Card Counters beware...

...I feel obligated to pose thee fair warning that the following post will not be pleasant to read for some, those who have a reverence for the old school, its masters, their thoughts and traditions. Note that it won't be obscene or anything like that and is actually meant for general audiences, but is just cuts across the grain of too many of our core beliefs and challenges us to re-evaluate our notions about the game.

I don't know what to say as there is no easy to way to say this but I will try to temper my words, however I do not wish to dull their meanings, nor have them fall on blunt ears.

Please do not get me wrong or misconstrue my words, but listen carefully to what I have to say within their correct contexts as I will try to write them as I sincerely mean no offense to anybody and really to critize is really a form of endearment and flattery, worship of the highest order.

Okay here we go, while I do have the utmost respect for the pioneers of the study of blackjack I do believe their is one fatal flaw in their research findings. Most of them are dead or soon will be notably Julian Bruan has recently passed away, god rest his soul. Lawrence Revere has been deceased for some time now along with the great Ken Uston. I do also believe that Dr. Peter Griffin has regretfully passed away as well, and all the others including shall I name Dr. Edward Thorp who started this whole thing, Stanford Wong who was born in 1943, Jerry Patterson who opened the first blackjack training school back in the late 1970's, Stanley Roberts, Darwin Ortiz who played professional for a while, Lance Humble, maybe Arnold Snyder and Ian Anderson who all made serious money among the other notables have all retired or have found alternate means of exploiting the game and making money, namely that of publication, web posting sites and other things of the sort, but they are not taking that money from the casinos only the aspiring players who don't seem to win any more or less than the average Joe.

I am somewhat aware of more recent figures such as Bryce Carlson and his fame and fortune, but let's face it he probably made more money writing his book and selling his system than he ever did at playing the game even if he did win big. I can't help but allude to a statement made in a book I have read saying that the only people who actually make money off gambling and blackjack books in particular are the writers and perhaps the publishers, but certainly NOT the players who are the sole readers. Could it be that blackjack is smiply a game of chance where skill has very little effect? After all blackjack is gambling, an age old practice.

I am not sure, but presently do not believe that any of the players previously mentioned could still win consistently with the playing conditions of today. Call me pessimistic, but the casinos aren't stupid. If we can read the books, they can read the books, after all isn't it their business? And something they know how to run very well?

I don't know how to express this, but is blackjack still a beatable game worth the risk, cost and trouble of playing, not to mention the countless hours of practice and studying to actually be capable of making that miniscule profit? I think not and now in a way feel I have wasted my time with foolish dreams. Is this the case, or would I be wrong? Due to ignorance or some other factor? Skepticism, cynicism
pessimism or what, I need to know before I can confidently proceed with my studies assured in my knowledge and chances of winning a game which can actually be beaten for profit and enjoyment. If not I shall give up all ambitions and look to something else convinced of the fact that it is simply impossible to win in the long term. Because
frankly I am not that lucky and can't stand to count on it alone.

It would be much appreciated if you would kindly answer my requests and keep me dealt in the game. I do wish though that you be as straight forward as possible and give me only the facts, your own personal opinions that you adamantly believe in and stand behind firmly and justify their reasons. I do not mean to make this a tiresome excercise or some tedious chore, but I need to be absolutely sure before continuing on.

What are the rules of the game, have they changed drastically in the past years? Is it still possible to win under these conditions, and how likely is that occurance? What are the current trends in the game, is it in decline ? Has anything been done to favor the player, how about his comfort to offset the heat coming from the pit? In my mind all these factors need be taken under consideration before a wise decision can be made, if not you may as well give your money away which may be exactly what we are doing if we are not careful.

shorterm-luck, longterm-skill...

the skill allows you to play with an edge...

given a large BR the casino cleans the tables in the long run with a small edge (large enough obviously),

the player is just turning the tables to his advantage, giving him the edge...if he keeps this edge, then longterm he will almost definately make money...

the casino plays by probability and statistics, and makes money. why cant the player???

it's still beatable...but no candy store. Takes lots of hours of play generally to have a good chance of being ahead and some will be much further ahead than others due to good luck. People still make money (and a living) off of blackjack everyday but most advantage players are not blackjack players but instead play a variety of games.

