Without Counting, best point in a Shoe?

[Neo]

I play in a H17, DAS, DOA, 6-deck game with minimum betting and obeying BS (even when it's painful, like DD a soft-18 vs a 6 and 12 vs a 2 )

Anyway, I know that counters call a fresh shuffle 'neutral' when the count is at ZERO. And as the shoe progresses the count can either start to favor the house or the player.

My question is, without counting, is a fresh shoe always the best situation for a BS player. When it gets late in the shoe, since you don't KNOW if you are favored or not, could you end up loosing more often?

I'm toying with the idea of only playing a fresh shoe, half way through then waiting for a reshuffle or moving to new table.

Any thoughts?

P.S. A blackjack session simulator could possibly mathmetically determine this, there are too many out there to choose from, what do you guys use/recommend?

 

[Sonny]

My question is, without counting, is a fresh shoe always the best situation for a BS player.

No. If you are not counting then there is no “best” situation, they are all the same. As far as you are concerned every hand will cost you a little more money. If you don’t know the odds then there is no reason to think that one hand (or section of the shoe) is any better than another.

When it gets late in the shoe, since you don't KNOW if you are favored or not, could you end up loosing more often?

You might loose more on one particular shoe, or you might win more. Overall the good and bad shoes will cancel out and the house edge will not change. There is no way to avoid a bad shoe unless you know how to recognize one.

I'm toying with the idea of only playing a fresh shoe, half way through then waiting for a reshuffle or moving to new table.

This strategy will not change the house edge at all. You will be avoiding just as many good hands as bad ones. However, since you are playing significantly less hands per hour then you will lose less money for each session. The less you play, the less you lose.

-Sonny-

 

[dacium]

Keep in mind though, that the average shoe is going to float around 0 all the way down. So if you come in just before the cut, and in one or two hands it goes positive to 4 or 5 you will in the long run actually have a true count of 4 or 5 (assuming about 1 deck left in the shoe).

Most counters will say this is stupid because you could be betting when the actual count is -20, but of course you could equally be betting at +20. all considered the average shoe at any time is always zero so any number of cards counted can give you an edge! I guess that the price you pay is massively increased variance.

 

[zengrifter]

The deeper the pene/deal point the lower the house edge. If the round was dealt from the 1/2D remaining level the housEdge would be considerably lower than at the top of the shoe. zg

 

[ScottH]

The deeper the pene/deal point the lower the house edge. If the round was dealt from the 1/2D remaining level the housEdge would be considerably lower than at the top of the shoe. zg

I read about this in Blackjack Attack. He said something about the house edge gravitating toward 0 at the half-way point of a single deck game. I don't remember the term he used for it though.

 

[tedloc]

We have discussed this often....

I play in a H17, DAS, DOA, 6-deck game with minimum betting and obeying BS (even when it's painful, like DD a soft-18 vs a 6 and 12 vs a 2 )

Anyway, I know that counters call a fresh shuffle 'neutral' when the count is at ZERO. And as the shoe progresses the count can either start to favor the house or the player.

My question is, without counting, is a fresh shoe always the best situation for a BS player. When it gets late in the shoe, since you don't KNOW if you are favored or not, could you end up loosing more often?

I'm toying with the idea of only playing a fresh shoe, half way through then waiting for a reshuffle or moving to new table.

Any thoughts?

P.S. A blackjack session simulator could possibly mathmetically determine this, there are too many out there to choose from, what do you guys use/recommend?

According to Fred Renzy http://renzey.casinocitytimes.com/Archives/ if they were to post the odds on you winning the next hand, when you play with a fresh deck, the odds are 101/100 against you . (This amounts to the .05% house edge in the game you play). I have long felt that if this is true, that a BS player, who has no idea of the count, should play on a CSM as you will always have a fresh deck. I know that some say, this will increase your loses as they play more hands but as I've said before, you can find ways to sit out some hands.

 

[zengrifter]

I read about this in Blackjack Attack. He said something about the house edge gravitating toward 0 at the half-way point of a single deck game. I don't remember the term he used for it though.

Its called the FLOATING ADVANTAGE and it was first pointed out by Revere. Example: you have a h17 no-DAS 6D game - off the top the housEdge is .70% (?whatever?) - at the 1D remains level the housEdge is now only .17% and at the 1/2D level its 0%, etc. zg

 

[sagefr0g]

Its called the FLOATING ADVANTAGE and it was first pointed out by Revere. Example: you have a h17 no-DAS 6D game - off the top the housEdge is .70% (?whatever?) - at the 1D remains level the housEdge is now only .17% and at the 1/2D level its 0%, etc. zg

when you say "at the 1D remains level" i'm a bit lost terminology wise. but i think an equivalent statement would be if at one deck there is still an equal number of high cards to low cards. yeah that would make sense that the advantage would improve as the number of decks left to be dealt was diminished as long as the true count (from the hi/lo perspective) stayed at zero. pretty neat.
i suppose this helps explain how end play that Thorp talked about can be so powerful.
best regards,
mr fr0g

 

[QFIT]

Floating advantage only affects counters as it refers to edge per TC, not overall edge. When using BS, all card depths have exactly the same edge, as per the TC Theory. However, all rounds do not, as per the cut-card effect. The sounds contradictory, but is true because if large cards come out early in the shoe, the average hand will have fewer cards and you will play more rounds with a negative count.

