 |
FRONT PAGE - Back to THE ADVISOR PAGE Hi GameMaster,
Hope you can answer this...
Hello, Ricky.
Yours for winning, GameMaster,
Hi, Penny.
Yours for winning, Dear Gamemaster, Hello, Al.
Yours for winning, Dear Gamemaster:
Of course, the game in Winpoker is full-pay deuces but I don't believe that
fact would change the draw in a lower paying game. Am I missing
something or is your example in error?
I must admit that since I had found your site, and since I have
been playing vp and bj more on line, I spend alot of time visiting and
reading the message board and various sections and articles on gambling. Hello, Al.
The hand I described is correct because the Royal on the game is
progressive and, as I stated in the article, I had it set at 6400 coins
which elevates the long-term return to 100% for the "Midwest" version of
this game. The extra value of a non-wild Royal makes the 10, J, Q the
better play, according to Winpoker.
Yours for winning, Gamemaster,
Let me know if you can help. I am looking for this information as soon as
possible. Hello, Kevin.
I have never felt a need to cheat in order to beat the casinos, but for
those who do, I suppose it could be called an "art". It never fails to
amaze me to see the lengths to which people will go to hustle a buck out of
the casinos. Quite honestly, it's actually easier to learn to count cards
than it is to pull some of the stuff that these "grifters" do, but I guess
their mindset is different. The two books by Dustin Marks, "Cheating (and
Advantage Play) at Blackjack" and "Cheating at Blackjack Squared" will give
you enough information to help you decide if cheating's an art or a science.
Yours for winning, Hi Gamemaster. Some of the hands the dealer gets are so unbelivable, going 10 to 15 hands without busting.
I have spoken to a few people who have also lost a lot of money on this site, yet when I e-mailed them to ask if site was safe I was just told to go to their gamefairness page on ther web site. Hello, Norman. As for your situation at William Hill Casino, I have very little doubt that they are honest, but I have no absolute proof of that statement. Certainly they are not going to tell you otherwise, so being referred to their "fairness" page is about all you may expect from them on the topic.
You didn't mention the approximate number of hands which you've played there and that's really the key to understanding if your losses are "reasonable". For example, betting $25 per hand at their game has what we call an "expectation" of losing $25 x 0.5% = 12.5 cents per hand since the casino has an edge over you of about 0.5%. At that rate you would expect, on average, to lose $10,000 in about 80,000 hands of play. If you can get in 100 hands of play per hour, that's about 800 hours' of play or 150 hours of play per month.
But remember, that is just the average. It is very possible to do better and show a profit, or do worse and show a much bigger loss than expected, at least for a period of time. There really are times in a legitimate game when the dealer will win 10 or 15 hands in a row and, while it's no fun to watch, it's within the realm of mathematical possibilities.
If you continue to play at William Hill, I suggest that you start keeping track of the totals for the dealer's hands, because that's a very good indicator of honesty. You'll also need to keep track of the times you "bust", since the dealer may not complete its hand if you do. The dealer's ending hand can be calculated precisely and, if the sample is large enough (20,000 hands or so) those percentages should very closely match expectation. Another thought is to look for a game which has a lower edge and you can do that at our newest site, The GameMaster's Casino Directory. I want to point out, however, that good rules should not be the only reason to give your business to an online casino. I have no question regarding the integrity of the William Hill Organization and that counts for something.
Yours for winning, GameMaster,
I certainly don't know everything, but I found that after buying Standford
Wong's "Professional Blackjack", (from reading other posters
recommendations) I had wasted my money since I had already learned
everything in it from your articles. And to your credit yours were easier to
understand and even made me laugh at times.
My problem is this: I have started to delve into every available source of
info I can find on BJ, and have started to hang out in
rec.gambling.blackjack. I have been reading a lot of posts and have come
across many from a gentleman by the name of Doug Grant. I am sure that you
would of heard of this guy, and I was wondering about your views on him.
Almost all his posts in this newsgroup is about: -How counting doesn't work in the real world, and is a waste of time.
-Many of the well known authors (such as Wong, Synder) are con men working
for the casinos and their systems are for suckers. I have read about the
stories of the authors admitting to working for them. Here is the type of posts I am talking about, and are regularly found in
rec.gambling.blackjack: "Card counting systems have been proved a loser against real world casinos.
