holy crap, new respect for counters....

Well,
gotta tell you, i'm practicing the hi/lo system and I have found a new respect for the card counter. It is NOT AS EASY as one would think.

I'm pretty good with the addition/subtraction and keeping the running total. That seems to be the easy part to me, I'm fairly astute at "zeroing" out pairs and running the count quicly.

Here's the problem, one that many grueling hours may fix, we'll see: I've yet to make the association between the count and my probability of winning. I know the edge is there (mathmatically proven) however I am having a hard time "feeling" it, or "seeing" it.

I need to become more comfortable with knowing what is actually a good count, what is considered high. I'm able to calculate the true count quickly but it always comes down to betting spread and count. Hmmm. I'm working on it. I will say, even if I continue to play my progression system, having a count will make me feel better about doubling down or perhaps being conservative. I suppose card counting at it's roots is a well informed progression system. :)

Cheers,
major rookie learning the basics thanks to the seed you've all planted,
Mark

I'd recommend that you get some books and some software to help you along. I will unabashedly recommend my own book, Bootlegger's 200 Proof Blackjack, which is designed for beginners. I'd also recommend, for starters, Wong's Professional Blackjack and Schlesinger's Blackjack Attack. As for software, give Casino Verite a look.

There is no such thing as learning too much about counting. If you are going to play at even the nickel level, the investment in a few books and good software is well worth it.

Here's the problem, one that many grueling hours may fix, we'll see: I've yet to make the association between the count and my probability of winning. I know the edge is there (mathmatically proven) however I am having a hard time "feeling" it, or "seeing" it.

Your probability of winning in terms of the number of hands doesn't change much with the count, unless it gets pretty high. This is something a lot of folks may not understand. What happens is your probability of getting a blackjack with its 3:2 payoff increases, as well as your chances of making double down hands and splits. The dealer's chances of busting are also increased. Add these things up and that is where the advantage lies for counters.

Most people won't stay around long enough and put in the time and effort needed to learn to count. They start off like gang-busters, then realize that this thing will take some work. Laziness sets in and they slack off and head to the casinos thinking they know enough to beat them. They know just enough to be dangerous to themselves.

If you REALLY want to count, do what Boot suggests. Read his book and every other reputable AP book out there. Spend the money acquiring only the "best" books for your library and after you read them, read them again.

Then practice on the computer until you can't stand it any longer. Then practice some more.

Pick up a deck of cards and make sure you can count in down with NO errors in less than 30 seconds. You should even be able to tell what that last card is.

After about 4 or 5 months of doing the above, THEN, you may well be ready to actually count a live game.

Yes, there is NO easy way to anything...this game will test your mettle and your determination.

Regards,
PM

Most people fail because they can't commit big enough capital... you don't have experience and confidence so you use small capital, you win small and you are not satisfied so you overbet and go bankrupt...
On the other hand, many old hands don't win much because they underbet... they use 1 Kelly initially, then 1/2 Kelly when they double their bankroll, then 1/8 Kelly... then they diversify and use half bankroll on other "safer" investments such as stocks...

Your percentage of winning and losing hands changes relatively little as the count goes up and down. What happens in high counts is that your double downs are more likely to win, the dealer is more likely to bust, and, most important, the player is more likely to get blackjacks. The value and frequency of soft doubles goes up in high counts also.

Ideally you would want to trade blackjacks with the dealer back and forth. You get paid 3/2 and the dealer gets paid even money.

In negative counts the dealer is more likely to catch a small card to make their hand, double downs are less likely to make 21, and blackjacks are less frequent.

Finally, counting is not remotely like a "well informed progression". With counting you bet according to your edge. If you're not willing to jump your bet from your minimum bet directly to your maximum bet if the count calls for it you will be leaving a large chunk of your expected winnings on the table.

"What happens in high counts is that your double downs are more likely to win,"

True.

"the dealer is more likely to bust,"

Not true.

"and, most important, the player is more likely to get blackjacks."

True.

For the second one, if you had written that, "When the dealer shows 2-6, he is more likely to bust," then, surely, that is true. But, because the count is higher, the dealer shows a smaller percentage of these break cards than he normally would get, and, as a result, breaks slightly less frequently than in neutral counts, over all possible upcards.

Don

Bigplayer and I said the same thing about dealers busting more in high counts. I imagine we were both thinking of the qualifier, "when they have stiffs," but we didn't say it that way. I'd say it goes without saying, but that's a poor defense.

Wait a minute! Did I say it anyway? :-)

... at what count the dealer busts most at. I assume it is somewhere near zero.

<< ... at what count the dealer busts most at. I assume it is somewhere near zero. >>

Mr. Wong has a post with detailed info on this subject in the Green Chip archives.

Try the bottom chart here:
http://www.blackjackincolor.com/useless2.htm

I'd say -2 looks about the highest.

Don

Glad to see that you've finally come around. What you need to look at is a complete system. Send an e-mail to moll345@aim.com.

Knowing the overall bust probability of the dealer doesn't bring you any practical benfit. I mean, you wouldn't attack at -2 on the grounds that the dealer is most likely to bust.
I think the bust rates for low and high upcards should be treated separately.When the dealer busts with a card higher than six, it doesn't always help you.Many times you will have busted before him since you tried to get a score of at least 17. Also, even if you stay in the game, very often you don't care whether the dealer busts since you can beat him on points.You actually wish him a ten when he has a 7 up.
On the other hand, when the dealer busts with a low card you get the full benefit,especially in high counts since you avoid hitting your stiffs and in most cases you have a lot of money on the table because you split and double at hearts content.

Francis Salmon

Rather than Bootlegger's "get some books" (which is good advice of course) I would say "get some software". Notably Qfit's CVBJ. Then practice. You will discover that the more you play, with CVBJ nagging you incessantly every time your bet is not appropriate to the count, the better your betting to count correlation becomes. And before you know it, you will be pushing out the right bet without really thinking about how you know that....

but it takes practice, and it is far cheaper to practice at your computer rather than at a real table, although the latter is necessary as well.

Wow

I have been counting for years, and always assumed that the reasoning behind counting was that the dealer was more likely to bust on high counts even with face cards up because just one stray is more likely to cause a bust sandwich. When I would stand on 16 against a 10 at +1 I was thinking yea but the dealer is more likely to bust. I think I have been doing it right because I follow the books, but I guess I misunderstood the theory. Shows how smart I am, at least I can follow instructions though (duh) so I guess it didn't cost me any money

"Wow. I have been counting for years, and always assumed that the reasoning behind counting was that the dealer was more likely to bust on high counts even with face cards up because just one stray is more likely to cause a bust sandwich."

Nope. Just not true. Lots of reasons why counting gives the player the edge, but that simply isn't one of them!

"When I would stand on 16 against a 10 at +1"

Not zero??

"I was thinking yea but the dealer is more likely to bust."

Nope.

"I think I have been doing it right because I follow the books, but I guess I misunderstood the theory."

Yes, I'm afraid you did. But, now you know.

"Shows how smart I am, at least I can follow instructions though (duh) so I guess it didn't cost me any money."

No, it didn't. You played properly, and that's the main thing.

Don

Thanks Don!