I think Mr. Wong is WRONG....

in saying that we can play better with his counting ideas in playing 8 deck BJ (= running count/# of remaing decks). I actually read through his book and tried playing with his strategy tables for the 8 deck BJ (in famous software program, a couple of thousands rounds) and kept ending up with POORER results than when I do according to simple basic strategy or progressive betting idea.

It tended to work well only when I play with 1~2 deck games though. In conclusion, I think his book is useless in most of today's casinos which mostly offer 6~8 deck BJ games. I'm also dubious whether he really came out with advantageous simulation results as in his book, for this kind of multi-deck situations.

Could Mr. Wong or any of his followers want to argue against this or explain please? Thank you.

please don't make a ass of yourself.

buccaneer

Would you mind helping me and explaining, please? Thank you.

Stanford Wong has perhaps forgotten more than you will ever know about blackjack.

I would suggest a calmer tone in your subject line, dump the upper case when challenging someone of his caliber...you'll only get dissed, BIG TIME!

You seem too uneducated in the field for any type of argument. Have you taken any type of college level statistics course? This would be a good start for you. Without some basic knowledge in the field you will not understand what anyone here is talking about. Study up and come back and try again.

, but if anybody could read Mr. Jerry Patterson's "BlackJack", you'll get the similar idea about 8 deck BJ and problem with counting (you don't have to buy, go to Barnes and Noble for a little review). I agree with Mr. Patterson on this part.

Would anybody please give me some response on the results or comments on counting for multi-deck?

I am a top college graduate and curently at Ivy League graduate school, and got an A grade in statistics. Would you please also comment on my word above on the Mr. Jerry Patterson's logic on the problem of multi-deck counting?

First, counting does work better in 1 and 2 deck games...that is why they are so rare. 8 deck games are pretty difficult to play and win against which is why you see them all over the main floor of casinos in AC and Vegas. You've got to keep moving from table to table to have any decent shot at comming out a winner over a decnt number of hours. If you're getting mediocre penetration, playing-all through shoe after shoe, not spreading your bets widely enough, and playing only 1 spot at a time you are essentially just shuffling money around as your game is producing much more variance than eV and the number of hours of play required to have a decent shot at breaking even or being ahead is gigantic.

Suggestions for playing 8 deck games...get good penetration....at worst 6.5 decks dealt out of 8 and preferably as close to 7 decks dealt out of 8 as possible. (Contrary to popular belief, 75% pen, which is a playable game at six deck is unplayable at 8 deck). If you're only getting 6/8 dealt you're playing an almost unbeatable game. You will also need to spread very big AND refuse to play in negative counts. In otherwords, if you're just sitting there playing through shoe after shoe it is no wonder that you're getting clobbered.

is misguided and totally incorrect in most respects.

He is just trolling guys. He is trying to get a rise out of everyone. Throwing Patterson's name in put it a bit over the top.

It appears the majority of people question the integrity (purpose) of your comments. I agree with them, however I will give you the benifit of the doubt and address some of what you said.

If you've really played a couple thousand rounds mixing Basic Strategy, Progressive Betting, and HiLo Counting - you don't have near enough data to make any conclusions!

If your software is truely a "famous" program then set it up to analize the various systems - don't play them yourself! It will take too long and you will make mistakes - esp. if you don't understand all aspects of play (counting, betting, indicies, etc.).

One thing you'll notice about Professional Blackjack is the numbers are there, for you and anyone else to check the conclusions. Or get a real application and run the numbers.

Whatever you do, don't be a smart ass novice trying to tell the pros that your limited experience has proved them wrong!

If you've really played a couple thousand rounds mixing Basic Strategy, Progressive Betting, and HiLo Counting - you don't have near enough data to make any conclusions!

See my post from a couple of weeks ago: http://www.bj21.com/boards/free/free_board/index.cgi?read=135230

Take it from someone who came from the same starting point as you: read what these folks have to say, as well as what the REAL blackjack books have to say.

Like you, when I first encountered blackjack 10 years ago, Patterson's book was the first one I read. At the time, I thought it was a bible, since it was my first exposure to basic strategy. That, along with his enthusiasm for the possibilities of beating the game, gave me the confidence to go forward and learn more. However, he is simply a starting point.

Once you start reading the true blackjack bibles, you will see what the game is really all about.

And, as you have already seen, you better know what you are talking about on this forum. ANY statement or comment will be challenged. So, you better have your facts on your side before you make ANY assertions.

These guys have there s**t together... so should you!

..but I think everybody else has pretty much said it all. (On second thought, I just cant help myself, an opportunity like this doesnt come around often)...

