 |
FRONT PAGE - Back to THE ADVISOR PAGE Hello GameMaster,
Hello, Robert.
The 6-deck game is marginal, but with 66% penetration and a larger (1-12)
bet spread, a 0.6% long-term edge can be achieved. Combine that with the
tactic of leaving the table whenever the true count drops to -1 or lower
and you can at least see some sort of profit. The 6-deck game will give
you an average bet of about $8 per hand (leave when the count drops to -1)
and the 2-deck game has an average bet of $33.25, if you never leave when
the count drops. At a rate of 50 hands/hour for the 6-deck game, your
expectation is to make $2.88 per hour and at a rate of 75 hands/hour on the
2-deck game, your expectation is to make $3.71/hour, but you're betting
only $400/hour at the 6-deck game vs. $2475 at the double-deck game.
Needless to say, betting over 4 times the $$$ to make an extra 83 cents
isn't worth the risk.
Yours for winning,
Hey Gamemaster,
Anyways, this dispute is over but in my dealings with this casino I would recommend that you still leave a strong warning to those who plan to play at this place. The customer service is terrible.
Thanks for all the help
Hello, Dusty.
It's good to hear that you got your $$$; well, most of them, anyway. We will keep our warning up.
Yours for winning, Hello Gamemaster,
Thank you for all your advice and teaching. But I was wondering if there
were any books you could recommend? I've read how you recommend Stanford
Wong's books, but they seem out of date, written in '92 and '94. Do you
recommend any that are a bit more recent?
Thank you for your time.
Hello, casual.
Regarding book recommendations, Wong's books are not, by any means, out of
date and I consider Professional Blackjack to be my "bible". That said,
there are some recent books that are also worth the expense, most notably
Blackjack Attack, 2nd. edition by Don Schlesinger and the book, Beyond
Counting by James Grosjean, although it doesn't focus only on BJ.
But believe me when I tell you that Wong's book is essential and if I could
own only one, that would be the one.
Yours for winning, Hi GameMaster, my name is Eric and I am a huge fan of your site. It has thought me many great things so far, that I am using everytime I step to the the table, however I do have one question. At a local dog track the only blackjack there is video blackjack. I was wondering is there anything special to know when playing these or is it all computer rigged? If you could give me any tips they would be greatly appreciated. In addition, thanks for the site.
Hello, Eric.
As far as Blackjack video machines go, most deal the cards in a random manner, but where they get you is the payoff on a 'blackjack' or natural. Normally that pays 3 to 2, but in a lot of machines, it pays 1 to 1 (or, as some will say, 2 FOR 1 - it's the same thing.) Such an even-money pay for a natural gives the casino about a 1.7% edge, so don't play the machine if that's the case. Otherwise, you'll probably be fine.
Yours for winning, Hello.
I was concerned I wouldn't be able to keep up with the dealer's pace while
trying to count. I've been practicing for about 1 1/2 - 2 hours a night for
the past month or so & can run through a deck via the Red Seven count in
just under 30 seconds. I counted the first eight shoes I played & a betting
opportunity based on the count only presented itself ONCE. Does that make
sense? I'm assuming it does with all the crappy cards in the shoe an eight
deck shuffle brings.
So I doubled the bet when the count was +3 & the dealer was at the end of
the shoe. All low cards get dealt! Now the count is +8 and we all have to
hit. Here come the face cards, right on cue. We all busted. So I guess I
counted right on that shoe anyway.
Thanks for the advice last week. I will continue to practice. There's a
Vegas trip in my future & I'm quite sure that being able to count will help
me much more when playing one - four deck games.
Hello, Rich.
Practice is the key and you'll find that soon it'll be easy to vary your
bets with the count, so just keep at it. As for those little cards coming
out even when the count is high, that is, unfortunately, the way it goes
sometimes. This is a long-term approach to the game, so you have to expect
situations like that. The same can be said about only one shoe in eight
having a positive count. If you can, leave the table when the count drops
and either take a break or find another table where the dealer is
shuffling. Like I always say, it's cheaper to walk around than it is to
play negative decks.
As always, let me know if I can help.
Yours for winning, Hi, love your website!!!! I have a question: I use John Patrick's counting system.....all face cards as -2, and all other
cards as +1...once the count reaches 25 it's rich....-20..its poor......etc.