Wong's systems cannot beat real world casinos no more than any other card
counting system. Unfortunately, Wong is not providing "real world" rules
when he analyzes the effectiveness of card counting systems. In "real world
casinos" casinos can alter the rules of the game even during a game in
progress as soon as you start spreading your wagers or try to back count.
Moreover, Wong's claims that you can camouflage effective card counting are
outright fraudulent and pathetically incorrect. I have challenged Wong to
prove his claims several times and Wong always hides from such challenges.
Do not be deceived by con men like Wong into believing you can beat a real
world casino with a 40 year-old system known as "card counting." And this one: "I hate to be the one to dampen your dreams Jason, but none of the systems
you mentioned can beat real world casinos anywhere, especially in AC. Card
counting has been proved a loser against real world casinos. Math
professors, casino experts and casino control commissions have publicly and
officially determined that card counting systems cannot beat real world
casinos. Please do not be deceived by books from con men that are secretly
working for the casinos, like Stanford Wong.
Doug Grant (Tm)"
There are many other messages like this (mostly from Mr Grant) and I dont
doubt that the is a lot of truth in most of what he has to say. I am looking
at them at face value but are starting to question myself. Am I wasting my
time? Am I being played for a sucker? I am now unsure whether counting will
prove advantagous under the right conditions. But I mean, if counting
doesn't work, and casinos know this, why are casinos worried about counters?
Why would people get banned, or even get heat??
This has got me very disillusioned and I am wondering where to go on this
matter. I don't want to spend any more hours refineing my counting, if the
whole system is a sham. I am sure that you have heard the arguements for and
against and would like to ask you for your views and help. Here are some questions I would like your opinion on: 2. Also a $3000 - $5000 bankroll seems unrealistic to a small time, small
stakes player like myself (I can usually get away with a $100 - $300
bankroll and make at least $100-$250 on it). If I had access to that kind of
money off the cuff, I probably wouldn't have the need to start playing for
cash in the first place. 3. I play in Australia and the rules vary slightly from the US. I got my
original strategy from website "Basic Strategy Engine" that you reccommended
and varied it from other sources. Many of the basic startegy matrix's I read
are very similiar, but recently I read from a software package (Learn to
Count Blackjack) help file this message "There are two different ways that
the dealer receives his cards. The most common in the USA is the Nevada Deal
whereby the dealer's second card is dealt face down and is checked for a
blackjack before players take further action such as doubling etc. The other
style is the London Deal which is quite popular outside the USA and involves
the dealer receiving the second card after all players have finished. This
style gives the casino a further slight edge over the players."
In AUS we play by the "London Deal" rules. To make it clear for you to see I
have included both types of strategy, the one I've been using and the one
recommended from this software package (London Ver). Even through both vary
by only a couple of plays, please clarify the correct strategy for me
because I feel like Im spinning my wheels.
Thank you for your patience and I hope you can help restore my faith in the
game. Hello, Nick.
First of all, thanks for the compliments. It's always gratifying to hear
that we've been able to help someone. Regarding Doug Grant, what can I say, other than the man needs to get a
life! You answered your own question when you said, "if counting doesn't
work, why are the casinos worried about counting?" That's exactly what the
situation is: at good games, counters can win. Period, amen. It really is worthwhile to learn this skill and, while you may never get
rich from it, I believe that knowing how to play the game properly adds to
the fun. I'm flattered to be compared with Stanford Wong, but you didn't
lose anything by buying his book, since it will serve you well as time goes
on. The real key to success is to play beatable games and that has to do with
their rules and penetration levels, not all that mumbo-jumbo Mr. Grant
spews in the news groups. I wasn't able to open the copies of the
strategies you sent me, but when you lose "all" bets against a dealer's up
card of 10 and Ace (if s/he gets a 'Blackjack'), the rules are to never
split or double against a dealer's 10 or Ace, except split a pair of Aces
against a 10. None of us know where the Road of Life will lead us, but learning any new
skill has got to be a good thing, I think. Hang in there and just have
some fun with this. That's what I did over 20 years ago and, as I told
some friends over dinner the other night, I can walk into a casino, play
their game, against their dealer, by their rules, using their cards and
win. Man, that's fun.
