Another question for advantage players

I've been playing BJ for over twenty years and have learned a number of counting systems including Hi-Lo, Revere and Alpha Omega II (Bryce Carlson). But I have never even attempted to play a 4 or 6 deck shoe game figuring it wasn't worth the bother since the "good" shoes with a true count of >2 must be quite rare. Admittedly I haven't won a great deal of money on the SD or DD games most of which I attribute to various combinations of bad luck, poor penetration or heat related to betting spread. I presume for the shoe games you are mostly betting minimum bets until the last deck is being dealt because the true count has to be very close to zero nearly all the time with three, four, five or six decks remaining. Right? I guess what I'm really after is understanding if successful AP play these six deck shoes instead of the more closely watched SD or DD games. Should I consider counting shoes? As we all know its pretty rare to find good SD or DD games.

I almost never play SD or DD because of heat; causing short sessions and very restrictive bet spreads. I also have a desire for longevity. I have been backed off a number of times on SD & DD but only once on 6D after over cooking my welcome of 2 years.

I use AOII and start to spread my bet at 1.5TC. I see this happen fairly often after even the first round of cards comes off the top. All it takes is a pair of 5's doubled catching a 6 while the D shows a 4 then turns a 6 and then hits it with a 9. Five really bad cards and one good card cause a 1.5TC on a 6D shoe with AOII. I will bet 2 units on the next hand.

When the count does go high early, it's hog heaven to the end because the TC average is the same all the way to the cut card and beyond.

Like Stealth said... when you DO get a good count, the tendecy is for the count to remain the same. Not as volitile swings as in SD, but much better due to heat restriction. Backcounting and leaving when the shoe goes bad improves the game still! Shoes for me.

I played mostly handheld games with the idea it took too long to get to a positive advantage in shoe games. After reading several posts, I forced myself to add wonging to my repertoire. As my my BR supported it I added play all. A successful AP will play whatever game he gain a positive advantage. Longevity comes into play because shoe games aren't watched as closely. I have seen the high cards come out half way through a shoe, but your right they do have a tendency to come out towards the end. Hopefully the count will start dropping before you reach the last deck or you'll never see them since few places deal down to a deck in a shoe game.

Positive SD,

ODAAT

The wise AP can adapt to the varying game conditions that he finds. In today's casino environment, that includes playing shoe games, which are now prevalent. If you use a play-all strategy, you will find that you spend more time at minimum bets in shoes that you will spend in one- or two-deck games. That is the primary reason why a larger bet spread is required for shoes. When the count turns positive, you have to bet more to offset the greater number of hands you played at neutral or negative counts. However, you may find a positive count early on in the shoe, or it may appear later.

Adaptability is important. Wonging and exit strategies can enable a player to attack shoes with quite good results. If you find yourself at a table where good penetration is occuring, perhaps a few shoes of play-all is in order. If you are in a casino that lends itself to Wonging or exit strategies because it has a good number of tables, that may be your best play. If you are in a venue where good hand-held games are the rule, then by all means, play them, but being able to adapt to the games you find is a key factor for successful advantage play.

...they do have a tendency to come out towards the end. Hopefully the count will start dropping before you reach the last deck or you'll never see them...

Not correct. Big ones, little ones, medium ones come when they come. It's all random. Yes, the RC will on average return toward zero as more decks are played. However, whatever TC becomes generated while playing, will on average remain to the end.

Consider a SD game for the moment. Let's assume there are seven players at the table + the D. The RC is +10. That means the RC is +10 for all eight positions at the table prior to the start of the next set of hands. As cards come out, the RC will on average return toward zero. Knowing this, should the player on 3B bet less than max because the RC will on average become less when he gets his cards? ...... No, because the TC remains the same on average and the big cards are randomly mixed throughout the remainder of the deck/pack.

I was just relating to Winterhawks's statement of "mostly betting minimum bets until the last deck is being dealt". It seems that it raises towards the end, but I only remember it this way since I have my big bets out. I know it is random, but really high RC's are obviously diluted early in the shoe. I find it interesting someone who has played BJ for 20 years and has learned several count systems is just now looking at the validity of shoe games.

I guess we all have our biases. Yes in twenty years I've never counted the shoe games, playing exclusively SD and DD. My rational has been two-fold.

First keeping track of six decks is harder than SD or DD and should I lose the count for some reason (and yeah it happens sometimes) then its a LONG time until the shuffle and re-establishing an accurate count. Also I keep an ace side count and I'm not sure how I would do that accurately with more than two decks. I use my thumb on my left hand and dig my nail into the the other four fingers in sequence as aces come out and I have to remember if I'm on the first set of four aces or the second set of aces. I know this wouldn't work for six or eight decks.

