first time post - questions about card counting

[babyspice]

Hello everybody.

I have been a visitor to the blackjack forums for several years now, but recently became a member and so i thought I would post several questions related to card counting. A couple particular members here I have followed before on other sites and their stories have been inspiring, as well as insightful to improving my game. With recent deteriorating BJ conditions in the northwest i've found that I need every edge possible to win.

1. One of the best advice i have learned is to keep short sessions and to always leave after exposing your spread. Sometimes though I don't have many nearby casinos as other options so I have to stake out at a table for awhile. If I am already a known card counter at a given establishment, however I have managed to stay within tolerance levels thus far - is it a bad idea to camp out at a BJ table until i get a good count? Or should I leave after say... 2 shoes max - even if i do not get an opportunity for a high count? I feel that the later is a better option for longevity. Sometimes I feel that just sitting at a table as a known counter (without even raising my bet) will disrupt comfort levels for casino. Do people do this?? or do they leave the table EVEN if the do not see a high count?

2. I frequently play 8-deck blackjack because they have low min games, good rules, and are less watched then 2-deck & some 6-deck games. Is 8-deck game with 80% penetration still a good game? I mean a true count of +4 in 8-deck is JUST as good as a true count of +4 in double deck, correct? Like its the same % chance of pulling a face card (depends only on true count - NOT remaining decks) so I don't see why 8-deck is less advantages as double deck, as long as you can sit through long negative counts with min bet.

3. Lastly. Are people really splitting 88 against dealer 10? even at high counts?? To me that is an obvious surrender, but apparently 88 split against dealer 10 is better than surrender. Anyone have any insight into why that is?

Thanks again for all the posts everyone I've really learned a lot from the forums over the years. Hope to hear your guys thought on the questions, but no big deal if they get overlooked because i am a noobie after all.

Thanks!!
-Babyspice

 

[BoSox]

babyspice, welcome to the board.

With recent deteriorating BJ conditions in the northwest i've found that I need every edge possible to win.

#1

If I am already a known card counter at a given establishment,

Sometimes I feel that just sitting at a table as a known counter (without even raising my bet) will disrupt comfort levels for casino. Do people do this?? or do they leave the table EVEN if the do not see a high count?

#2

so I don't see why 8-deck is less advantages as double deck, as long as you can sit through long negative counts with min bet.

In #1 you mention twice the term "known counter", the first time as only a possibility of being a known counter, the latter as a matter of fact. I am assuming you are talking about two different casinos, and IF you're correct that they know what you are doing, don't worry about longevity in those two casinos. You will be kept on a very short leash anyway, depending upon your skill level, the better the skill that you have the quicker you will be told to leave. If you are a bad counter they will let you play.

You have a contradiction also in #1 and #2 where you play through complete 8 deck shoes "while being watched" betting minimum looking for a good hi count what about all the negative EV hands that you are playing against? Every negative EV hand that you play against requires a much larger spread to hopefully overcome all that negativity you are playing against. The reason for the contradiction is you are forcing yourself to use a necessary larger spread that will most likely get you barred right away, especially someone already under scrutiny.

 

[BoSox]

3. Lastly. Are people really splitting 88 against dealer 10? even at high counts?? To me that is an obvious surrender, but apparently 88 split against dealer 10 is better than surrender. Anyone have any insight into why that is?

In higher counts surrender is the much better option.

 

[DSchles]

Hello everybody.

I have been a visitor to the blackjack forums for several years now, but recently became a member and so i thought I would post several questions related to card counting. A couple particular members here I have followed before on other sites and their stories have been inspiring, as well as insightful to improving my game. With recent deteriorating BJ conditions in the northwest i've found that I need every edge possible to win.

