I have been a member on this forum for about 1.5 years now. When I signed up I wrote a post about thinking going pro, asking for advices, and got a lot of good responses. My experience as a cardcounter is very bleak (1 succesful week in LV), due to the lack of shoegames in Europe, where Im from. To be prepared for a long stay (6 months) in the US, I tried to perfect my game, learning as many indices as possible, with various rules, conditions etc. I have read practically EVERY post dating back to the early 2000s on this forum, and have tried to learn as much as possible. I have played 12 000 shoes (mostly 6D) on Norm W's excellent CV software, averaging about +0.9 units/shoe (due to mostly, wide spreads, optimistic rules, pen etc).
Then, the pandemic hit, and shattered (perhaps postponed is a better word) all my current plans. Since then, more time have been spent on studying, but also philosophizeing about the future of the great game of BJ21. This post does not take into account any possible changes that have been made after the corona virus made its entry around the world. When writing my first post I expressed my frustration about the lack of shoegames in Europe. You might get lucky to find a few here and there, but most places require ID when entering the casino, and they will quickly barr you when they find out youre playing a winning game. This is not America where the casinos are competing for customers. Many casinos are owned by the government, which all deploy the CSM's. In other words, no win-zone for a BJ cardcounter.
Or so I thought. Then I remembered when the CSM was brought up for debate on this forum about 5-6 years ago, initiated by Francis Salmon (Francis, where are you?). The debate was based upon this article: https://discountgambling.net/2012/07/27/counting-csm-blackjack-ev/
This topic seems to be picked up again, from time to time, and I can already hear all the experienced members sigh: "here we go again...". I do understand why experienced AP's dismiss the approach to beat the CSM, since the general consensus seems to be that the hourly wage is almost non-existent, while the RoR is skyrocketing, due to ridicilous spreads. Colin Jones from, Blackjack Apprenticeship, made this conclusion based on the article linked above, on youtube as well.
Allright, fair enough. I get why you would rather play shoegames. But as already mentioned, most non-american countries dont posess this luxury. So, during a visit in a major enterprise in Asia about 1.5 years ago I came to discover that there are several things that can be done to increase the EV to the window-counting approach. I will use the oppertunities that I was offered from this casino as my arguments for increased EV. My only problem is that I dont know by how much, and I was hoping someone here could help me run some simulations ( I dont have CVCX, but even if I did, I wouldnt know how to implement all the parameters, because I dont know their exact values).
1) The benchmark rules: While the author of the article linked above uses for 6D, H17, DAS, LS, RSA, giving the House Edge about 0.48%, the casino in question offered 6D, ENHC, S17, DAS, ES10 (surrender option against anything but the Ace), and OBO. This produces a House Edge of 0.33% using basic strategy. While the ENHC and ES10 is a rare rule in the US, this is quite common in many european and asian countries. Whats surprising to me, is that the playing efficiency seems to have been totally left out, by the author, when estimating the EV at various counts.
About the early surrender, Wong states in Professional blackjack, p90: "Early surrender is quite profitable for the cardcounter, adding $23 to the original benchmark ($16)...". Most of this whopping edge comes from surrendering vs A, which is, of course, NOT an available option in this case. Wong doesnt mention any particular gain for the cardcounter using ES10 only. Also some of the indices included, presented by Wong, will never come at hand when window-counting (Fex hard 17 and hard 12 vs 10 at +5 and +8 respectfully), due to the limited amounts of cards that can produce the count. Also, the low frequency of a high true count reduces the impact of these indices on the overall edge. But, some of the indices appear quite so often, most notably 14, 15 and 16 vs 10, and 15 and 16 vs 9.
Then, there are all the other indices, ranging from a TC=-3 to TC=+3, although, on a rare occasion, the delay of the cards put in the machine from the previous hand, combined with a wide layout of cards at the table could produce counts higher than that. I remember Fred Renzey adding something like 0.07% more EV for the use of his "Magnificent Seven" ranging from -1 to +1. Then there are a lot more, and I suppose all the I18 will come in handy at some point. On a last note on this subject, there sure must be more to gain learning another counting system than hi-lo, when it comes to playing efficiency when window-counting, as I believe playing efficiency gains more importance, due to more marginal spots.
