Unbalanced bets as camouflage

Doofus

Well-Known Member
#1
When playing multiple hands, does anybody have any thoughts as to efficacy of using unbalanced bets as camouflage for high positive counts? For example, in a high positive true count, going 2x units in the first circle and 5x units in the second circle? Other than guaranteeing the BJ will fall on the first circle, it's my impression that this is not the kind of thing a "typical" AP would do.
 

EasyRhino

Well-Known Member
#3
I've ended up with imbalanced bets once in a while, usually if I'm really trying for cover, sometimes if I'm drunk:

a) It's somewhat more difficult to ensure that you have the same aggregate bet out there. If you try to make it look like you're working a "system", it's even more complicated.
b) In the long run, it shouldn't matter, but short run I think it might increase your variance a bit, if you get unlucky or lucky with the bigger bets.
c) It's actually kind of fun when you feel like you're playing like a crackhead.

And I've seen ploppies playing independent hands. Most remarkable was a guy using a positive progression system on two spots. If the spot won, he'd add a green chip, if the spot lost, he'd revert to a single green. I happened to catch the streak when the second spot had been on a wicked winning streak, and had a very large stack of greens on the spot. Maybe $400. The first spot kept losing and getting replaced by a single spot, and the monster spot kept winning. It was quite a sight (he said he had been playing all weekend for that to happen).
 

halcyon1234

Well-Known Member
#5
shadroch said:
I find spreading to 5X or more in each of two hands increases the dealers chances of getting a BJ about a 100%.
That's because when you switched to two hands, you altered the flow of the cards in a nega-state quasi direction that imbalanced the causality matricies.
 

jack.jackson

Well-Known Member
#6
I first read about this technique in Henry Tambourine's " Take the money and run". He says casinos can easily recoginize mechanical betting patterns.

As for myself; Ya, I, experiment/practice this way. You can see my "Thread" jacksons level3 to give you an Ideal on unorthodox betting.
 

ihate17

Well-Known Member
#7
Correction

halcyon1234 said:
That's because when you switched to two hands, you altered the flow of the cards in a nega-state quasi direction that imbalanced the causality matricies.
You forgot to capitilize the holy, sacred, mythical, and mystical all mighty Flow of the Cards. Shame shame

ihate17
chief muckity muckity of the Sacred Flow
 
#8
spread the love

I find that increasing bet units much over 5x normal units attract attention. However opening multiple boxes doesn't... especially if you describe it away as "Oh, 2 boxes isn't working for me, let's see what happens if I open a few more"... what you're really trying to do of course is catch those high cards which are due to come, and get 20 and blackjacks. :)

My recent article on shufflers and how I increase bets might be useful:

http://beatthecasinos.blogspot.com/2008/02/card-shuffler-friend-or-enemy.html (Archive copy)

Stay lucky!
 

Ferretnparrot

Well-Known Member
#9
I do this all the time, i think anything that makes you look superstitious and not predictable makes you look less counterish, sometimes ill be skeptical as to which hand to put the additional money on, then complain after the hand is over that i shoudl have put it on the other one, i switch one hand to two randomly, one time i split 8s and one all three hands, at coincidentally a high count, somebody suggested that i should play three hand cause its worked i TOTALLY agreed with them and used that as an excuse to do so, of course i put ranom amounts on each and was debating on where to put an extra 50 bucks.
 
Top