1. One of the best advice i have learned is to keep short sessions and to always leave after exposing your spread. Sometimes though I don't have many nearby casinos as other options so I have to stake out at a table for awhile. If I am already a known card counter at a given establishment, however I have managed to stay within tolerance levels thus far - is it a bad idea to camp out at a BJ table until i get a good count? Or should I leave after say... 2 shoes max - even if i do not get an opportunity for a high count? I feel that the later is a better option for longevity. Sometimes I feel that just sitting at a table as a known counter (without even raising my bet) will disrupt comfort levels for casino. Do people do this?? or do they leave the table EVEN if the do not see a high count?

2. I frequently play 8-deck blackjack because they have low min games, good rules, and are less watched then 2-deck & some 6-deck games. Is 8-deck game with 80% penetration still a good game? I mean a true count of +4 in 8-deck is JUST as good as a true count of +4 in double deck, correct? Like its the same % chance of pulling a face card (depends only on true count - NOT remaining decks) so I don't see why 8-deck is less advantages as double deck, as long as you can sit through long negative counts with min bet.

3. Lastly. Are people really splitting 88 against dealer 10? even at high counts?? To me that is an obvious surrender, but apparently 88 split against dealer 10 is better than surrender. Anyone have any insight into why that is?

Thanks again for all the posts everyone I've really learned a lot from the forums over the years. Hope to hear your guys thought on the questions, but no big deal if they get overlooked because i am a noobie after all.

Thanks!!
-Babyspice

A +4 TC (or any TC) in DD -- given same rules and percentage of penetration -- will always be a greater advantage (by about 0.25%) than for eight deck, mainly because the starting player edge for DD is that much higher than for eight deck.

Depending on rules (DAS or NDAS), you should always surrender 8,8, vs. T, at TCs of +2 or +1 respectively. If surrender isn't permitted, then splitting is a reverse index, meaning you split if the TC is less than the proper index, rather than higher. So, at very high TCs, splitting is never correct; you would either be surrendering, if you can, otherwise, you would be standing.

Don

 

[KewlJ]

1. One of the best advice i have learned is to keep short sessions and to always leave after exposing your spread. Sometimes though I don't have many nearby casinos as other options so I have to stake out at a table for awhile. If I am already a known card counter at a given establishment, however I have managed to stay within tolerance levels thus far - is it a bad idea to camp out at a BJ table until i get a good count? Or should I leave after say... 2 shoes max - even if i do not get an opportunity for a high count?

2. I mean a true count of +4 in 8-deck is JUST as good as a true count of +4 in double deck, correct?

Thanks!!
-Babyspice

Welcome babyspice.

On point number 2. True count of +4 IS just as good in an 8 deck game as the 6 deck game. The problem is the frequencies at which they occur. I am going to use Don's BJA3 as my reference, although you could also use software. With a 6 deck hit 17, DAS, 75% penetration game (pretty standard) a TC +4 will occur 2.45% of the time. With the same 8 deck game only 1.88%. That is a big difference. And it will be the same for all positive true counts. They will occur far less frequently in the 8 deck game. That means you will have to sit through and play many more negative and neutral counts to get to those "good" counts. This will knock your results way down for an 8 deck game compared to a 6 deck game. And even much more so when comparing to DD.

It actually took me a long time to realize or learn this. Longer than it should have. I really didn't get this until I moved to Vegas an started playing 6 deck games. What a difference from the 8 deck games I was playing on the east coast! I mean you look at the initial house advantage (or player disadvantage) and it is very minute difference. But those TC frequencies make the win rate significantly less. To offset this you have to do something differently when playing 8 deck...either spread bigger, ramp up faster or escape at least some of those less desirable counts with some type of wonging in or out.

So point number 1. You might think it doesn't matter how long you play prior to showing your spread and that it only matters once you show spread. So if you have to sit through 6 or 8 shoes before you get to a really good count and show your spread it doesn't matter as long as you exit after showing spread. I have come to disagree with that. If you sit through more than a couple shoes, flat betting or minimum betting, it only makes it more obvious when you do start betting significantly more. Should be pretty easy for someone to look at the tape.