In other words, counting depth by rounds, all rounds have the same edge except for very large numbered rounds. See http://www.qfit.com/cutc0.jpg for a chart of edge by round number for a fixed rounds game versus a cut-card game.

 

[sagefr0g]

Floating advantage only affects counters as it refers to edge per TC, not overall edge. When using BS, all card depths have exactly the same edge, as per the TC Theory. However, all rounds do not, as per the cut-card effect. The sounds contradictory, but is true because if large cards come out early in the shoe, the average hand will have fewer cards and you will play more rounds with a negative count.

In other words, counting depth by rounds, all rounds have the same edge except for very large numbered rounds. See http://www.qfit.com/cutc0.jpg for a chart of edge by round number for a fixed rounds game versus a cut-card game.

very interesting. who ever invented this game was a blooming evil genius :yikes:
but as i understand it the game sort of evolved.
best regards,
mr fr0g

 

[Neo]

Soo.....what does this all mean?

Soo.....what does this all mean? Right now I'm a strict BS player. Learning to count is proving VERY difficult. At home I do fine, but in the Casino i miss cards, take to long, and eventually loose track and give up.

Currently I'm in the habit of waiting for a new shoe when I first get to the table.

Sounds like the later point of a shoe (since I DON"T have a count) actually favors the casino a tad bit less. Is this accurate?

 

[zengrifter]

Floating advantage only affects counters as it refers to edge per TC, not overall edge. When using BS, all card depths have exactly the same edge, as per the TC Theory.

You are sure about that?? As a BS player down to th 1/2D level the housEdge is still the 6D edge?? zg

 

[TENNBEAR]

Your Answer Neo

Soo.....what does this all mean? Right now I'm a strict BS player. Learning to count is proving VERY difficult. At home I do fine, but in the Casino i miss cards, take to long, and eventually loose track and give up.

Currently I'm in the habit of waiting for a new shoe when I first get to the table.

Sounds like the later point of a shoe (since I DON"T have a count) actually favors the casino a tad bit less. Is this accurate?

The answer is no, nothing short of counting wiil tell you when the deck is in your favor. As far as learning to count; practice makes perfect, much like basic strategy is to you now, counting will become automatic, and seem easy, it just takes practice.

 

[QFIT]

You are sure about that?? As a BS player down to th 1/2D level the housEdge is still the 6D edge?? zg

There is an article in BJInsider that is famously wrong on this point. It has been argued numerous times over the years as it is quite difficult to come to terms with. At the end of each discussion there is agreement that edge doesn't change as depth changes. It's still the same shoe.

Floating Advantage has to do with edge per TC. See a chart at http://www.qfit.com/FA200.gif . But, the chart ignores frequencies. FA doesn't relate to a BS player.

 

[dacium]

WTF?
Is that graph correct? 0% edge on +10 early in shoe?

Oh I just realised the impossible conditions are listed as zero, was wondering why +10 had no house edge early in the shoe cause it aint possible to get it.

 

[dacium]

So from that graph, you still get EV 0 or above if you play on a zero count once you are near the end of a shoe? Thats awesome.

 

[zengrifter]

There is an article in BJInsider that is famously wrong on this point. It has been argued numerous times over the years as it is quite difficult to come to terms with. At the end of each discussion there is agreement that edge doesn't change as depth changes. It's still the same shoe.

Floating Advantage has to do with edge per TC. See a chart at http://www.qfit.com/FA200.gif . But, the chart ignores frequencies. FA doesn't relate to a BS player.

Well, I want a second opinion I'm going to ask Victor Aquilar! zg

 

[QFIT]

Well, I want a second opinion I'm going to ask Victor Aquilar! zg

Clarke Cant posted a "proof" as a corollary to Michael Hall's True Count Theorem some years back on BJMath. I put proof in quotes because I didn't understand a word of it.

 

[Canceler]

Trying for common sense understanding...

This is another one of those posts I'm putting out to be shot down. Have a blast!

...there is agreement that edge doesn't change as depth changes. It's still the same shoe.

A 6-deck game has a greater house advantage than a 1-deck game because of, let's call it dilution, there being so many more of each card in play. Just because you're in the final deck of a 6D shoe doesn't mean the effect of the dilution is gone.

Suppose you have a container with five cups of water. Dump in a cup of lemonade and stir. Now scoop out a cup of the mixture. What are the chances you got your nice cup of lemonade back?

 

[sagefr0g]

Clarke Cant posted a "proof" as a corollary to Michael Hall's True Count Theorem some years back on BJMath. I put proof in quotes because I didn't understand a word of it.

is there a miss-print in that proof?
http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/counting/tcproof.htm (Archive copy)

i'm refering to the following statement:

"The running count must be zero at the end of the deck. Therefore, drawing cards in high counts tends to cause the running count to fall, and drawing cards in low counts tends to cause the running count to fall. But the expected true count is unchanged"

it doesn't seem logical that both drawing cards in high counts tends to cause the running count to fall, and drawing cards in low counts tends to cause the running count to fall. i would expect if the count is positive that drawing cards would tend to cause the running count to fall and that if the count is negative drawing cards would tend to make the running count rise.

best regards,
mr fr0g