I change my basic strategy a little based on the count.... never split
aces against face cards, and never double 11 or 10 against 2,3 or 8,9 unless
the count is rich..I just want your opinion on this method of counting and
strategy....As far as money management goes...if my starting bet is
50...i go 50,25,50,75,100..etc....let me know what you think of all of this
when you get a chance..thanks.
Hello, Brian.
I'm not familiar with the John Patrick method of counting, but this is
obviously what we call an "unbalanced" count. Actually, since he is a
former casino employee, I'm surprised that he even talks about counting,
but I'm not at all surprised that his system is relatively weak. Anyway,
while Patrick's system is fairly easy to use because no true count
conversion needed, it has a low betting correlation (72%, if the Ace is
counted as +1) and you could do a lot better with the KO or Red Seven
system. Both of them are also unbalanced, but their betting correlations
are in the 95+% area and that's important in shoe-type games, which, it
appears, you are playing.
As for the strategy modifications, you are making some serious mistakes
there. It's not so bad for the pair of Aces, because that's a relatively
rare hand (A,A vs. 10 occurs only 173 times in each 100,000 hands), but not
doubling 10 and 11 vs. 2,3,8 and 9 is costing you a lot. First of all,
these are relatively common hands and the "expected value"(EV) on doubling
each is fairly high. For example, just hitting a 10 against a 2 has an EV
of .187, whereas doubling has an EV of .368. (Both of those EVs are based
upon the original bet, not the fact that you're putting up more $$$ to
double, so it's a fair comparison. They are also based upon a 6-deck game
where only the 3 cards involved have been removed; basically a 'neutral'
shoe.) The only modification that makes any sense at all is not doubling
10 vs. 9 when the count indicates the decks are "poor". And, while A,A vs
10 is rare, the EV for hitting is -.066 (it is, after all, a "soft" 12),
but the EV for splitting them is .182. You won't see it very often, but
it's costing you almost 25% when you do.
Let me put all of this in perspective for you. If your average bet is $25
per hand (I'll talk about your betting in a minute) and you're playing at a
rate of 75 hands per hour, you will have a 10 or 11 against a 2,3,8 or 9
twice an hour, on average. While I chose a pretty dramatic example of 10
vs. 2 above, the average cost of these modifications is about .120 or 12%.
Twelve percent of $25 is $3 and if you're making this mistake twice an
hour, their cost is $6 per hour. If you have an overall average advantage
of 0.50% with this count and the betting strategy you listed, then 75 hands
per hour at an average bet of $25 means your total "action" is $25 x 75 =
$1875. A 0.5% edge results in an expected win of $9.38 per hour (again, on
average), so you're giving up almost two-thirds of your edge by not making
those plays. By not doubling, you are indeed reducing the short-term ups
and downs in your bankroll, but at a considerable long-term cost.
I don't know if those modifications come from you or John Patrick (I
suspect the latter), but they are based upon intuition and not fact. I
often hear players lamenting that they "always" get a small card when they
double a 10 or 11, but the fact is, these are excellent hands and they
should be exploited to their maximum effect. You are getting some of the
value from these hands by doubling when the decks are "rich", so maybe this
is costing you only $3 an hour, but who needs it more, you or the casino?
Your betting schedule should be based upon the count and not upon some
arbitrary series of wins and losses. When the count is low, bet the
minimum and when the count is high, bet more. I don't know if John
Patrick's book covers that, but any betting schedule should be based upon
your estimated advantage for the next hand. The count does that and you
should be taking advantage of it. Otherwise, why count? Since you are
already familiar with using an unbalanced count at the tables, you might
want to consider switching to the KO or Red 7 count. Both have specific
betting recommendations and, as I said earlier, they have a much higher
betting correlation. You can read more about them in my series "Counting
Systems" that is archived on the Blackjack page of my site.
Yours for winning, GameMaster, Hello.
