-Known Member
#51
xengrifter said:
Some advanced card counters have been doing this two tables at a time tactic since at least 1999 - 20 years.
I wish I can do. Am still working on my eyes. I just recently had a day I could play without my glasses. It's a work in progress.
 

BoSox

Well-Known Member
#52
KewlJ said:
But what I learned from that experience is that you can never convince the doubters, who have decided it can't be done. I am just a little surprised that BoSox seems to have joined that camp. And these doubters do use distorted descriptions like BoSox did.
I am not a doubter and did not say that. Although, I can see how you can take it that way with my over-dramatization reference to Tarzan. Suffice it to say I think using that play is in direct contradiction of keeping to a low profile player that you are always trying to project, sorry it does not fit the act.

KewlJ said:
Jumping from table to table like Tarzan. I mean come on.
You are the one who wrote the following:

". I track multiple tables about 50% of the time and am actually able to jump directly to a more advantageous count and situation, half of that time, maybe less than half (not exactly sure how to track that). "

Of course, there are no ropes used in this endeavor but that is not my idea of keeping a low profile either. What good is going to the trouble of using the counter's basic strategy, and playing short sessions if you are going to draw some attention to yourself? How can it not? Where I play seated players often will make a big display regarding people who jump in without asking. The trouble being you never know when this may happen and will get noticed. I also do Wonging in at times but very infrequent.
 
Last edited:

KewlJ

Well-Known Member
#53
BoSox said:
What good is going to the trouble of using the counter's basic strategy, and playing short sessions if you are going to draw some attention to yourself? How can it not? Where I play seated players often will make a big display regarding people who jump in without asking.
I really didn't want to get into correcting your misconception, but I guess I will. You are not thinking about it right BoSox. Yeah, we have all played with a nut job jumping in and out of games, jumping from table to table to table every 2 or 3 hands. Of course that kind of nonsense draws attention and is annoying. This seems to be what you are thinking, but that is NOT what I am talking about. When I track a second table I will switch tables exactly once if a better opportunity (count) presents itself. Just like I will show my spread exactly once at each casino. I am not jumping back and forth.

There also IS a difference between Las Vegas and other locations. Even with all the new casinos and jurisdictions throughout the country, that difference remains, many games in very close proximity. In other areas players drive a hour or two to get to a casino and there is much more of that "play all' Approach mentality. A player whether counting or not pulls up a chair (when he can get one) and doesn't give it up for an hour.

Vegas is VERY different. Again, with all these games, players come and go much more frequently. It is very common for players, mostly non counters, to sit down and play a few hands and move on. Sometimes they even tell the dealer "Oh I lost 3 in a row" as they exit. You also see people buy in for $100 at a $25 minimum table or even buy in for $20 or even $10 at a $5 table. That means they are not playing many hands. :oops: I have even incorporated some of that (small buy-ins) into my game. It is just a different mentality here and things that stand out in other places, don't stand out or draw attention here.

And it works both ways. There are things accepted other locations like spreading to 2-3 hands that are thought nothing of, yet you do that here and you might have a pit critter flipping through the discard rack. ;)

So, when I moved here, I tailored my game for this location. I figured out what draws attention and what doesn't, including stakes at different times. And not to pat myself on the back, but I think I have done a pretty good Job. I moved here in December of '09. 10 years now. And I play far more than most professional players, because I play lower stakes (green and black) than most. Stakes that are better tolerated. So I am doing something right. :cool:
 
Last edited:

BoSox

Well-Known Member
#54
KewlJ said:
I really didn't want to get into correcting your misconception, but I guess I will.
KewlJ said:
When I track a second table I will switch tables exactly once if a better opportunity (count) presents itself.
The above quote is NOT the same as how you originally presented it in the thread, far from it.
Repeated here again:

". I track multiple tables about 50% of the time and am actually able to jump directly to a more advantageous count and situation, half of that time, maybe less than half (not exactly sure how to track that). "

How in the world is that above quote of yours not interpretational to anyone? Either way, I think it is a big red flag to the EYE upstairs.
 

KewlJ

Well-Known Member
#55
BoSox, I think you nit picking. ;)

When I walk into a casino to start a new session, I will be able to move to a second table about 50% of the time. Maybe a little less.
 

