I read a few post that suggest playing heads up against unfavorable shoe conditions is better than having other players at the table. I disagree and would suggest playing heads up on favorable games with good conditions not bad ones. In bad games I need other players to eat up the bad cards.
I dont understand why anyone would benefit playing one on one in a bad game. The conditions are already bad and now you have to play through all negative counts,yuck.
enough hands in an hour, at a mediocre penetration game. Then playing heads up at that game compared to the better penetration game that has 5 players is the better choice. Boy, i'm pretty sure that makes sense the way i wrote it.
table
I agree with TG.Bad penetration means a low proportion of favorable situations. If you are alone at the table you will need a spread of more than 20:1 to make up for this as you cannot wong out.
Francis Salmon
I would prepare to accept a higher risk of ruin,increase of variance and some heat due to the large bet spread required to win back the money you lost during all those "play all" nasty negative counts.
If you must play all under bad conditions I would lower your minimum bet, this will decrease the risk of going broke.
