Camouflage cost

Many card counters will normally lower their bet at the beginning of each shoe no matter what their last bet was. Can someone calculate the cost of the camouflage technique of not lowering your bet between shoes? I assume that never lowering your bet until you lose a hand would be even more costly. The BJ scenario I was thinking about was double deck, $25, 1-5 spread.

need to run a simulation for the exact cost, it's far more costly on double deck than shoes (more shuffles per hour played).

My other thought was that you're using a narrow $25-$125 spread at double deck which is barely enough to beat the game in the first place, and is relatively low stakes, why would you even think about using any cover.

Bet $25 when you don't have an edge, bet $50 at +2, $100 at +3, and $150 at +4. Play like a robot. (It's never good to bet $75 or $125 in the game of blackjack, it slows the game down by making blackjack payoffs more time consuming and insurance wagers more difficult).

You can get excellent information on playing and betting from Blackjack Attack 3 chapter 7.

Your nice bit of information about not betting $75 or $125 makes perfect sense and I would have never thought about that. Thanks so much. So I guess $80 is better, for instance? Also, using your line of reasoning, wouldn't a $25 bet make blackjack payoffs more time consuming as well?

Bigplayer,

Thank you for always being willing to answer question. Your answers are always insightfuland and accurate. I apprecite the meaningful input you bring to the forum.

Thank You,
Wantabe

Thanks big player for the info. I just got backed off playing this spread. I wanted to know the cost to help extend my play. Knowing the cost, I may play a bigger spread like you suggested.

25-150 spread (1-6) No Cover , 55% penetration s17 ds double deck, Ideal Ramp $25 at +1 or less, $50 at +2, $100 at +3, $150 at +4

Edge 0.67%, Win/100 $25.82 SCORE 17.73

25-150 spread (1-6) Cover always leave previous shoe final bet out at the shuffle if the previous hand won. No decreasing bet after a loss

Edge 0.56%, Win/100 $23.84, SCORE 12.38

Avg Bets in negative adv or small + adv situations due to sometimes betting more than the ideal $25

+1 TC $33.00
0 TC $32.25
-1 TC $27.75
-2 TC $26.00
-3 TC $25.25

Summary
Costs you about $2 of your win rate per 100 hands played (about 10%) but due to the increased flux due to bigger betting your SCORE drops by a much greater margin.

Either way, spreading 1-6 on a 55% double deck game even with s17 ds rules is a bad bad game. SCORE of $18 is horrendous even for the no cover approach. Generally you need a SCORE of $35-$50 to be barely acceptable, $50-$70 SCORE would be good, and $70 or higher would be very good, and $100 or higher would be heaven.

Wow. I guess I will need to re-evaluate the games I'm playing and the spread. Thank you very much for your efforts and insightful info.

I never bet the minimum "off the top"