My thoughts on card-counting

I learned card-counting 4 years ago from reading Revere's books. Later I studied Uston's book, and decided to stick with Revere's True Count (which gives 5 a +4 and sidecounds A's).

I spent weeks writing programms to re-exam every situation, also tried to come up with a better system. After comparing RTC, Uston's, Hi-Lo, and 4 of my own systems, I found that RTC and Uston's are the overall best ones, and RTC is more powerful than others on SD and 2d tables, where close decisions come up very often. (16 v 10, 12 v 3, 9 v 3, etc.)

Then I tried my skills at some 5 or 10 dollar tables in vegas. It worked as I expected.

3 years ago, I spent 6 months at vegas counting cards full-time. After playing 100 hours at $10-30 spread, I was up $2300. Then I spent 10 hours playing $25/50/75 spread, won another $600. Then I stopped keeping the record, but pretty much kept the same pace for another 200 hours. Fluctuations were the biggest enemy, they shook my confidence every other week. Also I got kicked out 5 times, even playing at such narrow spreads.

Last month I spent a week at Vegas for vacation. I didn't want to win much, just wanted to play a little above even. I played 30 hours at 14 different casinos, spreading only $10-25. I won $1700, which was a big surprise. Because from EV's point of view, that was about 3% net profit of my total bet, which was amzingly high. If I bet flat, I would still win after 30 hours playing.

This week I went to two casinos near San Bernadino and Palm Spring. They have 6D tables using Vegas strip rules. I played total 8 hours, spreading $10-25, and lost $1000.That was about 8% loss of my total bet. Most part of the loss ocurred when the count was really high, then I had to hit on 13/14, or stayed below 20, only watching the dealer draw to 20 or 21 with a 5 or 6 showing.

Now some thoughts:

1. There are things nobody knows about Blackjack. Can players keep winning or losing hours or days in any other table games?

2. Casino cards distribution is very different from any computer progamms' results. Some situations will never come up, others come more often.

3. High count doesn't necessarily mean good thing. I'm not saying we should consider betting big when it's low and betting flat when it's high, but there's more story beyond plus and minus. Only nobody knows yet.

4. Vegas tables ( espesially on the strip) may have better, more predictable card distributions due to their ways of shuffling. California and off-strip casinos may not so random shufflings and produce mostly unfavorable shoes.

Any serious comments on these thoughts are welcome.

Good cards

Morongo casino near Palm Spring has 8 decks, H17, No surrender rule on most, if not all, tables. Curious to know which casino nearby has Vegas rule.

According to CBJN, these three all have 6D tables, s17,ds,rsa, mostly $10 minimum. I went to Aqua. I'm planning to visit the other two soon.

Also San Manuel has 6D h17,ds,ls tables, $10 or $15 minimum.

Thanks for casino info. Blackjack, or gambling in general, involves luck, mathematics and computer science. I play BJ reasonally well (small bet player) over the years and won more often then lost. However, in one trip to LV I lost 50 units in two days. I believe this is just the nature of the game.

> High count doesn't necessarily mean good thing.

I agree. In high count I see the advantage is really the blackjack payoff of 3:2 which happens more often than low count. OTOH, dealer has less chance of open cards being small cards. So the dealer often shows an open card of 10 or other big cards. In these situations, the player is forced to hit until 17, less doubling, less splitting. In essence, player is using dealer's strategy with some disadvantage (bust first). It looks to me the good EVs is not proportional to high counts, at least not linear. Hopefully, somebody can show scientific data to shed more light on this issue.

My point is: I believe I am a good counter, and understand the game very well. But I am not sure I won money from BJ tables by counting cards. It's been said that the house has under 0.5% edge over basic statege players, the best counters can have an 1% edge over the house, and the edges shall and will preveil themselves in a long run. But,

a. from what I have experienced, I feel I could still win a decent amount of profit if I bet flat all the time.

b. if I bet flat, I might have won more, because most of those breathe-taking losing streaks actually happened when the count was really high. My guess is, when the count is high enough, the shoe produces less double-down opportunities (since a typical 11 v 5 situation requires three small cards), but more two-card combinations of hard 13's and 14's, which give both sides more chances to bust, but the player will lose even if the dealer busts after him.

c. almost all my big losing sessions happened in these casinos: Golden Nugget, Rio, Stratosphese, Binion's Horseshoe, Palace Station and Arizona Charlie's, also the Southern Cali casinos. I've never lost a session at MGM, Flamingo, Venetian, Monte carlo, Stardust and Treasure Island. Either those off-strip casinos did something to their card-shuffling or card-dealing, or the big casinos on the strip did something stupid to accidentally give players an edge.

d. after hundreds, if not thousands hands, the net gain/loss is always around 5% of the total betting amount during that period, sometimes as high as 10%. There is rarely a period with a fluctuation under 1%, as it should be. If handreds or thousands hands don't even come close to be a long run, then BlackJack becomes a pure gamble, since to some unlucky dudes, the long run might be virtually impossible to get in their life time. They have to accept the result of the period they can afford to play.

e. I'm not religious nor superstitious. But during most winnig or losing rushes, I could feel that all the cards were either helping me or against me. When I split and double to expand my original bet to 5 or 6 bets with dealer's 5 or 6 showing, I could feel that the dealer would draw to a 6 card 20 or 21. This happened 3 times to me. I've never won once in this kind of situation.