But my biggest hesitation is simply the DILUTION of the running count with so many decks in play. For example; lets take a six deck shoe; You probably have to play through at least four decks before a you can get a high enough TRUE count to justify a non-minimum bet most of time, right? In other words, I've have assumed the few positive shoes that can be played aggressively at the end are really few and far between. Heck even playing a DD game with just 60% penetration doesn't yield that many opportunities.

So I guess a good question for an experienced shoe player is how often does a good shoe present itself? From what little I know about the shoe games they seem to cut out MORE than one deck meaning their penetration is even worse than a crappy DD game with 50% penetration.

Please correct me if you think I'm wrong but thats why I've never bothered with the shoe games.

I never play at a property which squeezes 7 players onto a BJ layout. Not only is this very uncomfortable, (especially with cigarette smoke), but there is a VERY real detrimental effect to your winning chances, as good betting situations are seriously diluted. Comparing heads-up play to a seven 7player table is educational. The mean BJ hand contains 2.7 cards. The dealer & seven players consume 21.6 cards. That is nearly half a deck. If you are playing a 6 deck shoe and the penetration is a typical (borderline satisfactory) 75%, you can expect to be dealt 11 hands per shoe! But wait. Things transmogrify. They devolve. In situations where the count is high and the advantage swings to you, you will probably get between 8 or 9 hands as the high count is created by the play of excess small value cards which will create hands that use considerably more cards. Conversely, low (read - disadvantageous) true counts are created largely by a plethora of 20's and BJ's which in effect lower the number of cards exhausted from the shoe. That is to say that under the worst of betting circumstances you are likely to be exposed to not 11, but between 13 and 15 hands! Also play tends to be slower with so many ploppies, decreasing hourly income for advantage players. Of course that is a plus for those playing for comps. For hopeless ploppies it merely extends the (virtually inevitable)time that it takes for them to go belly up. It also suggest high-pitch corporate greed and a concomitant lack of consideration for the patrons.

7 spots at the corner store!
Never say never

I personally don't feel shoe games are any harder to count than pitch games. Counting is counting to me. Of course the TC conversion is different, but more mitigating factors are casino heat at pitch games. As far as losing the count, which I think we all do sometimes since we're human, in a shoe game I don't stop counting and wait for the shoe to restart. Being off by +/- 1 seems to be pretty inconsequential. It's more important near the end of the shoe, but still doesn't have that much effect. Worse case, I am slightly underbetting if it's higher than I think it is. I might be playing slightly longer if it's lower, but I typically wong-out in negative shoes. Of course in pitch games this is greatly magnified. If I lose the count in these situations I just flatbet playing BS knowing it will be over soon. But because it so short this rarely happens and is probably, inadvertantly, good cover when I do. I don't keep a side count of Aces, but I have read many different ways of doing so (i.e., pointing your feet in different directions). I thinking creativity is the watch word here.

There are other more knowledgable people that can speak specifically about the "dilution" of the count. From what I understand it's all the same in the long run. I have had shoes where the count went skyhigh from the very beginning where eventually the TC was in the +10 range. But as far as justifying a "non-minimum bet" this is done at TC+1. If your waiting for really big TC's then your probably not spreading big enough. If you're used to playing pitch games, this may be the most difficult for you. You need at least a 1-12 spread to beat a shoe game. (I assume you know all of this already, but for the sake of other readers I'm staying pretty basic.)

Penetration is everything in any game. I would play a 4.5/6 (75%)shoe game before I would play a 50% 2D game. When that count does go skyhigh I want every opportunity to see those cards. Dealing only one deck out of two yields so fewer opportunities than the shoe game with a bigger spread. 5/6(83%) games are out there and if you add LS it a great game. I like the quickness of pitch games and didn't focus on shoe games because of the time it takes sitting through a shoe that stays neutral. Now I play whatever I can to get the hours in. It's all about spending "quality time" in your friendly neighborhood casino.

Try communicating with a view toward transmitting an idea or feeling.

"Corner Store" = ? "Never say Never" = ?

You probably have to play through at least four decks before a you can get a high enough TRUE count to justify a non-minimum bet most of time...

I guess you don't believe what I said in my post above. I will say it again in a different way. It is very possibe to be on 6D, 1 on 1 and after the first hand is done, the TC can be +1 or better. Therefore, the next bet is 2 units.

So I guess a good question for an experienced shoe player is how often does a good shoe present itself?

Assuming a "good shoe" is one that happens to provide a TC of +1 or better for a certain period of time, regardless of whether or not you make any money. Based on my experience with 6D, I will estimate that I am playing in a possitive EV TC about 40% of the time. That means, I'm betting 2 units or more 40% of the time. This percentage can be higher or lower depending on how strict my wonging is.

I never play at a property which squeezes 7 players onto a BJ layout. Boot said: You must be able to adapt & wherever your closest to could be a corner store