A very humbling experience

Had a humbling experience in Windsor Canada the other night. Sat down with a group of my friends, and imagine my delight when we hit three very plus shoes in a row. (75% penetration, $15 minimum, DAS, RSA, Double on any number, stand on hard 17) Anyway, using the AO II count, turned $200 into $1000 after only three shoes. Did I leave? NO...I watched to see what the next shoe would do. My friends left after making some money. I was thrilled to see an immediate large plus deck. There were three other people playing, and miraculously they all left after about six hands. Got mad about all the small cards I guess. Anyway, left me to play by my lonesome with a +30 deck after about 1/2 to 3/4 of a deck dealt. So, I play $30, and eventually get to the max of my spread ($125 - an 8:1 spread) Well, like a dummy I made two major mistakes. I didn't play multiple holes even though it was only me and the dealer. I just kept plunking that much money down and watching the dealer beat my hard 18 with a better hard 20. Also, didn't vary my betting strategy. I continued to play perfect BS and make no adjustments for the abundance of 10's throughout. Finished the shoe because it stayed so plus throughout, but learned a valuable lesson as a new player...I had an incredible session, and should have walked when I could have. Staying for the proverbial "one more shoe" turned my $800 in profit (I think pretty good for a small fry) into "only" $250. I'm not complaining, because the session was still a positive one, but it was a harsh lesson in the fickleness of the blackjack gods. No counting system or positive deck is a sure thing, no matter how inticing it may look.

I have a couple of comments about your trip report.

First you mention that you are a newbie, and I assume that are new to counting. But you mention that you are using the AO II. The AO II is an advanced count, and should not be attempted by newbies. In fact, I would recommend against it for experienced players.

Are you using the side count of Aces. If not, then you are playing a really weak system! It is much weaker than HiLo (or KO), and much harder to play. The only advantage it would have is that the playing strategy is slightly better. But you said you were playing BS, so you weren't using that strategy.

Second, you seem to be advocating sometime type of stop-win money management strategy. If so, then this is another serious error. You should not have left that Hot Shoe!

You had a head-on play against a Hot Shoe. We salivate when we hear of such opportunities. We spend 2 or 3 hours in a casino to get one such Shoe.

You lost over $500 in that shoe (BTW, is that Canadian, or US equiv.) But the next time you went to the casino, it might have taken you 3 hours to get that many big bets out, and you still could have lost $500. But you might have won $500. You odds of winning $500 are much better than your odds of loosing $500.

If you have been in the business a long time, you will learn that there are three things we never do

1. Never Leave a Hot Shoe, especially when head-on
   
2. Never take a rental car out on the LV Blvd.
   
3. Never eat at the IP buffet.
   

Remember, even when the count is high, counters lose more hands than they win. Your edge comes from BJs and DDs.

Bert

It is nice to hear from you. I have been trying to get in touch with you for some time.

Would you drop me an E-mail.

spread, the game quality, top bet etc. you still won over and above your expectation for this particular session. Fluctuations are a part of it. Better get used to it.

Just the thought gives me indigestion.

Best Regards,
Crackerjack

Thanks for the input. As a new player to the game, (and former player of roulette) I wrongly assumed that with a shoe so positive that it was basically a "sure thing" as far as some winning hands. To answer the money question, it was all Canadian anyway so the net positive was around $200 (with a $200 American equivalent buy in). However, I have what is probably a basic question regarding the system used. What would make KO or HI/LO better than AOII for counting? In a shoe, I was always under the impression that bet spread is where you made your money, not on playing strategy when compared to a single or double deck game. I don't have a problem converting the count, using the betting indices, or losing the count. I've put homework time in trying to learn the basics. (although I'm always trying to improve) Anyway, why would a level one count be better than a level two count other than the fatigue or mistake factor?

Winning in High Counts is never a sure thing. Look at the craps table. You see Mr. X put down a bet. Is it a "sure thing" that Mr. X will lose that bet? Is it sure thing that Mr. X will be a loser that session?

The answer is No. Craps winners win almost half the time. If players didn't win nearly half the time that they play craps, there wouldn't be any craps tables.

Now the advantage that we in BJ is rarely better than the advantage the casino enjoys in craps.