Just some thoughts here and there. I'm going to play tomorrow, and will go to Vegas again next week. Hope these words could help some players think deeper about the game.

Good cards.

Theoretically a good counter should have at least 1% advantage over the dealer. But the variance is big. You could end up winning 5% or more, or lose 4% or more. One time I won 24 units in 3 hours with flat bets in LV. Unbelievalble, but I can never reproduce this stellar performance.
BTW, I am a recreational player just enjoying winning with small bets. So sometimes I use flat bets or small spreads. This avoids the heat and I never worry losing too much. I give tips to the dealers and waitresses too. To really win big I believe we should follow the established guideline for bet spreads most of the time although I am still skeptical of betting high spread with extreme high counts.
Sometimes, strange things do happen. One time, the lady next to me got a pair of 9. Dealer got open card 2. She split and got another 9 and resplit. She lost all three hands. The next round, the same situation happened to me. Dealer got 2 up and I lost all 3 split hands of 9. I believe we both played the right way. Just the luck is no on our side.
Good luck for your trip!

First or all, don't worry about the theoretical performance of various counts. Most work well and the best is usually the easiest because you will play faster and more naturally, and will make less mistakes. That is why I always recommend KO or HiLo.

Second of all, I don't think you have a clue as to what risks you are taking with your money. Unless you are wonging in and out, with a 1-3 spread on 2 or 6 deck games, at best, you are playing a marginally positive game with a huge risk of ruin.

High count doesn't necessarily mean good thing. I'm not saying we should consider betting big when it's low and betting flat when it's high, but there's more story beyond plus and minus. Only nobody knows yet.

Comments like this make me cringe because it means you are considering using voodoo.

You really need to buy Blackjack Attack. It does not teach how to count, but it will teach how best to use that knowledge. You will learn about risk, optimal betting, and other fine points. Mostly, you will see how your style of play is inferior when compared to others.

For instance, in another post, you mentioned that you played at Golden Nugget, Rio, Stratosphese, Binion's Horseshoe, Palace Station, and Arizona Charlie's. I would not play at any of these casinos because they don't offer the best games. The rules are bad, the penetration is
poor, or both.

Also consider joining greenchip. Aside from the higher level of discussion you will find there, there are years worth archives of posts from years from some of the top theoreticians in the field.

It is my contention that no person has any more or less luck than anyone else. In fact, I believe there is no such thing as "luck".

In my past posts, I have said we need to find another word.

What really is meant by the fraise; "Good Luck"?

Jacobson's book will help answer many of your questions and/or clarify your comments. Briefly, you asked/indicated:

(1) Any other table game in which a player can win/lose for hours/days on end?

ANS: YES! I spent my first 20 "casino years" as a "professional craps player"...for the first 19, I was even, or even ahead when you add in comps...but when the statistics chose to correct themselves, they did so with a vengance.

(2) Some Card Distributions never come up in real play.

ANS: All card combinations will eventually come up at their expected percentage, albeit in short and even medium-term, there will be relative excess/deficits of certain ones. For example, I once played a 4-hour session in which the Dealer never got a BJ! Conversely, how many times does the Dealer get a BJ 3-4 times in a row...several in my experience.

(3) High Cts. not necessarily good.

ANS: Depends somewhat on the System used, but in many, the highest possible TC would have all remaining cards being 10's...therefore, Advantage would revert to 0...constantly pushing. However, in this same situation, if certain side-bets were available, such as LL, Royal Match 20's, etc., you would "clean up".

Likewise, if for example, 20 cards remained, 19 T's and one 6, you could still "clean up"...certainly, when you get the 6, you are screwed....but when the Dealer gets the 6-up, you could split and resplit your T's with impunity.

(4) Non-random shuffles produce less favorable shoes.

ANS: Certainly, Mechanics could do this, i.e., preferentially shuffle so that slugs of "good cards" remain unplayed. However, fortunately for us, at $5.35/hour + tips, there ain't too many of these available. Conversely, Non-random shuffles create a "cake-walk" for those who can take advantage of them.

phantom007.

This is where the real money is made.

I'm sure you get them next time....LOL

Best, Jim

Good variance

No, not unless you're lucky.

In MANY hours of experience of actual play and practice play, I find:

there are times winning is just not in the cards (no pun intended -- yeah right) -- i.e., nobody at the table -- even good BS players -- is winning;

that I win slowly with "normal" cards, while the other (good BS) players are losing; and

that I win more than the other players, and win it much more quickly, when the table is "dumping."