2) Hand interaction: Having played a lot in Asia (though not strictly as an AP), this aspect of the game could potantially be a huge boost. This is where blackjack can turn into art, if you are a socially skilled individual, a mix of both the streeth hustler and the aristocrat. Maybe the whale at the table, with his max bet out, will sell you his blackjack for even money, because you, in the previous hand, stood pat with your hard 12 vs 2 and the dealer busted, because he advised you to? Maybe the chinese businessman who got 22 vs 6 wants to sell you one of his splits because he despises the number 4? There are infinite of oppertunities in a room full of rich, supersticious, asians. I once were offered to buy a $500 split of tens vs 6 from a drunk korean, because I knew the korean swearing word, ssibal. Oh well, I guess theres "nothing new under the sun", the hand-interaction-part is not exactly a brand new concept. However, it might be more effective in Asia than in the US, but I could be prejudiced ;) As for increased EV, its really hard to put out a number, but Renzey estimates on an average that "....for a basic strategist it could wipe out the entire house edge", in his Blackjack Bluebook II, though my past experiences tell me sky is the limit.
3) Comps: What I like the most about window-counting is that the pit personell are totally oblivious towards your play. Heat is absent. They could not care less about your results, and very few know anything about basic strategy. If anything they are sincerely cheering for you, hoping you would give a generous tip when finished. Nobody is breathing through their necks. The machine is unbeatable (supposedly). Now, I know nothing about comps, or how the management calculates these things, but I was given a 1 week's stay (junior suite) at their luxury resort for free, during my 3 weeks of play. These rooms costs $300 a night, though they are considered somewhat overpriced. I believe I played about 120 hours in total, but am having a hard time calculating my average bet. My minimum bet at a true 0 or below was $10, but things could escalate quickly when the running count went to +10 or more, placing $400 on two spots each. Furthermore, I accumulated a total of $500 in play-money bonus during those weeks, and a $200 foodcourt-coupon. In sum, I got comps worth of about $2800 in the course of 3 weeks and about 120 hours of play, leaving me with comps worth of $23/hour. Its hard to make anything of it without knowing my average bet, but lets assume the average bet was $100 (it was far less in reality). A basic strategist betting 100$/round will lose $40/hour, assuming being dealt 120 hands/hour (this is the benchmark for CSM rounds/hour), and thus by adding $23, cutting the expected loss by more than a half.
4) Miscelleaneous: Asia (pre-covid) is always growing. New-coming billionaires are pouring investments into third world countries with friendly governments. Giga-resorts are popping up, and so are the casinos. And so are the staff. Who do you hire when youre about to open a brand new casino demanding 3000 employees? Of course you hire the cheap labor, with no experience, and train them yourself. As for my first trip, when the casino, already mentioned, opened its doors, Im sure I experienced a dealer-error at least twice every hour, due to the poorly trained staff. This however, got better with time, but in general, a large enterprise of this scale are using their employees like an assembly line, and its evident its wearing them off. This can obviously be exploited.
Another point to be made, when playing the CSM, is the rate of speed, which are increased by 20% compared to its shoegame counterpart. Things go faster, and albeit your winrate is smaller than in a normal game, it will get you to the long run 20% faster as well. You can Wong in (as already mentioned in the article) and out as you please. Now, Im painfully aware that the Risk of Ruin formulas thats been advised in the classical litterature, does not exactly support the kind of spread one have to deploy in order to make window-counting a somewhat meaningful, profitable endeavor, let alone. The purpose of this post was to try to narrow the house edge down to such a level, that this kind of spread would not be necessary. I like to compare this discussion with the discussion whether 6:5 singledeck can be beat, if you have a lot of other perks coming your way. I remember Richard Munchkin mentioning in his podcast, "Gambling with an edge", that card counters are "...suffering somewhat from tunnel vision when entering the casino", and that they would be well-advised to think outside the box more often. So this is me trying to find a way around it.