Most play craps, slots, blackjack, tournaments, videopoker, hold-em, 3C Poker, comp abusing, internet bonus hunt, sports betting, coupon hustling, EBay trading, etc, .

The learning curve from ploppy to casual player is not very long or steep, but to get from casual player to become a players who is a serious longterm threat to the casinos is much much more difficult.

At this moment in time, there are very few advantage players who make their living solely from blackjack. Just about every pro out there has his or her fingers in more than one pot, and is searching for ways to find the advantage in other games. Many of them hardly ever play blackjack anymore.

Gambling is not a career I would ever recommend to a young person who is smart enough to find a way to make a living doing it. Odds are, with the proper education, such a person could make a better living by getting into any number of "straight" occupations or fields.

This is nothing new. Most of the authors you mentioned never made blackjack a lifetime career. Stanford Wong, who is the one I know personally, will tell you that he could have probably made quite a bit more money if he had pursued business instead of blackjack. I would strongly encourage you to get a good solid education and find a career that suits it. If you want to be an advantage player, do it on the side. It can be a good extra income and can be rewarding in many ways, but as a career, it is a high-risk proposition at best. Don't let dreams about becoming a high-rolling gambler get in the way of a good education and establishing a solid career in a more rewarding field.

I am a net winner at blackjack (maybe only about even if expenses are factered in) but about certain I will never play seriously again because of my personal makeup and situation. It is not for everyone.

However, the fact many "names" no longer play does not mean a thing and I get tired of hearing that refrain as part of the argument that advantage gambling does not pay. The realities of grinding out things out in a hostile environment often around unpleasant people playing a game one knows so well it is ultimately boring is grim. Most of the time I have a good time at my real job which is about as lucretive so why should I take on a job that is not as much fun? The "names" are in similar situations whether it be Bryce Carlson in a computer management job the last I heard or Stanford dealing in web pages and publication sales or Thorp dealing in securities.

But these observations do not deny there is a niche for the pro. The three pros I know fairly well from web pages (two of whom I have met personally) have good lives too and I am happy for them. I'm walking through a casino with a pro having a comped breakfast on him and he stops at a quarter slot which has a progressive feature he picks up in a glance. He takes out a couple of quarters and hits seven or eight dollars on the second quarter and says "Well, there is the tip." It was cool as hell. But much of the life is not cool.

If games are tougher you have to get smarter. But advantage play is advantage play and money can be made whether it is at blackjack, promotions, on line bonuses, or whatever. The trick is in recognizing the advantage. One more person sitting down at a decently cut double deck game might cut the advantage in half or any obscure thing can have effects and you cannot miss such things just as my friend did not miss a slot ready to pay. Advantages remain but you have to be mighty good to exploit them enough to be a pro.

This thread reminds me of that old Steve Martin gag, how to have a million dollars and pay no taxes. Step one: get a million dollars...

I would proffer that a young fellow with the bankroll and quantitative skills to be a successful BJ pro would be better off investing the bankroll in a Wharton MBA. The other thing he might consider is a different game -- like basketball, which requires less of a bankroll, and plus chicks dig basketball players almost as much as they dig AP's.

I knew one full time pro very well. He had a $30,000 bankroll and played mostly DD. He averaged about $30.00 / hour playing. He traveled a lot. He was one of the smartest guys I ever knew, but very eccentric. At the time I was spending time with him we were playing DD games with penetration so deep the the dealer ran out of cards on occassion. Generally, about 15 cards were cut off. We also knew of several single pass shuffles for 6 deck games and a 1 deck game that was s17, DD 9, 10, 11, DAS. The dealer would deal as deep as she could without running out of cards. Presently, these conditions no longer exist anywhere that I know. The majority of DD games are 50% penetration or less, shuffles are complicated, Single deck games are red chip games and have poor rules. A $30,000 bankroll could probably make about $10.00/hour these days. This guy had an opportunity to join a team. He declined because he felt the amount he had to bet would get him barred everywhere quickly. Then the team would just get another player and he would no longer have a job.

Bert

If you're in it strictly for the money, let alone trying to make a living from it, I'd say forget it.

