Card counting today

A successful card counter must now be capable of flying under the casino's radar. You can no longer get away with playing basic strategy and a 5-1 spread at a 2 deck game. The purpose of counting is mainly to help you make the best decision, and to get the player's disadvantage as close to zero as possible before worrying about how much I want to raise my bet in a + count. When the count is + you push as much into the circle as the traffic will bear. Every mistake in your decision will force you to ramp up your bet that much more, increasing your risk of ruin and your odds of a tap on the shoulder. You want to maximize your rate of return while reducing your risk of ruin, and at the same time not getting the attention of eye in the sky. I want to be able to spread 2-1 or 3-1 at a good 2 deck game and make a worthwhile profit.

True count tables at www.1stbooks.com
Search Title: True count tables

Or a sermon?

More like a sermon. I posted an "ad" on the books/software page and posted this message here because it is what I believe. I put the link to the book on the bottom because I've seen others do it and thought it would be OK. If it's not I won't do it again.
But getting back to the original point. A sermon is required because I see blackjack authors tell their readers it is OK to spread 5-1 in a hand held game, which is guaranteed to bring countermeasures and/or barring. So what they are selling you is a system that will work IF you are allowed to play it, but since you are NOT then it's a useless system, wouldn't you say? My point is that nowadays if you are a card counter you have to "fly under the radar" and not attract attention. One way to do this is to learn every single index number that you can so that you never make a wrong decision at the table. Every mistake or incorrect decision that a counter makes is that much more he must ramp up his bet in high counts to make up for it.

And you are not going to raise the PE by much with fancy charts etc. I use 180+ indexes, and I find more gains from the cover involved, than any real gains.

Most indexes are good enough.

Better indexes is pretty much meaningless, in that there is little penalty for index rounding errors.

So forget about New super accurate indexes suddenly making it possible to live on 1 to 2, to 1 to 3 in double deck games.

Now if he had been talking about flashers and bangers, (dealers who show hole cards, dealers who are rough putting them in the readers, respectively) he might have a point on surviving 1 to 2.

So forget magic indexes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The lower your spread, the less your risk of ruin and the less your chances of barring. Every error you make will cost you advantage, and force you to raise your wagers that much more in a + count. You may not raise your PE by "much" (whatever that means) but every penny counts. Benjamin Graham (the man Warren Buffet called the #1 influence on his life outside of his father) said his #1 rule of investing is : Don't lose money! (rule #2 was don't forget rule #1) If you are going to tell people that it is OK to accept errors in their play then they might as well split 5s like John Patrick. A serious counter should tolerate NO errors in his play. I use 270 extremely accurate numbers and can survive with a 2-1 spread at 2 decks (S17, doa, das) and can destroy them at 3-1. If you can find a "flasher" or a "banger" then go for it, but I want to be able to have an advantage at any table I walk up to, and not be accused of cheating by the casino (maybe it isn't cheating but you can't tell that to the pit boss that's for sure).

...Blackjack Attack, how far do I go on for why this more firepower argument fails?

Don this guy NEEDS your venom!!!!

indexes are only 1/5 of your profits in a double-deck game. That is with huge index use.

18 indexes give you 80% of the profit of the 20% gain possible thru variation from basic strategy.

So you think by limiting your spread (and giving up a portion of 80% of your profit potential) is going to be made up by improving on the untouched 20% of the 20%?

Say I bother to memorize that I should hit hard 14 vs 6 at -9.
A -9 count is going to occur about 1 out of 1000 hands. And what do I have bet at -9 (if I am stupid enough to play at all)? 1 unit. So by improving my play on a 1 unit bet that occurs once a month - that is going to make up for the 100 times I get a BJ with 3 units bet instead of 5?

Don't know where you play that you can only safely spread 1:3 in double deck, I typically spread 1:10 with no problem in double deck.
I use about 50 indexes, but that is only because I know them, I realize that only 20 of them are actually making the money.

Why the heck would I want to bet so low when I can get away with more. And what does it matter if I know the index where staying on 12 vs a 10 (or something else that never happens)? Plus even if you do make a mistake and lose a bet, you have lost that bet in the short run, but in the long run if you're not that far off from what you make an educated guess the right move is, your loss won't be that big of a factor. I go with the big 18 indexes, and I've thrown in about 10-15 more using Advanced Omega II. By the way, I've only been accused of counting once, but that's because I was spreading from 1-16 units on a single deck game at a place where they deal very very deeply into the deck.

"Don this guy NEEDS your venom!!!!"

Clarke, you actually brought a smile to my face with that one! :-)

But, I'm going to pass and let you guys handle it.

