If 100 card counters...

playing hi-lo (I18/F4) at a decent game (heads-up, 5/6 dealt, h17, ds, ls, play-all, spread 1-16) for a year (say 1000 hours or 100,000 hands each person) and NEVER made a mistake, how many of the 100 would predictively be in the red at the end of that year? Also, what is the average gain for the 100 people?

I think sims would tell u the last part but the rest of your question I am curious about the answer...

I used CVCX to come up with the following:

Mathematically, 1.73 of the 100 people will have actually lost money for the year. (this is like 1 of the players at the stadium during a major league baseball game).

The average gain per person is 3593 units per CVCX.

hello theo,

when you say "unit", can you refresh my memory.....is that the minimum bet, the max, or the average bet? how do you calculate the ave. bet? if i spread from $15 to $250, whats the average bet? thanks,

jefftrader

"Unit" is the minimum bet. A spread of $15 to 250 would be a spread of 1 to 16.67 units.

The average bet will vary based upon how you ramp your $15 to $250 per the count, whether you Wong-in and/or Wong-out, actual True counts encountered, etc.

According to CVCX, if you spread 15 to 250 using optimal betting, your average bet (over the long term) will be 2.78 units ($41.70) using the conditions mentioned at the top of this thread.

Theo

I get roughly the same figures. My calcs are closer to 1% because I I'm using an optimal betting ramp and I don't think you are.

That said, this scheme would be impossible to pull off in practice. You have expenses, logistical support, and a significant possibility of cheating and/or marginal players in a population of card counters that size. Very large teams usually have come unstuck in practice for these reasons.

My optimal team would be three to six guys who I trust. The games just aren't good enough any more to try the train-people-up-faster-than-they-can-be-barred approach.

I am trying to decide which count method to learn. I would like a method I can grow with (starts simple yet can become more complex as my skills grow), yet I have read that it makes little difference which method is used in actual play nowadays, so the simpler the better. Years ago I learned Hi-Low but I am essentially starting over. So far the Kiss seems to fit my needs but I would appreciate advice before moving forward.

I would also appreciate a few essential books to read. Currently I am reading Renzey's Blackjack Bluebook II. I am 46 and will retire soon with too much time on my hands.

I began with KISS I, eventually progressed to KISS III and am having good success with it. I found it an easy, gentle way to learn counting. Until then I stumbled around with an old balanced system.

If you REALLY knew hi-lo "years ago" -- it's like a bicycle -- you'll have no trouble getting back on.

The main difference between now and "years ago" is wonging and the abbreviated indices (I18/F4), which make things much better and much easier.