I would guess that at least 90% of the members on this forum are americans, and you might not find this subject particularly interesting, since you have plenty of options for advantage play. I have to say though, that reading all the comments about how games are deteriorating in the US, the level of scrutinizing, heat, barrings, problems cashing out etc, does not sound very appealing for a newcomer like myself. I would prefer making less in a calmer environment. I hope some of the brilliant minds in here would like to share their thoughts upon the points listed above.
Then, the pandemic hit, and shattered (perhaps postponed is a better word) all my current plans. Since then, more time have been spent on studying, but also philosophizeing about the future of the great game of BJ21. This post does not take into account any possible changes that have been made after the corona virus made its entry around the world. When writing my first post I expressed my frustration about the lack of shoegames in Europe. You might get lucky to find a few here and there, but most places require ID when entering the casino, and they will quickly barr you when they find out youre playing a winning game. This is not America where the casinos are competing for customers. Many casinos are owned by the government, which all deploy the CSM's. In other words, no win-zone for a BJ cardcounter.
Or so I thought. Then I remembered when the CSM was brought up for debate on this forum about 5-6 years ago, initiated by Francis Salmon (Francis, where are you?). The debate was based upon this article: https://discountgambling.net/2012/07/27/counting-csm-blackjack-ev/
This topic seems to be picked up again, from time to time, and I can already hear all the experienced members sigh: "here we go again...". I do understand why experienced AP's dismiss the approach to beat the CSM, since the general consensus seems to be that the hourly wage is almost non-existent, while the RoR is skyrocketing, due to ridicilous spreads. Colin Jones from, Blackjack Apprenticeship, made this conclusion based on the article linked above, on youtube as well.
Allright, fair enough. I get why you would rather play shoegames. But as already mentioned, most non-american countries dont posess this luxury. So, during a visit in a major enterprise in Asia about 1.5 years ago I came to discover that there are several things that can be done to increase the EV to the window-counting approach. I will use the oppertunities that I was offered from this casino as my arguments for increased EV. My only problem is that I dont know by how much, and I was hoping someone here could help me run some simulations ( I dont have CVCX, but even if I did, I wouldnt know how to implement all the parameters, because I dont know their exact values).
1) The benchmark rules: While the author of the article linked above uses for 6D, H17, DAS, LS, RSA, giving the House Edge about 0.48%, the casino in question offered 6D, ENHC, S17, DAS, ES10 (surrender option against anything but the Ace), and OBO. This produces a House Edge of 0.33% using basic strategy. While the ENHC and ES10 is a rare rule in the US, this is quite common in many european and asian countries. Whats surprising to me, is that the playing efficiency seems to have been totally left out, by the author, when estimating the EV at various counts.
About the early surrender, Wong states in Professional blackjack, p90: "Early surrender is quite profitable for the cardcounter, adding $23 to the original benchmark ($16)...". Most of this whopping edge comes from surrendering vs A, which is, of course, NOT an available option in this case. Wong doesnt mention any particular gain for the cardcounter using ES10 only. Also some of the indices included, presented by Wong, will never come at hand when window-counting (Fex hard 17 and hard 12 vs 10 at +5 and +8 respectfully), due to the limited amounts of cards that can produce the count. Also, the low frequency of a high true count reduces the impact of these indices on the overall edge. But, some of the indices appear quite so often, most notably 14, 15 and 16 vs 10, and 15 and 16 vs 9.
Then, there are all the other indices, ranging from a TC=-3 to TC=+3, although, on a rare occasion, the delay of the cards put in the machine from the previous hand, combined with a wide layout of cards at the table could produce counts higher than that. I remember Fred Renzey adding something like 0.07% more EV for the use of his "Magnificent Seven" ranging from -1 to +1. Then there are a lot more, and I suppose all the I18 will come in handy at some point. On a last note on this subject, there sure must be more to gain learning another counting system than hi-lo, when it comes to playing efficiency when window-counting, as I believe playing efficiency gains more importance, due to more marginal spots.
