Counting in the UK

Hi Folks

I've recently caught the counting bug, having drifted into it from my work in magic and mind reading. I'm in the UK and wondered if there are any fellow brits out there - would love a few contacts as info on counting in this country is hard to come by. Would also love to hear from anybody involved with magic and metalism who also counts.

I also have a question..With the fairly lousy rules in this country and six decks as standard I figure wonging is the only way to play here. If I play two holes a time when i wong in can I count this as two independant events? i.e. I'm doubling the number of hands I'm playing without increasing my risk of ruin? or, because the hands a re linked through the dealers up card, they are not independant and therfore my risk increases?

My guess is somewhere between the two - if so is there an optimum number of holes to play on each round that would increase my win rate without seriously affect my ROR?

Many thanks

E.Coli

I've recently caught the counting bug, having drifted into it from my work in magic and mind reading. I'm in the UK and wondered if there are any fellow brits out there - would love a few contacts as info on counting in this country is hard to come by. Would also love to hear from anybody involved with magic and metalism who also counts.

I'm guessing Derren Brown got you interested. Be aware that his casino work was riddled with misdirection and selective editing-he is a magician after all. His techniques just don't work the way he makes out-not that mentalism can't be applied successfully in the casino.

I also have a question..With the fairly lousy rules in this country and six decks as standard I figure wonging is the only way to play here. If I play two holes a time when i wong in can I count this as two independant events? i.e. I'm doubling the number of hands I'm playing without increasing my risk of ruin? or, because the hands a re linked through the dealers up card, they are not independant and therfore my risk increases?

They are not independent and therefore your risk does increase. Obviously, if the dealer has a blackjack everyone either loses or ties, so you can see intuitively there is a relationship between hands. As you say, the dealer's cards are the linking factor.

Btw our rules aren't that lousy any more with the general decline of blackjack in the US and on the continent.

My guess is somewhere between the two - if so is there an optimum number of holes to play on each round that would increase my win rate without seriously affect my ROR?

That is correct. The answer is not obvious because while you reduce the risk with multiple hands, you are also eating cards up in positive counts. You might take a look at Schlesinger's Blackjack Attack for an understanding of this-also look in the GC archives if you want to sign up, this issue has been done to death there.

I have about decided to give up on gambling books anyway, except for a couple of good "reference-type" books. My wife recently bought a "casino gambling" book recommended by my sister-in-law. Covered most casino games, and I was skimming through it to find out some info about non-BJ games, just for fun. Got to the roulette section and almost threw up.

Guy was describing the martengale betting ramp, and pointed out that if you start at $5, you go to 10, 20, 40, 80, 160, 320, 640 and at a $1000 table max you are done, plus you are out a lot of money if you lose 9 consecutive plays. Then he uncorks the most amazing thing I have ever heard. He writes "the odds of losing 9 consecutive plays is XXX". But if you want to improve your odds significantly, watch the wheel and wait for some "bet" (say red or black) to lose three times in a row. Then make your first bet and if you lose, that is 4 in a row already. The odds of your getting to your $640 bet are now much lower since the odds of 9 consecutive losses is much higher than the odds of 12 consecutive losses. Same idea of flipping a coin until you get 4 heads in a row and then you start to bet on tails, knowing that a "tail" is due after so many heads...

I expected him to write that if you waited for 15 consecutive losses on red, before you bet, that you are now betting on a sure thing. At this point, I put the book by the fireplace. Wife asked "what is this doing over here?" Said "next time we build a fire, that's going to be used to light it..."

I won't post the name unless someone is interested.

I had never before realised that you were a fellow brit.

Is the GBV some kinda referance to Ray Reardon ? LOL

You play oop north or dan sarf ?

Thanks for the advice, I will check out the archives and the book you mentioned.

It was seeing the Derren Brown casino stuff that got me interested, and don't worry I've been doing mentalism long enough not to get sucked in by Mr. Brown - great routine though

It was seeing the Derren Brown casino stuff that got me interested, and don't worry I've been doing mentalism long enough not to get sucked in by Mr. Brown - great routine though

Yeah sorry, didn't mean to patronize you. Should have been obvious from the questions you were asking.

Actually, Brown's second casino sequence where he demonstrated his shuffling(-tracking) abilities indicates he certainly does have the ability to pull off advanced techniques in a casino. That card counting sequence was just bullshit, though. That is part of the fun I guess, working out which bit is true and which is false. He is a chimera of charlatanism and sceptical wisdom.

I had never before realised that you were a fellow brit.

Is the GBV some kinda referance to Ray Reardon ? LOL

Yeah, great film. Kinda AP related in a way. Actually a dealer gave me the handle because I used to "bleed" her chip tray dry of red chips when I was barely out of college. I guess she'd just seen the flick.

You play oop north or dan sarf ?

Sarf, mate:) (Any snide comments from Northerners here will get directed to some of my friends in the local football "firm", believe me they ain't soft).

If you've got that routine on DVD have a good look at those "shuffles" he peforms...