For a better illustrations, suppose I give you an ear with 48 white marbles and 52 red marbles. Is it a "sure thing" that you will pick a red marble? The answer is again no. Yet rarely do we have a bigger edge here than in BJ.

Now to discuss the issue of count systems. I didn't see an answer to me question on whether or not you use the Ace side count. I assume the answer is No. This means that your counting is oblivious to the number of Aces. Now the Ace is a VERY Important card. Any system which is not paying attention to the Ace is going to be inferior to either HiLo or to KO.

Professional Blackjack" by Stanford Wong, 1994 Edition, Chapter 14 Finer Points, Living With Risk, Page 193.
AND
"Blackjack Attack Playing The Pros' Way" by Don Schlesinger, 2nd Edition-More Ammo, 2000. Chapter 2 Betting Techniques and Win Rates, Page 19.
To quote Don - "And don't worry if it seems like just when you've reached the top, you slip back down again. Peter Griffin estimates that we're at an all-time high only 1% of the time. Thus, 99% of the time, we have the nagging feeling that we 'once had more'."
ALSO
"The Theory of Blackjack" by Peter Griffin, Sixth Edition, 1999, Chapter 3 The Spectrum of Opportunity and Chapter 4 Exploiting the Spectrum - Single Paramter Card Counting Systems. Should answer your questions about AOII vs HiLo, betting variation vs playing strategy departures, etc.
OR
You could just send me the $200 you won, consider yourself absolutely even, and never play blackjack again.

i am not sure that you can fit 100 marbles into just one ear, but other than that i have to agree with mathprof. (sorry mathprof, couldn't resist)

to go a little further and assume that you do keep a side count of aces and apply it correctly into your betting decisions, then yes: it is comparable to hi-lo or ko or red7. you said you are not using strategy decisions, so even with the side count of aces it is not superior to the level one ace reckoned counts.

summary...

• advanced omega 2 (with ace side count and strategy indexes) is a very powerful count. highly regarded.
  
• half assed omega 2 (with no side count and/or no strategy indexes) is <= the level one counts (and is more work). waste of time, if you don't plan to implement the full strategy.
  

1 and 3 I understand. Why not take a rental car on the strip other than its just too crowded?

Too crowded indeed - gridlock is a better description, unless it's 4:00 AM midweek.

I just want to chime in on the marble analogy. I feel that this is not a valid analogy. Yes, it is similar to one hand in a high count, but the card counter plays many hands in many high counts. I don't know about other counters but I tend to play longer if I am losing than I do when I am winning. The result of this varied session time is a 70% session win rate and perhaps slightly more heat than the average counter.

I am not totally discrediting the Mathprof as I feel he is vary knowledgeable however I have seen this analogy before and I feel it gives some people the wrong idea about how often a card counter has a winning session.

skyhawk

of our local police station they always give you an earful of marbles. And if you can't guess how many re & how many white they give you an earful again.

I noticed a post from over a month ago that said "Never rent a car on the LV strip. Why? And what's that about the IP buffet? Bad food or just a joke?

First, the IP is notorious for having the worst buffet in Vegas. It is usually ranked close to the bottom, if not the bottom, by most independent raters. I will post include a link to one of my favorite web-sites, cheapovegas.com. So the IP buffet it is standard joke.

Now my other suggestion was to never take a rental car on the LV strip. Traffic on the strip is awful. Sometimes it seems you could walk to your destination faster than driving on the strip. If you have a car in Vegas, it is best to drive on the roads that parallel the strip, rather than on the blvd itself.

This advice would apply to owned cars as well as rental cars, but many of us only have rental cars in Vegas. Besides I find the experience of driving a rental car to produce a lot of anxiety by itself. Driving on the strip aggravates that anxiety.

At least we don't have to worry about making boarding times.

If you don't care for the IPs buffet-may I suggest that
you try the Riveria's for a week- it's as dry as
Sam Kennison's SAND!

Might Be Why I Never Tried It . Read About It Here First.

You played Spanish 21 and NOT regular blackjack which explains the super high counts 3 times in a row. I live in the Detroit metro area and frequent Windsor alot and they do NOT allow doubling on any number of cards in the regular game. Also they are horrible for their cut card placment as it is normally about 60% in those 8 decks!

I used the monorail to pop up and down the strip last trip...I liked it