Wong out point for DD

[weavin42]

A while ago, AM posted some charts on how far to back count into a 6 deck shoe and at what point should you go find a new table to back count. My question is kinda the reverse. Lets assume a 1-7 spread play all DD with good to deep pen, H17, DA2, DAS, no mid-shoe (once you are out, you are out for the rest shoe). At what point in the deck and at what count should I take a restroom break? Lets also assume that there are enough tables to hop around.

I don't want to wong out at all negative counts because of heat and because of the sometimes huge count fluctuations in DD.

Lets assume one more thing, I use the zen count.

Thanks for any input!

 

[EasyRhino]

Based on no math whatsoever, and assuming good (75%) pen, my vote would be between half and 1 decks dealt. Under half a deck would be too short, and Over 1 deck would be too late to really matter.

This assumes you can't reenter the game until the shuffle.

 

[weavin42]

Yes, I agree. When I do wong out it is usually at the one deck mark. I was just looking for some numbers and what not. I would hate to wong out at a nominal negative count and miss an edge at the end. Some sim data would be nice.

 

[EasyRhino]

Blackjack Attack didn't discuss this, did it? I know it did for shoes, but I can't find my copy.

 

[jimbiggs]

ZG uses zen and a while back he posted his wong out preferences. I don't remember what they were but maybe he'll repost them for you.

Personally, I wongout after one deck if the true count is -2 or less.

 

[sagefr0g]

Blackjack Attack didn't discuss this, did it? I know it did for shoes, but I can't find my copy.

i quickly scanned my copy and in chapt 13 wonging was mainly covered for shoes not double deck. Schlesinger gets rather complicated about the whole issue of when to wong in or out. taking in such issues as delays in play time as a result of how long it's going to take to find another table, ect.
that seems taking the issue a bit far for most of us i should think.
really to me it seems the question of penetration should be the salient point along with the question one might ask ones self as to whether or not the pack reamining to be dealt has a reasonable chance of going positive or if it is positive how many rounds do you think you can get out of it.
but back to the penetration issue. what i mean is most of us would hesitate to play a game that offers poor penetration and legitimately so. but say you are halfway through a pack that started out with fair penetration and the true count is zero. isn't that the same thing as playing a game with really poor penetration. point being one may use such considerations when deciding if they should bail out or not. i think it may be best to make the decision on the fly rather than to look for some universal wong out point such as one deck dealt or what ever.

 

[EasyRhino]

Well, if you're playing a 6D shoe, 4 decks have been spent, 1 deck is cutoff and the TC is exactly zero, then suddenly you're playing a doubledeck game with 50% penetration.

I remember Schesinger argued for wonging out of negative counts in shoe games fairly early (like, 2 decks in a 6d shoe?).

Intuitively I'm thinking the decision is more pen dependent on doubledeck. If it's 50% pen, well, first have my condolences. But then reasonably, it wouldn't make any sense to wong out any later than a half-deck into it. While with 75% pen, you could possibly shift the decision point to halfway through the working part of the decks (about .66 of a deck).

Personally, I just play it by ear.

 

[weavin42]

Ok, I guess the general consensus is to play it by ear. The pen is consistently good with only a few dealers that I avoid. Depending on the time/day finding another table isn't that big of a deal. I was just curious if it quantifiable (like everything else in blackjack). With all considered, play all for this game still produces good results.

 

[sagefr0g]

Ok, I guess the general consensus is to play it by ear. The pen is consistently good with only a few dealers that I avoid. Depending on the time/day finding another table isn't that big of a deal. I was just curious if it quantifiable (like everything else in blackjack). With all considered, play all for this game still produces good results.

i'm pretty sure it is quantifiable. Schlesinger more or less did it for multiple deck but l guess the thing about DD is you blink and it's over lol. i haven't used the feature on cvcx much to analyse this sort of thing but it does give stats according to deck depth and hands dealt.