KewlJ

Well-Known Member
#56
And for the EYE, a player switching tables occasionally is a lot less suspicious than a player retreating back to his small wager shuffle after shuffle.

At least where I play. If you feel it is different where you play then do what you feel is best. I don't know what to tell you. I don't have all the answers. I just evaluate my situation and what is and isn't tolerated where I play.
 

KewlJ

Well-Known Member
#57
You know what. You are absolutely right Bosox. Tracking a second table and switching to that second table, meaning you will see and play a significant higher advantageous and max bet situatuons, resulting in a significant higher win rate is a bad idea. No one should try this. ;)

Forget that many successful players have been employing this for a long time. Bad idea! :oops:
 

BoSox

Well-Known Member
#58
KewlJ said:
When I walk into a casino to start a new session, I will be able to move to a second table about 50% of the time. Maybe a little less.
One bit of advice Don S gives in his books is him saying for players not to make a trip or session memorable.
In my mind, those words go way beyond possibly having a large win for the day in one casino. I think Don also meant leave as little information as possible to detect. Comportment wise, what you are doing in my mind by Wonging out of one shoe and immediately placing bets at another table does not pass the test of low profile.

KewlJ said:
You know what. You are absolutely right Bosox. Tracking a second table and switching to that second table, meaning you will see and play a significant higher advantageous and max bet situatuons, resulting in a significant higher win rate is a bad idea. No one should try this. ;)
No wink from me on this one. Nothing wrong with a disagreement among members once in a while.
 
Last edited:

21forme

Well-Known Member
#59
Bosox - I agree with KJ. Even in AC, people are constantly jumping from table to table. I sometimes play a technique call tag-team wonging, which involves playing with a partner who is at another table within the same pit. If my shoe is going nowhere, and he signals me an advantage at his table, I jump to his table and play out the shoe. He leaves at the end of the shoe and starts at another table. I conitnue at the same table. This can be repeated a few times in the same pit, then we move on.
 

KewlJ

Well-Known Member
#60
BoSox said:
Nothing wrong with a disagreement among members once in a while.
No there isn't. Funny thing though, you have a new fan club somewhere, consisting of 1 person but 12 personalities who is cheering you "taking me down". You are his new hero. :D

BoSox said:
One bit of advice Don S gives in his books is him saying for players not to make a trip or session memorable.
I couldn't agree with this advice more. Mr. Schlesinger has had a huge influence on my career and the way I do things. I mean obviously I don't agree with everything, but most I do and it has served me well. I guess we are reading into that "memorable" comment different things. Some of the things I do to try to make myself less memorable are:

I never argue with a backoff when they occur. You aren't going to win that argument and it only serves to make you more memorable.

I no longer offer advice to other players at the table.

I minimize interactions with the pit, including buy-ins, cashouts.

I wear very plain clothing. No logo or sports teams.

My short session style is designed to minimize really big wins that draw attention. Sometimes they still occur.....oh damn....what are you going to do. :rolleyes: But short sessions will minimize.

BoSox said:
In my mind, those words go way beyond possibly having a large win for the day in one casino. I think Don also meant leave as little information as possible to detect. Comportment wise, what you are doing in my mind by Wonging out of one shoe and immediately placing bets at another table does not pass the test of low profile.
I guess this is where we have a real difference of opinion. I don't think moving once or even twice (I only do so once per visit) from table to table draws the attention you think it does. And as evidence I will repeat the following.

Yesterday I mentioned that when I brought up my tracking multiple tables on that other site and got such weird pushback that I contacted a number of long-term players. I am not going to name them again....I probably shouldn't have done so yesterday. Maybe they don't want it publicly known that they track a second table while playing one. One of the people I mentioned 21forme, confirmed it last night, so I think it ok, to repeat his name (handle).

But one of the others I mentioned, when I contacted him, asking if he had ever tracked a second table while playing one, his response was "I have been doing that for 40 years". I am reading you are the forum detective, so I'll leave that to you to figure out, unless he wants to chime in himself like 21forme did.

My point is action of tracking a second table and jumping to that better count are in direct conflict with how YOU are interpreting that "less memorable" advice.

I am not here to say you are wrong. There is no right and wrong. If you feel something draws attention....don't do it. But again, there is a number of pretty successful players that by their actions, seem to feel differently. You might just consider that.
 
Last edited:
Top