but by hitting the blackjack and doubles in high counts.
That is a misconception of newbies, they think they will win more hands when the couunt is high.....what you're really looking for is those doubles and BJ's at +4 TC and above
"That is a misconception of newbies, they think they will win more hands when the count is high."
And, in fact, we do. It's just that, as you state, this isn't the main reason that more money is won in high counts. But, it doesn't hurt any to win more hands, too! :-)
Don
Don
Could you expand on your thought that we do win more hands in high counts or I am missing something here?
For many years I have always been under the impression and have read (somewhere) that that percentage of about 43% wins, does not really go up that much in a high count. The premise being that both you and the dealer have the same chance of getting the good cards and of course the dealers advantage coming from those hands where both you and he bust=you lose!
At extreme high counts we expect a lot of pushes and blackjacks. Players have an advantage in blackjacks and taking insurance.
Empirically, at high but not-so-high counts I observe that players can expect an improvement in win rate from neutral counts. We have the option of standing on a big-small card hand, whereas the dealer has to hit which is likely to bust at high counts. I am not sure if my observation is correct.
"Could you expand on your thought that we do win more hands in high counts or I am missing something here?"
Not sure what there is to expand on. As the count goes higher, you win increasingly more hands. Maybe you're thinking that you win more hands than you lose. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that as the count goes up, you win more hands than if the count hadn't gone up.
However, it also happens to be true that, for a shoe game, at TCs of +5 and higher, you win more hands than you lose.
"For many years I have always been under the impression and have read (somewhere) that that percentage of about 43% wins, does not really go up that much in a high count."
Live and learn! :-) The win rate doesn't go up all that much, but the loss rate goes down a lot more (therefore, more ties). The result is that, at +5, the wins outnumber the losses.
"The premise being that both you and the dealer have the same chance of getting the good cards and of course the dealers advantage coming from those hands where both you and he bust you lose."
As was stated, the lion's share of your extra profits comes from more blackjacks, more successful doubles and splits, insurance, etc. But, you also win more hands. Just go to http://www.bjstats.com/bjsc.asp, and, for the Table, choose "Win, Loss & Tied Percentage by TC." I used 6 decks, 75%, no cover, Hi-Lo, S17, DAS. Let me know what you find for hands won and hands lost at TC = +5. :-)
Don
Don,
I plugged in 6D 75%, HiLo, no cover, S17 DAS, looking at Win, Loss and Ties %ages by TC. The number of units won starts dropping at TC >+4 and actually becomes a loss at +18. Up to +17 the loss rate continues to drop, however at +18 lsses exceed wins by quite a bit. Can you explain what's going on here? Thanks.
"I plugged in 6D 75%, HiLo, no cover, S17 DAS, looking at Win, Loss and Ties %ages by TC. The number of units won starts dropping at TC >+4 and actually becomes a loss at +18. Up to +17 the loss rate continues to drop, however at +18 losses exceed wins by quite a bit. Can you explain what's going on here?"
Sure. First, the 1-8 spread tops out at TC = +5, but the frequency of that count is sufficiently lower than that of TC = +4, where only 6 units are bet, such that you win slightly more at +4 than at +5. Above +5, you are betting the same 8 units, and, although the edge continues to increase, the frequency of the count decreases at an even greater rate, such that, when you multiply the three (bet x edge x frequency), the win maxes out at +4.
The losses at the ridiculously high counts are just due to the extremely small sample size of those counts. So, for that particular sim, the computer simply got "unlucky" with the few bets it placed at those levels.
Clear?
Don
"Clear? "
Crystal. Thanks!
Certain conditions may include:
1) Quality of B.J. game.
2) Strength of player system with expanded indices.
3) Accuracy of player.
4) Ability to minimize playing negative hands.
Without going into detail, there are instances when winning more hands than losing is not out of the question.
Frenchman
A good deal of money can be made by betting the side bet when the condition of the prevailing deck warrant that action. Examples are lucky ladies, over under and match the dealer. That way you don't have to spread. You can acheive these edges through shuffletracking as well as counting.
I was under the impression that it wasn't until you get into ridiculously high counts that the LL side bet pays off? Also, since the calculations take into account the rather rare QH,QH pair and that pair against a dealer BJ, the real tipping point for the count would be even higher. Am I wrong?
I played the LL side bet a couple times yesterday when the count was around 3-4 when the pit boss was watching. I figured only an idiot would play it and wanted to look as much like an idiot as possible. Something I'm generally pretty good at by the way.
if you really want to enjoy a good average per hour return, you will play no limit holdem or omaha. if you play blackjack, it's not because you like money. there is another reason at play