First of all, the idea of mentioning Patterson in the same sentence as Wong is a complete joke with the exception of contrasting a genius and living legend to a person who is just a half step above a con man who makes money off of old ladies. (Since you appear to be confused in this matter, the living legend in this example is, in fact, Wong). The simple mathmatical fact of the matter is this: You CANNOT have an edge unless you use some method of advantage play. That could be counting, hole card plays, depth charging, shuffle tracking, etc.

Progression and money management schemes often touted by Patterson work off of past results and will tell you nothing about what is to happen. Unfortunately, since we have to put our money in the little circle BEFORE we get to see our cards, we have to know in advance if we have an edge. Patterson does nothing to help us with that. Wong does. It's that simple.

You say you "got an A" in statistics, in which case you must be the typical book geek that has all of the book knowledge but not the first CLUE on how to interpret it. You got an A because you can reason through the logic, being able to apply that logic is where the true value is. In other words, outside the world of academia, your A doesnt mean sheeeit.

Furthermore, if you really understood statistics, you would realize, as pointed out many times above, that your limited "testing" is statistically invallid. Of course you are looking at your book thinking "but in a T test...30 item sample..bla bla bla" but OF COURSE what you are forgetting is that a casino is not a CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT. In order for the book tests to be valid you have to have a CONTROLLED environment, and the only way to create a CONTROLLED environment in a casino is through the use of simulation software. Which leaves me to my final point...(also stated above in the string)

Your "famous" software must be touted by Patterson as well if it cannot even run sims. My advice to you you poor lost misguided ignorant fool, Buy the books, the REAL books, and then rather then try to study them as you did your statistics in order to get an "A", try to UNDERSTAND what they are saying. Next, buy some REAL sim software, www.qfit.com, and prove the books right. But you DAMN WELL best not come on a site supported by a master, and insult the master in his own cyber living room as it is.

You are a fool, and if you ignore the above steps, you deserve to lose every penny that you will....

D

Blue-Spotted is right on point, as are the other people who responded to your question.

I realize that people are being pretty harsh on you, but please realize that you are asking a pretty mis-informed question. Of course, the title of your original post really didn't help much either.

If you truly understand statistics, and also understand how blackjack is played, then it should be pretty easy to understand the concept of card counting and how you can get an advantage with it. That being said, if you are trying to play all hands at an 8 deck shoe game with poor rules and poor penetration, then you may actually be playing a losing game and should expect to lose money in the long run (unless you are also using a huge spread).

I would recommend that you read the Theory of Blackjack by Peter Griffin to further understand the math behind the game. Before setting foot in a casino you should also read Blackjack Attack by Don Schlesinger and practice, practice, practice. If you still doubt the math behid card counting, then get some decent Blackjack simulation software (Qfit or SBA) and simulate various betting strategies over 10 billion hands.

Ignore him, he is just playing a game...and it is not BJ.

HJ

>(in famous software program, a couple of thousands rounds) and kept >ending up with POORER results than when I do according to simple >basic strategy or progressive betting idea.

I wasn't aware that purple Barney had a sim program!
It certainly is a dinosaur. A good sim will run 100 million rounds
in a few minutes! Try SBA.

Why didn't you post what software you used! (I'm guessing Nintendo) You also didn't post what the rules were, betting spread, penetration etc., so no-one is able to guide you as to whether the game you are looking at can even be beaten. One can only assume that you are oblivious as to the importance of these factors. A couple of thousand rounds is a joke! The variance is far too high to see statistically valid results in games which typically yield less than 1.5% advantage for the professional player.

Serious pro's on this forum often have losing months, some losing years. I suggest you learn something of standard deviation.

Also don't expect to be taken seriously on this forum if you follow Pattterson's loony ideas, believe in progression betting, or are quick to dispute the validity of the Greats of this game.

'Could Mr. Wong or any of his followers want to argue against this or explain please? Thank you.'

Explanations have been given depite your arrogance, giving you the benefit of the doubt as maybe a decent person who is frustrated or confused.

As for arguments, I doubt many on this forum see the need to prove to you that the world is round, because that is in effect the challenge you have put up. BJ counting stategy was first published in 1962 by Professor Edward Thorp. Other pioneers of this game such as Wong have built upon the foundations of this work tweaking simpler count systems, fine tuning applications for different rules & contributing immeasurably to the the millions of hopefuls like you who want to grasp how to beat blackjack, but Thorp's work still stands.

I doubt Mr Wong will reply to you, as he is mainly active on the Green Chip & sports betting pages, besides it would be like Ali taking a challenge from a snotty nosed school bully.

Ask nicely, post info. instead of arrogant challenges.....& oh I think many like myself would take umbrage at being described, 'his followers'. This is a friendly community which Mr. Wong is gracious to host. He is not a Guru, simply someone whose achievements like other Greats in the field of BJ is respected by those who enjoy, understand & most importantly prosper from the game.