For this reason, I include a time limit among my exit triggers. For me it is 30-45 minutes. usually 3 shoes max. Even if the count hasn't gone positive enough to show much of spread, I will move on, in the name of showing minimum information in one sitting. Problem is that most players don't have so many games in close proximity. No one is going to want to drive 2 hours, play 45 minutes, not getting any significant positive count (or higher bets) and leave. I guess you gotta figure out what works for you and your situation.

 

[Meistro]

"I mean a true count of +4 in 8-deck is JUST as good as a true count of +4 in double deck, correct? "

It depends. You stated that the 8 deck game has "good rules", so presumably that means better rules than the double deck game. The best way to determine your exact edge at a particular true count under a given rule set is to use a simulator like CVCX. Under a more liberal rule set, ceteris parabis, you are going to have a higher edge at a given true count. But the number of decks is part of the rules, and fewer decks are better, again ceteris parabis (all other things being equal).


The main reason why double deck is better than 8 deck, is because of volatility. The law of large numbers says that over a larger sample, you are more likely to arrive at the expected result. So fewer decks will mean a wider range of true counts, even though the over all average will be the same, because you are moving your bet with the count you will be in a better situation.

An easy way to evaluate different games is the concept of SCORE, which again is a number you can get through the use of CVCX. With SCORE higher is better.

It also worthwhile to note that % wise penetration is not the same. 80% penetration on a double deck game is amazing. 80% penetration in an 8 deck game is DECENT. 80% penetration in a 6 deck game is better than 80% penetration in a 8 deck game. Again, you should use CVCX and the SCORE integer as a means of evaluating various counting opportunities, because ceteris is almost never parabis.

 

[Meistro]

As for whether to camp or to hit and run, that is a judgement call. Camping might expose you, but it will also allow you to get in volume and the more rounds you play the more money you make. If you are red chipping, then a lot of the time you can fly under the radar and camp.

 

[babyspice]

babyspice, welcome to the board.

In #1 you mention twice the term "known counter", the first time as only a possibility of being a known counter, the latter as a matter of fact. I am assuming you are talking about two different casinos, and IF you're correct that they know what you are doing, don't worry about longevity in those two casinos. You will be kept on a very short leash anyway, depending upon your skill level, the better the skill that you have the quicker you will be told to leave. If you are a bad counter they will let you play.

You have a contradiction also in #1 and #2 where you play through complete 8 deck shoes "while being watched" betting minimum looking for a good hi count what about all the negative EV hands that you are playing against? Every negative EV hand that you play against requires a much larger spread to hopefully overcome all that negativity you are playing against. The reason for the contradiction is you are forcing yourself to use a necessary larger spread that will most likely get you barred right away, especially someone already under scrutiny.

Thanks for the reply BoSox. sorry that may have been misleading the way that I phrased it. To be clear, I was referring to one casino that most likely knows im counting. I played there regularly about 1.5 years ago, so i thought it would be okay to return after the break, especially if i stayed away from their juicy DD game. Unfortunately after my 2nd shoe the PB told me specifically that I need to color up after i'm finished playing that table (will avoid 3rd base next time to avoid PB encounters).. everyone at the table thought it was weird. also i didn't recognize her which leads me to believe they got me on the facial recognition (I don't play rated there).

Yes i see the contradiction. Not an ideal situation, but luckily the table is 3$ min so I survive the neg EV and spread large. In my opinion that will still draw less attention than a 1-10 spread on the hawked DD. Its a large casino and there are 4 pits. So i'll keep it in my rotation, try some different pits/times, and play short sessions for as long as i can last

 

[babyspice]

A +4 TC (or any TC) in DD -- given same rules and percentage of penetration -- will always be a greater advantage (by about 0.25%) than for eight deck, mainly because the starting player edge for DD is that much higher than for eight deck.

Depending on rules (DAS or NDAS), you should always surrender 8,8, vs. T, at TCs of +2 or +1 respectively. If surrender isn't permitted, then splitting is a reverse index, meaning you split if the TC is less than the proper index, rather than higher. So, at very high TCs, splitting is never correct; you would either be surrendering, if you can, otherwise, you would be standing.