Yours for winning, Dear Gamemaster,
If the count is negative, meaning that a whole bunch of 5's have been already dealt out in proportion to the Aces, wouldn't that be a great time stand with a 16 against, say, a dealer's ten? I mean, the 5 are mostly gone, so your hope of a 21 isn't that great. Now granted, standing isn't that great either, but would it at least slightly outweigh the risk of busting in a high negative count?
Actually the count would be "high" because 5s are counted as +1, but your point is well-made. Yes, it would be a good time to stand with a 16 against a 10 and, indeed, that's what happens with the Hi/Lo count...the player stands with any positive (+) running count.
Another question: you say that when not card counting, you should never place bets in more than one circle. Would that also apply to the Ace-5 count games?
You could spread out to two hands with this count when it indicates a 2-unit or higher bet. But read my series on multiple-hand play to develop a strategy.
By the way, I can't believe how many questions you field. Do you consider this some kind of "ministry" or something? Thanks again.
I get a great deal of satisfaction out of helping people win at casinos, so I guess it could be called a "ministry".
Yours for winning, Gamemaster,
Hello, Vladimir.
Yes, it would be advantageous to count the cards at video Blackjack
machines and there's no way the software could tell if it was dealing to a
counter. But the vast majority shuffle the cards after each hand that's
played, so there's no way for counting to work. However, there has
appeared on the scene a game called, I think, "Digital 21" which is a
machine that deals into the deck. I've heard it's available in Las Vegas.
Also consider the Internet casinos which offer some penetration. No one
will be watching you there!
Yours for winning, Hello, Some people believe that it takes a while for the cards to become
"randomized" and I personnaly don't believe that's the case. But, waiting
certainly doesn't hurt. 2. I know you say to play a table where there are only 1 or 2
people.
But I have found that if more people play the faster you get to the end of
the shoe. That is where I find my biggest "True" count number therefore I
bet
more. Help me understand this please.
Yes, with more people at the table, the high counts come more quickly, but
then you have to share them with more people, so it all works out that
you're getting the same number of bets at the 'good' counts. In other
words, the high counts come more quickly, but they also leave more quickly.
But, if you play at tables with fewer players, you'll get more hands per
hour, on average, because there's less shuffling, less changing of $$$ into
chips, etc. Thank You, You're welcome, Lorie. Have fun on your trip.
Yours for winning, Gamemaster, I assume you're referring to the free game offered by Roman Palace Casino
in the GameMaster's Arcade? 1. Several times, the progressive has stopped at $80,999 while I was still
playing. Then when I would sign back in, it would start back up at a lower
number. That's how most progressives work. They like to keep the meter running
even if no one is playing, because it's more interesting. If you were to
hit the progressive Royal, you would be paid the proper amount. Don't
forget that this game is free.
2. I have lost $5,000 with not a single winning session, and with only a
single four of a kind, and nothing higher. If you are betting $25 per hand, that is a loss of 200 units and it's very
common to lose most sessions at Video Poker. You must remember that the
game returns 99.5% with the Royal included, so without it, you're playing
at a 97.5% return. If you bet $25 per hand and play 400 hands per hour,
you're betting $10,000 per hour, so your expected loss is $250 an hour,
minimum. With what we call "variance" thrown in (most people call it
luck), a loss of $1500 an hour is certainly possible. To determine the
fairness of a game requires an awful lot of play and it cannot be judged on
whether or not one loses in a few playing sessions. I lose all the time at
VP games in "brick-and-mortar" casinos, but I believe the games are honest.
I know it's not that simple when dealing with online casinos, but on our
Arcade, at least you have the opportunity to try the games at no risk. If
you feel this game is not honest, then my best advice is to not play VP at
Roman Palace Casino. 3. The display numbers make it almost impossible to "audit" whether you are
being paid correctly for a single winning hand. I'm not exactly sure what you mean here, but it's hard to imagine that the
game wouldn't pay each hand correctly. What would a casino possibly gain
by offering a free game in a "try-out" mode and then cheat on the payouts? 4. I am pretty sure that several times when I prematurely hit the DEAL
button, it shorted me on the payoff that was then happening. That could be the case. It's unlikely, but it's possible. However, if you
run out of credits, just get some more because they're free.
Yours for winning, |