2) Hand interaction: Having played a lot in Asia (though not strictly as an AP), this aspect of the game could potantially be a huge boost. This is where blackjack can turn into art, if you are a socially skilled individual, a mix of both the streeth hustler and the aristocrat. Maybe the whale at the table, with his max bet out, will sell you his blackjack for even money, because you, in the previous hand, stood pat with your hard 12 vs 2 and the dealer busted, because he advised you to? Maybe the chinese businessman who got 22 vs 6 wants to sell you one of his splits because he despises the number 4? There are infinite of oppertunities in a room full of rich, supersticious, asians. I once were offered to buy a $500 split of tens vs 6 from a drunk korean, because I knew the korean swearing word, ssibal. Oh well, I guess theres "nothing new under the sun", the hand-interaction-part is not exactly a brand new concept. However, it might be more effective in Asia than in the US, but I could be prejudiced ;) As for increased EV, its really hard to put out a number, but Renzey estimates on an average that "....for a basic strategist it could wipe out the entire house edge", in his Blackjack Bluebook II, though my past experiences tell me sky is the limit.
3) Comps: What I like the most about window-counting is that the pit personell are totally oblivious towards your play. Heat is absent. They could not care less about your results, and very few know anything about basic strategy. If anything they are sincerely cheering for you, hoping you would give a generous tip when finished. Nobody is breathing through their necks. The machine is unbeatable (supposedly). Now, I know nothing about comps, or how the management calculates these things, but I was given a 1 week's stay (junior suite) at their luxury resort for free, during my 3 weeks of play. These rooms costs $300 a night, though they are considered somewhat overpriced. I believe I played about 120 hours in total, but am having a hard time calculating my average bet. My minimum bet at a true 0 or below was $10, but things could escalate quickly when the running count went to +10 or more, placing $400 on two spots each. Furthermore, I accumulated a total of $500 in play-money bonus during those weeks, and a $200 foodcourt-coupon. In sum, I got comps worth of about $2800 in the course of 3 weeks and about 120 hours of play, leaving me with comps worth of $23/hour. Its hard to make anything of it without knowing my average bet, but lets assume the average bet was $100 (it was far less in reality). A basic strategist betting 100$/round will lose $40/hour, assuming being dealt 120 hands/hour (this is the benchmark for CSM rounds/hour), and thus by adding $23, cutting the expected loss by more than a half.
4) Miscelleaneous: Asia (pre-covid) is always growing. New-coming billionaires are pouring investments into third world countries with friendly governments. Giga-resorts are popping up, and so are the casinos. And so are the staff. Who do you hire when youre about to open a brand new casino demanding 3000 employees? Of course you hire the cheap labor, with no experience, and train them yourself. As for my first trip, when the casino, already mentioned, opened its doors, Im sure I experienced a dealer-error at least twice every hour, due to the poorly trained staff. This however, got better with time, but in general, a large enterprise of this scale are using their employees like an assembly line, and its evident its wearing them off. This can obviously be exploited.
Another point to be made, when playing the CSM, is the rate of speed, which are increased by 20% compared to its shoegame counterpart. Things go faster, and albeit your winrate is smaller than in a normal game, it will get you to the long run 20% faster as well. You can Wong in (as already mentioned in the article) and out as you please. Now, Im painfully aware that the Risk of Ruin formulas thats been advised in the classical litterature, does not exactly support the kind of spread one have to deploy in order to make window-counting a somewhat meaningful, profitable endeavor, let alone. The purpose of this post was to try to narrow the house edge down to such a level, that this kind of spread would not be necessary. I like to compare this discussion with the discussion whether 6:5 singledeck can be beat, if you have a lot of other perks coming your way. I remember Richard Munchkin mentioning in his podcast, "Gambling with an edge", that card counters are "...suffering somewhat from tunnel vision when entering the casino", and that they would be well-advised to think outside the box more often. So this is me trying to find a way around it.
I would guess that at least 90% of the members on this forum are americans, and you might not find this subject particularly interesting, since you have plenty of options for advantage play. I have to say though, that reading all the comments about how games are deteriorating in the US, the level of scrutinizing, heat, barrings, problems cashing out etc, does not sound very appealing for a newcomer like myself. I would prefer making less in a calmer environment. I hope some of the brilliant minds in here would like to share their thoughts upon the points listed above.