Don

Sorry if you think perfection is a character flaw. Why is the gambling world more tolerant than elsewhere of the lazy and those who don't want to put out the extra effort? If you were building a house and you needed a piece of wood 12 feet long, if it was "only" a few inches short would you say "it's only 1% off"? If so you'll end up with a house that is not square and level. You use index numbers so apparently they are of some use to you, so why would you tell someone else that they are not necessary?? Maybe most people don't want to do the hours of simulations to get them, nor do they want to use Wong's truncated and approximate numbers. That is why my friend is selling these charts.

>>>So you think by limiting your spread (and giving up a portion of 80% of your profit potential) is going to be made up by improving on the untouched 20% of the 20%?

20% of 20% is 4%. If you are willing to throw away 4% because you're lazy, then you can sit in the back of the bus with John Patrick and the rest of the ploppies.

>>>Say I bother to memorize that I should hit hard 14 vs 6 at -9.
A -9 count is going to occur about 1 out of 1000 hands.

It DOES happen. And you better be prepared when it does.

>>>And what do I have bet at -9 (if I am stupid enough to play at all)? 1 unit.

1 unit is 1 unit. Again you don't seem too concerned with throwing money away... after all it's "just 1 unit". And, there may be times where you are forced to play a hand while the count is negative. Sometimes there may be only 1 or 2 tables where you are playing, or you may end up stuck with a - count after the hand has been dealt. You can't walk away in the middle of a hand because "the count went down and I don't feel like playing".

>>>Don't know where you play that you can only safely spread 1:3 in double deck, I typically spread 1:10 with no problem in double deck.

10-1 spread in a 2 deck game? Do you believe in Santa Claus too? I'll tell you flat out, if you claim to get 1-10 spread at 2 decks without heat I say you're full of it. Try that stunt in the President in Biloxi and they'll throw you out so fast you won't know whether you're coming or going.

>>>I use about 50 indexes, but that is only because I know them, I realize that only 20 of them are actually making the money.

I use about 270 index numbers, and while there are some that I may never use, I know for a fact that I'll never get caught with my pants down.

Dear Mr. Jackass:
12 vs a 10 will always hit. There is no index number for that (but if the count gets extremely high you will surrender it). But I know that (and I'm not guessing) because I have the tables.

>>>"If you are going to tell people that it is OK to accept errors in their play then they might as well split 5s like John Patrick."

>>>I don't know anyone who advocates splitting fives including John Patrick.

I never said that anyone advocated splitting 5s. I said that if you are going to tolerate errors in your play then you might as well do that. Like I said before, I'm sorry if you consider perfection to be a character flaw, but that's just the way we are.

>>>Now if he had been talking about flashers and bangers, (dealers who show hole cards, dealers who are rough putting them in the readers, respectively)

I'm NOT talking about "flashers" or "bangers" or "wheezers" or whatever. These things are what we call "gaming impurities", that is, they are considered cheating by the casinos and doing these things gives the casino hard evidence to bar you. We have no interest in any strategies that involve such impurities. Look at that Grosjean guy, he was doing this stuff and his friend was walking around with a stack of fake ID's (a definite no-no after 9-11) and got himself arrested. While he may be right and he's suing now, he still had to deal with spending 4 days sharing a toilet with some unpleasant people, and now he's most likely barred from every casino from here to Kabul. So what good is his flashing and banging doing him now? None. In fact my partner was accused of marking cards at Boomtown, but since he wasn't (and the eye in the sky proved it) he filed a complaint with the Miss State Gaming Commission, and ended up getting an apology and a comped meal for his trouble.

>>>Don this guy NEEDS your venom!!!!

You stick with the venom, I'll stick with the facts, and I'll win. Venom is the first sign of a losing argument, and I refuse to allow you to drag me into a fight.

....than 4%. Like didn't that occur to you???

Really if you are going to do this the time for it is long, long, long past. Paul Keen and I used to sell algebraic indexes by using either my Atari 1200XL, or my first IBM PC, to do calculate them, and then print them out on the thermal printer of a Timex-Sinclair 1000 (and an RS-232 adapter I actually had for it) I also used to keep around. We would sell the thermal rolls for $15.

Naturally, it being Las Vegas, most people would then leave them in their cars and the thermal paper would turn all black, and then they would be back at GBC, talking to Paul, "hey can you get back with Clarke Cant and get me another copy?"

Your advertizing and posting in no way matches what ANY of the regulars here already can do, and is not even in any way as good as the stunts Paul and I used to pull.

If you can only spread 1-3 in a double deck game, you do not need more indices.

You need to work on your act!

A proposition: You continue to play double deck games with your 1-3 spread and 270 precise indices. I will continue with my 25 or so indices and my 1-6 spread (1-8 when I can get away with it).

After a year, whomever earns the least must pay the winner an amount equal to the winner's earnings.

What do you say?

Snyder has alredy been playing the religion of blackjack bit for several years.

So if it is purification you need.....rge21.com