Regarding the specific hands you mentioned, I'll assume you're really talking about hitting 12 versus 2 and 3, not 12 and 13 versus 2, because the only time you'd hit 13 vs. 2 is when the count is negative and, I gather, you are not counting at this point. If my assumptions are correct you are making a very definite error, especially when the hand is 12 vs. 2. That said, I have to add that single-deck play is a different animal, because each and every card has a much bigger impact than each card in a multi-deck game. For example, a player's starting hand of 12 can consist of a 7 and a 5, an 8 and a 4, a 9 and a 3 or a 10 and a 2 (I'm ignoring 6,6, because pairs are usually played differently). These "composition-dependent" hands are sometimes played differently than one another, but let's use averages here. If you'd like to learn more about composition-dependent play, see the excellent discussion of that at www.thewizardofodds.com/
Standing with any 12 versus a dealer's 2 in a game where the dealer stands on A-6, has an average expectation of -.286 (which basically means you lose 28.6% of all the $$$ you bet in that situation), whereas hitting 12 vs. 2 has an average expectation of -.256. If you bet an average of $10 per hand, the cost of standing is $.30 per hand. You will start with a hand of 12 vs. 2 about 0.61% of the time, so if you play 40,000 hands per year (5-8 hours per week), this error is costing you about $73 a year. That $73 is a gift to the casino and you may not consider it to be as serious as I do.
You might be able to have your cake and eat it too, however. Most of the "gain" from hitting 12 vs.2 (actually a reduction of the expected loss) comes from the hand of 10,2 vs. 2. You can quickly see why that's the case. Since you already have a 10-value card in your hand, there are fewer remaining in the deck to bust you. So, if you can live with some inconsistency, but still prefer to stand with 12 vs. 2, then hit only those that are composed of a 10 and a 2. Another easy refinement is that a hand of 12 which is composed of 3 or more cards (for example, 4, 5 and 3) is a "stand". I won't go into as much detail about 12 vs. 3, because the numbers aren't as dramatic in that situation, but hitting is still the better play, on average. Also, there are some differences if the dealer hits A-6, but you didn't mention which type of game you play.
It's really a question of not donating $$$ to the casino, because I'm sure you need it much more than they do.
Yours for winning, GameMaster,
A player usually cannot double or surrender with 3 or more cards, but beyond that, there are no differences. Some confusion occurs with hands of 3 or more cards that contain an Ace, but you can read
2. What books do you recommend?
Every counter should own a copy of Stanford Wong's "Professional Blackjack".
3. Is there web site which lists the different rules of Blackjack for each casino?
No, but there is a publication called "Current Blackjack News" and you can view a sample copy of it at www.BJ21.com/
Yours for winning,
GM,
Hello, Rick.
A hand of 12 is a loser, no matter how you play it, but hitting reduces the loss. As you said, you "believe" hitting has cost you more, but if you'll keep track of your results for the next 1000 or so times that you have a 12 vs. 2 and/or 3, you'll see that hitting is the best way to play those hands.
Yours for winning, To the Gamemaster,
I'm learning the Red Seven count & prepping for my
first time actually playing at a table using a count.
The only casinos within driving distance of home are
Foxwoods & Mohegan Sun. Both play an eight deck game.
I have read many opinions on the usefulness of
counting into eight decks, both for and against. In
your opinion, can a count into eight decks be
profitable? Or am I wasting my time putting in the
practice?
Hello, Rich.
That said, the only way to get a significant edge over your "local" 8-deck
game is to back count the table and enter only when the count shows you
have an edge, then leave when the count drops. This is what we call
"wonging" and it can be quite effective. For other ideas, please read my
series, "Beating Tough Games", which you'll find archived on the Blackjack
page of my site.
Yours for winning, Gamemaster,
I was just recently faced with a unique situation. I was playing
mini-baccarat with limits of $5-500. The dealer drew a card when he
shouldn't have and it was a 9. Instead of purging the card, he kept it for
the next round of play! Not everyone saw it but I certainly did. I doubled
my bet on player (since the card will go to player) but I was so tempted to
do the max bet of $500. What were my chances of winning knowing the 1st
card was a 9?
P.S. I did win the hand at 9 player to 5 banker.
Hello, MC.
Yours for winning, Hi GM,
Hello, HM.