Don

Something I never understood was the starting edge being better for DD than shoe games, since ultimately its the same deck composition as shoe games, yet i have accepted that fact. But yes taking that into consideration DD has .25% advantage over 8 deck (assuming same rules) then its better from the start. I guess that would be reason #1

Thanks for listing the index plays on this hand. For some reasons my charts just say always split regardless.. so ill start incorporating this one into my play.

 

[babyspice]

Welcome babyspice.

On point number 2. True count of +4 IS just as good in an 8 deck game as the 6 deck game. The problem is the frequencies at which they occur. I am going to use Don's BJA3 as my reference, although you could also use software. With a 6 deck hit 17, DAS, 75% penetration game (pretty standard) a TC +4 will occur 2.45% of the time. With the same 8 deck game only 1.88%. That is a big difference. And it will be the same for all positive true counts. They will occur far less frequently in the 8 deck game. That means you will have to sit through and play many more negative and neutral counts to get to those "good" counts. This will knock your results way down for an 8 deck game compared to a 6 deck game. And even much more so when comparing to DD.

It actually took me a long time to realize or learn this. Longer than it should have. I really didn't get this until I moved to Vegas an started playing 6 deck games. What a difference from the 8 deck games I was playing on the east coast! I mean you look at the initial house advantage (or player disadvantage) and it is very minute difference. But those TC frequencies make the win rate significantly less. To offset this you have to do something differently when playing 8 deck...either spread bigger, ramp up faster or escape at least some of those less desirable counts with some type of wonging in or out.

So point number 1. You might think it doesn't matter how long you play prior to showing your spread and that it only matters once you show spread. So if you have to sit through 6 or 8 shoes before you get to a really good count and show your spread it doesn't matter as long as you exit after showing spread. I have come to disagree with that. If you sit through more than a couple shoes, flat betting or minimum betting, it only makes it more obvious when you do start betting significantly more. Should be pretty easy for someone to look at the tape.

For this reason, I include a time limit among my exit triggers. For me it is 30-45 minutes. usually 3 shoes max. Even if the count hasn't gone positive enough to show much of spread, I will move on, in the name of showing minimum information in one sitting. Problem is that most players don't have so many games in close proximity. No one is going to want to drive 2 hours, play 45 minutes, not getting any significant positive count (or higher bets) and leave. I guess you gotta figure out what works for you and your situation.

Hi KewlJ

Thanks for posting specific numbers on TC +4 frequency between 6 & 8 deck shoes. Clearly the lack of true count frequency in 8-deck is another reason why the game is less profitable, in addition to Dschles reason. I've noticed that counting through 8-decks shoes feels like an eternity and that probably has to do with me never seeing those high counts as often and growing impatient.

That being said i'd like to shed some positive light on 8-deck games. All the games I play are 3$ and 5$ min tables so I can survive the neg EV that way, and have been able to spread 30x as that still falls well within tolerance levels of casino. It seems like the counts tend to raise/lower more steady since the game is less volatile than DD, which allows me more time to ramp my bets and achieve bigger spreads (here im assuming bigger spread is more valuable then ramping speeds). And then lastly, 8-Deck shoes tend to give high counts that will last more hands. So it allows me to play for example: 10-15 hands of max bet, which seems less suspicious than play 2 hands max bet in DD, then retreating back to min bet. All-in-all though it makes sense that 6-deck and DD is significantly better. I'll be switching to these game immediately. however I just feel 8-deck can be beat with some adjustments in strategy and its not as bad as its made out to be.

For the other point, Yes I used to camp out at tables and min bet until I had Hi Count, regardless of how long that took. Thats probably why I think this particular casino has caught onto me by now. So I think a change in my strategy by limiting my time at a table would help me so im not min betting for extended periods, its not normal gambler behavior. What I need to decide is if its best to move on to another pit within the same establishment (changing PB personnel, but eye in the sky would still be able to track me) or going to a different shop entirely. I'm leaning towards to latter, but I suppose I would have to be a game time decision based on how comfortable the staff is with your play on that given night.. and those "game-time" decisions seem to be what separates the experienced counters from the mediocre ones, essentially having the skill to gauge a casinos comfort levels.

