A different kind of bet spread/wonging. (long)

After reading a lot of info about BJ strategy I have concluded that most experts, (incl. BJ School at far left), advise this betting strategy based on Hi-Lo:
TC below 0, get out or cope with potential losses by betting 1 unit
TC 0-2 bet 1 unit, maybe 2
TC 2+ bet 3 units and more as count gets better up to 10 or 12 units.

Several of friends have and do play at the casinos. They historically lose money. A good friend of mine ("Har") came back from a vegas trip and lost $1500. He spent a bit of time on the web and found that there is 'strategy' to playing BJ! After purchasing and reading quite a few books and numerous web sites we have decided that the BS and card counting system might just work!

We knew that this is not a get rich quick sceme. In fact, we have resigned ourselves that we'll lose money at BJ only because we're not going to give ourselves false hopes, and a small hourly wage doesn't compare with our incomes/expected incomes from our current jobs.

"Har" and I play a sample home game every morning before work over coffee for about 2 hours and have done so for a few months. The game is a 6 deck shoe game with 70-75% pen, dealer stands on all 17's, DOA, NRSA, NS, DASSPL3, split aces receive only on additional card. We have sent the table limits at $5-300.

I deal and play a hand, he plays a hand, and other 'players' come and go as we so choose. I bought good chips, a nice shoe and felt table top etc. and we have fun putting BS and Hi-Lo counting to 'action'. (We realize this simulation could be done by a computer in a few seconds, but there's no proof like what is in the pudding!) We have noticed the following.

- lower counts (TC-2 and below) often pay us well (dealer's bad luck)
- high counts with bet spreads of 1-10 can quickly deplete the day's available cash with a bit of bad luck (ie: 3 or 4 losing $50 bets drops a few hundred off the bankroll)
- high counts with bet spreads of 1-3 or 1-5 don't tend to really hurt our session as the shoe tends to run out of the good count, or out of cards.

Based on these variables and experiences we wonder about three items that we haven't come across yet.

1) A back better who wants to back bet at a table when the count is very high (TC 4 or more) has a chance of back betting an unlucky player. (There are, after streaks).

Who it be profitable to back bet the entire table during high counts?

2) How would this bet spread work?
- players bets 4 units at start of shoe ($20)
- if player is winning overall and the count is negative or about even he still bets 4 units.
- if the player starts losing, despite the count he slowly reduces his bet to 1 unit or $5. (reverse parlaying)
- if the player is about even or winning and the count increases then be spreads his be to 10 units or $50.

The theory is that the 1 unit player takes advantage by betting 4 units during streaks. If he's losing, he reduces his bet. If the count goes high, he needn't bet 10x $20, but rather 10X his $5 unit which is only 2.5x his 'normal' openning bet.

This would help:
- cover from pit bosses
- create higher wins during good streaks
- normal losses during bad streaks

We've realized the disappointment of betting only 1 unit during low counts when we've been doing well, and the fact that unless we leave the table, we cannot be less than 1 unit.

This is not the 'best' system, I know. However, is this a system which should give the player a positive expecation with only minor bankroll risk?

3) Finally, and I know this is long, we are continually deverging from basic strategy variations. The best example is dealer upcard of 10, we're dealt a 14 (4,8,2), running count is 15 (TC 3.75), table of 5 player has very few high cards. We'll stand.

Based on our pretend profits we make money on this bet. It could be that BSV that we've read don't show us the effect of our other cards, the last hand, and the other player's hands.

Any help would be appreciated to save us from losing money, or making us money!

When you talked about winning hands with small bets out, and losing the big bets, I remembered what Jerry Patterson says. He claims that if the shuffle is incomplete, the high cards will clump together. He goes on to say that one should consider raising his/her bets when the count is going down (ie. high cards are coming out) and decreasing them when it goes up, (ie. the low cards are coming out). Now, there is a lot of debate over whether this is really true. Some say it is, some say it isn't. Read his book, Blackjack- A Winner's Handbook, and decide for yourself.

I've never seen proof that a streak can influence the outcome of your next hand. I know every counter has seen what your talking about, but the truth is streaks are totally unpredictable, so why base your betting strategy on it? If streaks did influence your next hand I'd throw my count in the garbage and start playing professional progression.

Mark L

I know exactly what you are saying. The two of us went to a casino this afternoon. 6 deck shoe, 70% pen, $80 each. 1 lost $10, 1 made $80. Afterwards, we reviewed what happened during high counts. In ALL cases we lost during high counts. Fortunately both us (at different tables) only increased the bet spread when the count went up and we were winning. For example, my highest TC was +8 to +9 and I lost 6 hands and pushed 4.

I'm not trying to re-invent the wheel, but in 'home study' we consistantly find hugh spreads risky.

Could the problem be that most tables have 5,6 or 7 players? I say this because even a very high count will not have the same effect as Thorpe's (and others) ideal one-on-one 1 or 2 deck game.

Lastly, I will never throw counting out of the picture. Simply put, I enjoy BJ because of the mental effort required to cover all the bases, and I use the count to alter basic strategy.

Thanks for your advice.

the problem with your testing is it's based on a small number of trials.

Just as an example I've got a buddy that plays baccarat, he uses negative progression to the 12th level. He wait until the bank has lost 3 hands in a row and then starts his progression, so unless the bank losses 15 times in a row he'll always win, and has, but at some point he'll lose everything, but try telling this to a guy that's won 21 trips in a row! This is a prime example of how people base their strategy on small numbers.

Now your strategy is based on a positive expectation so you will win in the long run, but less than you would if you used traditional methods. I've posted some results under Vegas BJ section that I ran a few weeks ago, the post is titled "Avoiding the boot," here it is:

Would it make sense for us to give up 1/2 of our advantage to continue playing BJ? I think so, but I'd like your input. I ran this sim and it turned out we'll be giving up .64% of our 1.35% to look like the prefect progressionist.

Conditions:
DD,H17,DAS,75%
Hi-lo W/advanced Strategy (6-1 Spread)

Increasing only after a win. (Cover Method)
Payback 100.71% with an average bet of 1.3 units.

Increasing bet regardless of a win or loss (Common Method)
Payback 101.35% with an average bet of 1.6 units.

Mark L

And allow 6 unskilled players make play decisions with your money??