Yours for winning, Dear GameMaster, Last weekend I took a trip down, playing a $5-$500 table, and playing
with a fibonaci progression. I made off with about $100 in winnings, 10% of
my bankroll, in about 2.5 hours. My only gripe is that it felt like work. Concentrating on bidding,
counting, keeping up appearances, etc. I originally went with friends to
have a good time, but at the end of the night, I just had a bit of a
headache. I wonder if there is a way to play the game, that is easier to do, with
smaller returns. After all, I think I am more of a social gambler than one
that wants to do it as a part time job.
If not, I guess it's just back to the flashcards and the deck rundowns.
Yours for winning, Hi GM,
However, I want to know how effective the system is. What kind
of advantage can I expect to see on an 8-deck shoe, DAS, DOA,
S17?
Ideally, I would like to go into the casino once a week, play $5
minimums
and expect to come $100 up. Is this reasonable?
Hello, Nick.
I'm afraid such a game is not going to offer the types of returns you'd
like. Assuming 75% penetration (6 of the 8 decks are dealt out), a 1-12
bet spread and leaving if the True Count drops to -2 or lower, your edge
would be only about 0.6%. With a $5-$60 bet range, your average bet would
be about $7.50 and, at a rate of 60 hands/hour, that would translate into
an hourly income of approximately $2.70. You can see that a six-hour
session has the expectation of making $15 or $16. And that doesn't take
into effect the standard deviation swings that could find you playing at a
loss for a hundred hours or more before the small edge shows itself.
You might be able to back count the game and not sit down to play until the
True Count is at 2 or more, but then the number of hands you'd get per hour
would be considerably less. However, such an approach would raise your
overall edge to the 1.5% area, but you might actually play only 150 hands
in a six-hour session.
Either way, a $100/day goal isn't realistic.
Yours for winning,
GameMaster,
When the count is a plus it is said to be in the favor of the player. Is
the only reason because the odds of player getting a blackjack is better
and the
pay back is 2 to one? I don't see why the odds are not as just as good for
the dealer to get a winning hand. Maybe I missed something. Is there a
better
position at the table? Position 4 vice 1. I know you said to try and get a
table with only 3 players. That can change quickly. I appreciate your
previous
response and have had no problems continuing the lessons through game
master.
If some of these questions are covered later in the lessons or are stupid,
I,m
sorry.
Hello, Pete.
A high count is advantageous to the player for several reasons. As you
say, the dealer has the same opportunity to receive good cards, but the
player receives 3 to 2 on his bet when he gets a natural, whereas the
dealer only wins your one bet. Also, a dealer cannot double a hand of 9,
10 and 11 and I'm sure you'll see the advantage to having a lot of big
cards in the deck when the player does that. That's also true for
splitting pairs, something else a dealer cannot do. Also, the dealer MUST
hit a hand of 12-16 and, again, if there are a lot of big cards in there,
the dealer is more likely to bust, but the player may choose to stand with
such a hand.
So, it's the options a player has that can add to the edge when the deck is
rich in 10s and Aces, if he uses them correctly.
As for where to sit, there is no particular advantage at any seat, beyond
making it easier to see all of the cards for counting purposes, etc. I
choose tables with fewer players simply because I'll get more hands per
hour and, the more hands I play, the more $$$ I ultimately make.
Yours for winning, GM,
If that is true, then given that I have the freedom to be somewhat flexible
in deciding what to do as far as doubling, hitting, etc, then it would seem
that if I do it correctly, the advantage would be mine.
Given than, then how come I keep losing? :) (granted, I've only just
started your school and haven't gone through all the lessons yet)
Hello.
Yours for winning, GameMaster,
I will be using a negitive-progressive betting system, and hopfully making
enough to help me through College. I have won a few hundred, but today I lost
almost $700, I was up 3 to 2, I felt I had it in my hands and I got a bad
run. Well I can't win 'em all, I know. I felt more studing and practice was in
order to limit this type of situation though. Again, THANK YOU, the help you
offer is rare, even on the net.
PS. I know the cards are in my hand - win or lose- its me who placed the bet.
But I do appreciate your advice.
Hello, Zach.
Glad you found us. Welcome aboard! I hope you'll follow my lessons and if you do, you'll see that progression betting is not the way to go if you want to make any serious $$$ at Blackjack.
Take a look at what we offer and let me know if I can help.
Yours for winning, GM,
Hello, Shane.
With continuous shuffle machines, card counting is basically rendered useless.
Yours for winning, |