Counting for Cover

[RavenSlay3r]

I'm sure dealers, not to mention the "eyes in the sky", are honed to look for bet changes based on a hi-lo count.

Does using a less common more complex count like Uston APC (or any other that isn't hi-o or K-O) help to mask that your actually counting?

Would switching the count you use every shuffle help to cover you more?

 

[KenSmith]

Yes, but not much difference

Yes, there might be some benefit to using a more complex count for this reason.

The few casino personnel who are familiar with counting are probably going to use Hi-Lo to evaluate your play. However, if they're looking closely enough at your play to see how your bets correlate with a Hi-Lo count, it's not likely to matter much that you're using a different count. Most of the time, the bet sizing will be quite similar.

The play of the hands might be different enough to be helpful for cover, but again it's probably going to be a minor benefit. Even though it's a small effect, it does add another reason that a more complex count might be a good choice if you play a lot.

 

[Mackhack]

Hi,

I use K-O and I play usually 6-deck games. K-O mentions a spread 1-10. Just very few times the dealer announces to the pit boss "testplay"! He comes over looks at me couple hands and leaves the table again.

I think it is more important to act like a non-card counter. It is hard (for me) but I try to improve my skills to play more like an non-card counter.

Good luck to you!