I know "Revere" bragged that his RTC could give an advantage flat betting the single deck, but those games are gone forever. Julian Braun did a comparison of the systems available at the time he published his book, and found hi-lo to be just as effective as the RTC or Uston single level count.

IOW, just chalk it up to the truth reflected in the old saw, "I'd rather be lucky than good."

Like the others have said, you need to get past the voodoo.

You cannot beat 6 and 8 deck games by straight counting and playing all only spreading 1 to 2.5. You should be spreading at least 1 to 15.

I agree with the others, read some recent books by reputable authors.
Blackbelt in BJ by Snyder, Pro. BJ by Wong, and BJ Attack by Schlesinger are all solid books that will give you a firm understanding of the fundamentals.

You were fortunate do do as well as you did. You were playing at best a break even game. Chalk it up to positive variance.

if you play only on TC's +1 or more (Hi-Lo), you can beat a 6 deck game with a small spread...a strick wong-in, wong-out method of play.

By contrast, a play-all approach takes a greater spread, at least 1-8 or more just to break even for most games, and most authors recommend a 1-12 spread or more for a decent win rate.

re:
"You cannot beat 6 and 8 deck games by straight counting and playing all only spreading 1 to 2.5. You should be spreading at least 1 to 15"

You said if he wongs in, he can beat it. I completely agree. However he made no indication in his original post that he sat out negative decks. He simply said he spreads $10 to $25 in 6 deck games. I interpret this as a losing game.

My post simply said IF he is playing all spreading $10 to $25 he is even at best.

Most gambling books yield little or no profit. OK. They lose money for the author or publisher. Only a few best sellers every turn a buck.

In the case of my book, I wrote it knowing that I would almost certainly lose money (self-published). I originally intended to print 1000, then when the numbers came back, printed 1500 to decrease the per item cost. This was after I spoke to Mason Malmuth who said the "average" blackjack book sells about 300 copies during its lifetime. That's 300. Now my book has done a bit better than that, but not enough (yet) for me to have made back my investment. Recently it was picked up by Barnes & Noble and is going national. That's nice. But even with that big bite, it's still a losing proposition.

And so, it is simply a myth that authors are the ones who are making the money ... the biggest money makers out there are the casinos. Second come the high-stakes advantage players who use everything method available to turn the advantage towards their side. I'd say that writing a book is about the same as betting a single number at Roulette. If it hits, you win big, but overall it's a negative EV play that's very likely to lose.

There is a saying about books -- you don't make any money by writing a book, but you can't make any money without writing a book.

--Eliot

"I'm not religious nor superstitious"

Yes you are, your idiotic posts prove it.

or something to that affect.

Anyhow, YES, in +++TC's:

1. Dealer will get many more BJ's, which pays the House even-$, and Player will get the same relative # of BJ's, paying 3:2 (God-forbid 6:5!). Advantage: PLAYER!

2. Dealer will get LESS Stiff hands, but will be much more likely to bust when he/she has same! Advantage: PLAYER!

3. Player will get LESS Stiff hands, but will be much more likely to stand and watch the Dealer bust when Player has same! Advantage: PLAYER!

4. Player will get LESS Good DD opportunities, but will be MUCH more likely to "Hit a Big'in" and/or "who cares"...the Dealer will likely bust anyhow? Advantage: PLAYER!

5. Player will get MORE Good Split opportunities, with most of same becoming OFFENSIVE instead of DEFENSIVE. Advantage: PLAYER!

6. INSURANCE quickly changes from a PLOPPY BET to a PROFESSIONAL BET!
Advantage: PLAYER!

7. SIDE-BETS, such as LL's, go from another PLOPPY BET to +EV, at certain +++TC's. Advantage: PLAYER!

8. COMPS tend to increase with average bet size. Advantage: PLAYER!

9. HEAT tends to increase with average bet size. Advantage: HOUSE or DRAW....depends on how you play it and/or how long you stay!

Thus, in closing, I would just really prefer to play BJ in +TC's as opposed to NEGATIVE, when I have the choice. Most ALL of the Advantage is in my favour, with HEAT being sometimes in my control.

phantom007.

Luck is certainly not an academic or professional term. I vaguely remember my statistical course in college long time ago. Ther is a normal distribution curve and standard deviations. Let's use coin-tossing as an example. EV = 0. That's equal-play game. You toss 100 times, 1000 or one million times. The normal distribution curve gets sharper with high numbers of tossing. But it is far from sure thing that you would win 500,000 out of 1 million times of tossing. Percentage-wise,it gets closer and closer to 50% but not the absolute number of winning/losing tosses. So if two people plays blackjack using the same strategy, the outcome is not going to be the same. I call it luck. Maybe there are other good terms for it.