Neko

...and much of what you say is true, but you can do significantly better than $10.00 hour with a $30k bankroll, especially if you play mostly pitch games.

BTW, Thorp is alive, and many of the old school masters you list still beat blackjack for big money. That doesn't mean you can do it. It doesnt mean you should do it, even if you can.

ETF

I didn't understand your post. The subject line made it sound like professional gamblers do not pay taxes.

This is a very popular misconception. Many people think gambling incomes "under the table" and not reported, This is a slander against APs.

All of the professional BJ players I know pay taxes. All of the semi-professional players I know (i.e. those whose "day jobs" are their primary source of income") pay taxes. Personally, on my BJ earning I pay I pay US income tax, State of Michigan Income Tax, FICA tax, Medicare Tax, and City of Detroit Non-Resident Income Tax.

I may have misunderstood your post, and if so, I apologize.

I think TampaDave was merely expressing how hard it is to get a bankroll sufficient for professional play when he used the quote from the old joke. I don't think he meant to imply that professional gamblers don't pay their taxes.

I would like to thank any and all persons for their responses, your comments have proved to be very helpful.

Thank You!

ACDuC

I applaud your scepticism, and mostly agree with your post, but I want to correct the fallacy that blackjack authors are all rolling in cash.

Bryce's book sells almost exactly the same amount as mine does. In which case, extrapolating from my sales figures and the extra time bj for blood has been on sale, he's probably made around $10,000 in royalties. Some error is involved in that estimate, but not that much. Its very unlikely he netted more than $30,000. Not bad for a hobby but not enough to live off over the best part of a decade. Im virtually certain his bj profits make that figure pale in comparison, by all accounts he was very successful as a player.

It is just a myth you can make more money writing about blackjack than playing it. You can make more money publishing blackjack books, like Snyder and Wong do, because then you get 100% of profits rather than 15% royalties, but then you take on a massive risk of business failure that a card counter would balk at. You can also write many, many books about gambling (not just blackjack) and make money that way, as Scoblete and Tamburin do, but that is something else again.

I think that the post in very interesting, and must be answered in detail. I feel the same, and i don't know what i must to do. In my country are only games with 6 or 8 decks. And all the histories are about singles or doubles deck games.
I am very pessimistic about. ? i am

I do the same question of the original post, but referred only to 6 &8 decks.

Are somebody beating this???
Are those games suitable for profits????
some of you play those games with success??? using which methods??

a will appreciate the answers form you.

THKS in advance, and sorry my english, a am only a poor argentinian guy.

Depending on rules and pen, 6D & 8D games are beatable. You pretty much need to backcount. Also, you may be able to find some trackable shuffles.

By the way, were you on a temporary assignment in Chicago, Illinois at this time last year. Just curious whether you are someone that I know.

Here is my long winded opinion:
blah-blah-blah blah-blah-blah
I have never actually played blackjack in a casino, but here is what I think:
blah-blah-blah blah-blah-blah
In fact, I'm not even old enough to get in a casino, but here is what I think:
blah-blah-blah blah-blah-blah
Even if I could get in a casino, I have no bankroll, but here is what I think:
blah-blah-blah blah-blah-blah
I have never experienced the big losses or big wins, or any of the other distractions that occur in the casino world, but here is what I think:
blah-blah-blah blah-blah-blah
In fact, I can't actually count cards on any level, but here is what I think:
blah-blah-blah blah-blah-blah

Thanks for your input.

...This joke, which is very poplular in business school right now, is not really about taxes, it is about assuming away all your problems.

Seems like sometimes, people assume away all the problems they are likely to encounter on the way toward going pro in blackjack. No offense was intended at all; in fact you could (and should!) take it as a compliment, since the point was, as others have pointed out, that it takes a lot of talent and hard work, and a certain amount of careful financial planning to be a successful AP, let alone a pro.

Revere's book makes a big deal about how you really don't have to be some sort of genius to learn how to count. And that's true. But I would proffer that being a genius is never necessary or sufficient to make it in life. Successful people have a certain drive and focus, and a type of courage that's difficult to quantitate but is definitely real. I suspect that's why we see so many successful authors and doctors and bond traders and math professors on this forum...

so true.counting is only a small part.imho,your act is more important than your ability to count.