Non-card counting wife flat bet at Horseshoe, Tunica MS

My wife enjoys playing blackjack and slots for fun. She plays $25 or $50 minimum single deck (RO6, H17, NDAS) about 10-15 hours per week at the Horseshoe and Grand in Tunica, MS, both Harrahs properties, and is known by name on sight by most of the pit. She's friendly and fun, never abuses dealers or players, and tips well. She knows about 95% of the single deck basic strategy, but occasionally plays "hunches." Although she has never learned or studied a formal card counting system, she "watches the 10's come out" and raises her bet up to a maximum of 3 or 4 times the table minimum when she thinks there is a surplus of 10's left in the deck, and lowers her bet when she thinks there are fewer 10's left. This is certainly informal and includes no ratios or any systematic calculations. Over the last two years she has won more than she has lost, including her slot play.

Recently, she sat down at a table in the High limit area of the Horseshoe in Tunica, MS and turned in her card. Before playing a hand, the pit phone rang, and after a short discussion the pit boss hung up, and sheepishly said, "____, you can only flat bet now." The floor manager immediately came over and said, "Sorry ____, we've decided you can only flat bet." She said, "How come? I don't even know perfect basic strategy?" He said, "We know. But we've been watching for 3 years and you play too smart. Upstairs decided you can only flat bet."

Is it really possible that such a large corporation is incapable of accurately determining if someone has a long term edge vs. a lucky run? It seems inconceivable to me and runs counter to expert opinion that her method of play could possibly result in a long term edge; coupled with her slot play, it seems laughable and ludicrous. Ironically, in their misguided attempt to protect their blackjack game, these buffoons are costing their shareholders money.

and "watches for excess 10's and Aces" she is counting cards whether she is using ratios or not. She is just using a weak system, but it is a winning system regardless. Her lifetime result versus the casino gives them a fairly good level of confidence that they are making the right decision.

bp

Glorfindel,

Single deck can easily be beat by "watching the tens come out." In single deck, the edge quickly jumps back and forth between player and casino based on the number of tens left in the deck. In fact, if the player sees that the burn card (or a card cut out of play) is a 5, the player has an edge off the top of the deck.

For me, the hardest part of playing single deck is overcoming the desire to triple or quadruple my bet after seeing a lot of small cards come out. The dealer and pit also notice those small cards and which players take advantage of the situation. Combine that with the fact that your wife is indeed winning, it is no wonder they decided to flat bet her.

Dr 21

I got bared from four casinos by just noticing in general when the remaining pack was rich in good cards or bad ones. I got very good at it and was making some $. I was even sharp enough to add in some wonging.

"My wife enjoys playing blackjack and slots for fun".

Her fun will not be affected by the restriction to flat bets then.

For a losing streak and then pulled some countermeasures

I agree with your blackjack analysis. But she plays slots also.
So she is a long-run loser when you compound your expectation over both games. The casino made a stupid decision in light of this. Most players will take their cash elsewhere.
Casinos don't seem to get the notion that decent blackjack games act as a loss leader for competent players, such players also act as shills for genuinely awful players. They save themselves 0.1% at the blackjack table and lose 10% on slots. Great deal!
Such are the merits of listening to bean counters.

I wonder how casinos stay solvent exhibiting this kind of stupidity. I suppose even a smart chimp could make cash out of a money mint.

I dare say I was surprised to find that you 2 experts thought she may have a blackjack advantage. It must be very small, however, as she rarely jumps her bet more than 1 unit and her basic strategy errors do not necessarily correspond to the count.

As for the poster that stated she can still have "fun" flat betting, I can assure you that her gambling "fun," including slots, will be confined to other properties in the future.

I dare say I was surprised to find that you 2 experts thought she may have a blackjack advantage. It must be very small, however, as she rarely jumps her bet more than 1 unit and her basic strategy errors do not necessarily correspond to the count.

Simulations show almost any bet spread beats a halfway acceptable SD game. In fact not so very long ago there were a few expert players who played full-time SD with no spread at all. Basic strategy errors, provided they are fairly random and not systematic, make surprisingly little difference to your edge, despite what many of the books say.

Of course, your wife probably hasn't got a meaningful edge in terms of practical money-making. It is probably no more than few tenths of a % and there will be huge variance in her results.

As for the poster that stated she can still have "fun" flat betting, I can assure you that her gambling "fun," including slots, will be confined to other properties in the future.

I hope the casinos are reading this one.
I hope your wife took all this in good humour and was not upset by this incident.

The rating systems are designed to comp the worst players more ie... drunks, addicts, poor players etc. If you play at a Harrah's casino using their Total Rewards card, the system will evaluate your play over X number of hours and someone who plays even money BJ over 100+ hours will be backed off. Welcome to the New World Order of BJ. It makes no difference if you believe you are playing with a disadvantage. The computer model says you are a poor investment. The casinos have actually been taken to court based on them using the rating systems to gain an advantage. Remember that the casinos like AP's are not allowed to use an electronic device to gain an advantage. The gaming commission however, has conviently ruled that the rating systems are not part of the gaming action but rather promotion related. The bottom line is that the big three corporate cartel casino operators no longer want educated gamblers. If they have it their way, there will be no BJ. Forget about the days of playing even money BJ and getting paid off in comps. They are close to over in almost every corporate casino. My advice, learn a count, learn the indexes, travel the circuit, play 30 minute sessions (not rated or under an alias players card), max bet at least $300.00, have at least 250 X max bet BR or switch to Poker if you want to play for comps.

With all due respect, I'm curious as to how you come up with the 250.

Your 250 is much higher than DD' & MathProf's rule of thumb: 80~100.

How do you reconcile your rule of thumb with that of DD' & MathProf?
How have you come up with the 250, may I ask?

Page 158 of "Blackjack For Blood" is the technically based answer. Five years of playing BJ for a living is the anecdotally based answer. The risk of ruin calculation for 100 max bets = a 1 in 41 chance of ruin. Based on the system I use (advanced OmegaII and about a 1.5% advantage). I play for a living. If I lose I do not eat and neither do my kids. For me personally the only way to make a living is to stay under the radar, pay your expenses and grow your stake. I do this by playing short periods, spreading black chips and NEVER sweat the huge losses. Remember most risk of ruin calculations assume a reinvestment of your winnings. There is no chance I am going to wager my playing stake on a 1 in 41 chance when this is my living. I need a sure thing. With 250 max bets I have aprox. a 1 in 11,000 chance of growing my stake and never sweating the BJ demons. For a leisure player out on a weekend trip, 80-100 max bets are fine for a trip stake. I personally take only 50 Max bets for a trip stake. A playing stake of 80-100 simply does not provide me with the mental comfort level necessary to play at a high stakes level for a living. I have had dozens of losing streaks that have lasted over a thousand hands. For me the size of a playing stake is first determined on why you are playing (learning, fun or making a living). You then need to know the ROR calculations and determine what risk you willing to play at based on why you are playing. It sounds like you know all of this, so I apologize for the lecture.