 

[babyspice]

"I mean a true count of +4 in 8-deck is JUST as good as a true count of +4 in double deck, correct? "

It depends. You stated that the 8 deck game has "good rules", so presumably that means better rules than the double deck game. The best way to determine your exact edge at a particular true count under a given rule set is to use a simulator like CVCX. Under a more liberal rule set, ceteris parabis, you are going to have a higher edge at a given true count. But the number of decks is part of the rules, and fewer decks are better, again ceteris parabis (all other things being equal).


The main reason why double deck is better than 8 deck, is because of volatility. The law of large numbers says that over a larger sample, you are more likely to arrive at the expected result. So fewer decks will mean a wider range of true counts, even though the over all average will be the same, because you are moving your bet with the count you will be in a better situation.

An easy way to evaluate different games is the concept of SCORE, which again is a number you can get through the use of CVCX. With SCORE higher is better.

It also worthwhile to note that % wise penetration is not the same. 80% penetration on a double deck game is amazing. 80% penetration in an 8 deck game is DECENT. 80% penetration in a 6 deck game is better than 80% penetration in a 8 deck game. Again, you should use CVCX and the SCORE integer as a means of evaluating various counting opportunities, because ceteris is almost never parabis.

So i understand why DD is more advantageous to a counter than a shoe game (assuming all other things being equal), due to more volatility allowing more frequent positive counts.. but it doesn't explain why DD is a better game in general, for example if just playing Basic Strategy DD vs. 8-deck shoe, ceteris parabis, DD is 0.25% better. Seems strange to me that it would be better considering the DD has the same deck composition as 8-deck. I do accept that it is though.

Thanks for reference to CVCX i may have to look into the software as there are a lot of variations/combinations of rules where i live. will check our the SCORE functionality if i do end up purchasing the sim.

 

[babyspice]

As for whether to camp or to hit and run, that is a judgement call. Camping might expose you, but it will also allow you to get in volume and the more rounds you play the more money you make. If you are red chipping, then a lot of the time you can fly under the radar and camp.

Just out of curiosity... Do you think that if i've been camping out for previous years and have now become on the radar at a casino, that its better to switch to Hit and Run strategy? as long as I stay within tolerance levels I feel switching to this strategy becomes less of a threat to casinos since im giving them less to worry about by leaving more quickly.. or am i doomed regardless?

 

[DSchles]

So i understand why DD is more advantageous to a counter than a shoe game (assuming all other things being equal), due to more volatility allowing more frequent positive counts.. but it doesn't explain why DD is a better game in general, for example if just playing Basic Strategy DD vs. 8-deck shoe, ceteris parabis, DD is 0.25% better. Seems strange to me that it would be better considering the DD has the same deck composition as 8-deck. I do accept that it is though.

This is a fundamental tenet of all blackjack games: the fewer the number of starting decks, the higher the player edge, all rules being the same. It isn't the original proportions of deck composition that you quote that matters; rather, it is the effects of removing individual ranks of cards that is important.

Suppose I remove a single 5 from one deck. Then I have removed 25% of ALL the fives in the pack, and that is significant. But, if I remove that same 5 from eight decks, in which there are 32 fives, the EOR is insignificant.

For this same reason, for many doubles, the very fact that your original hand (say 6,5) contains two cards that you wouldn't want to receive for your double down card, and that now are unavailable because you already hold them, is important. Again, for eight decks, it is much less so.

Finally, all along the same lines, the probability of receiving a blackjack in single deck is 2 x 4/52 x 16/51 = 4.83% = once every 20.7 hands. For eight decks, it is 2 x 32/416 x 128/415 = 4.75% = once every 21.1 hands. So, this matters, as well.

Don