picking the right table

Here is a bit of a "musing" question, for those that play a lot.

How to pick the right table (if you are a counter of course, non-counters please ignore this)?

First, the choices. Rather than pick on SD, or 2D, or 6D, etc. I am going to use the term "small deck" and "large deck" to represent the endpoints of the possibilities. IE I am going to immediately exclude 1D 6:5 as non-interesting, so small deck could be 1-2 deck BJ with decent rules while large deck could be 6-8 deck shoe games.

Which do you prefer? The choice is not _that_ obvious to me. So I'd like to hear other opinions. I always thought that I liked small-deck games better, simply because the count seems to produce games with less variance. IE in a 1D game, with 33% of the cards gone, a +6 RC or +9 TC means those 9 extra 10's are distributed in about 34 cards. Some of them are going to show up _soon_ on average. In a 6d game with two decks gone, a TC of 9 or a RC of 36 means that 36 extra 10's are distributed in about 208 cards. Nothing says they are uniformly distributed, and we all have seen shoes where the 10's never come up, apparently being in the last deck or so that was cut off.

So which is better?

Scenario 1. Heads up play. Here I don't believe there is any argument about "small deck" being better. The only problem is potential "heat" or scrutiny. But with a big count, you are going to
see some of those extra 10's pretty soon.

On the down side, the count is more volatile. It can go from +5 to zero in one hand for you. Or vice-versa. And when it jumps, you have to get money out to take advantage of it. If you do much "progressive" style betting, you end up never getting your big bet out as the count can drop right back on the next hand (or two).

So what I generally see is a up and down game, where the count bounces a lot, and if you slip up, you make it obvious what you are doing. Spread to more than one hand only on high counts is about as bad as spreading your bet on one hand when the count climbs.

Scenario 2. large deck. Here the count seems to be much more stable, but the high-count situations are infrequent (at least for me. :) ). But the plus side is that when the count (TC) runs up, it can stay up for many hands, giving you the chance to parlay up to your big bet, or say something like "Hmm. two in a row, think I'll try a second hand here while the cards are running kind." or something similar. Of course, the count can and does go way negative as well.

Wonging is acceptable generally, at least up thru 25$ tables most of the time. Sometimes they say "no mid-shoe entry" sometimes they don't. In small-deck, this is basically out. I've played 1d and 2d games that allowed mid-shuffle entry, but the dealer always shuffled up when a new player sits down. I'd often like to reach over the table and slap 'im, because the count was good, but that would probably be worse than a 1-10 bet spread. :)

I have found myself playing more large-deck type shoe games recently, for many reasons. Pitched games often have a limit higher than I want to play. Yes, I'll bet a hundred bucks or two. But I'd like that to be my _big_ bet, not my small bet. :) Large deck games with lower min bet limits (10$) are my favorite. I can still bet green, and at most $10 tables there is always at least 1-2 doing that so it doesn't cause much attention. But more importantly, I've found a good way to "wong out" for a few hands as needed. Besides the usual restroom break (which is useless since you lose the count). Hint: Cell Phone. At about 1/2 the tables I play at, they don't like you to talk on the phone while playing. Makes sense as it slows the game down. If you let the dealer know that your professions leads you to taking a few phone calls that you can't ignore (you are a doctor, lawyer, indian chief, whatever) they generally say "no problem. If you get a call, just step away from the table and when you finish, sit back down again. If you are clever you can turn this into a way to "Wong out" when the count is bad at small deck games. You can use it at large deck games, but when the count goes south there, it might be a while before it returns North, so be prepared to talk for a good bit.

Now, with all the above, what is the consensus on the best choice for a non-pro player? small deck game or big deck game? And yes, I saw the recent blue-collar comedy routine where Drew Carey visited and I know what they were talking about. :)

I used to think small deck was always better, but after playing a lot, I'm no longer so sure. Certainly, if you are a "play all" player, I believe small deck games are better. Last time I played a shoe at the beau, I sat and played through three consecutive shoes where the running count dropped like a rock and stayed there. Basic strategy along with a few negative indices kept me pretty even, which was not bad, but 3 shoes is a lot of time with 4-5-6 other players. You could make a better hourly wage driving a garbage truck than I made for an hour playing there.

I now think I prefer big deck games since the TC changes more slowly, and spreading your bet is less noticable. Of course playing a second or third hand is not so easy when the tables are stuffed.

food for thought.

Hopefully not food for a religious war of course. :)

It's true as you say, big decks have the lowest variance as far as tc is concerned. They require a larger spread in order to do well so that betting strategy takes a front seat. On the other hand, small decks need less of a spread to beat because a lot of your advantage is derived from playing the hands optimally. They also are best for a play-all strategy. It all boils down to what it is that you feel most capable or comfortable doing.

I have (in the past) always preferred 2d games (since the 1d games I have encountered recently are 6:5 most of the time, although bigplayer gave some good info about where playable SD games exist). But, depending on the timing, and remember I am not a Pro BJ player, which means most of my playing is on weekends except maybe for 2-3 trips a year during the week) I have to deal with crowds. And higher-than-normal limits for weekend players at places like the Beau, or Grand, etc. So it has been, for me, more a matter of "what can I get to that I am willing to play the min bet limit?"

But, in looking at results, excepting for one pretty good one last week at a 2D game, I do about as well at the 6d games and seem to draw a lot less "attention" in doing so.

That led me to conclude that maybe I was not exactly choosing the table for the right reason when I happen to walk in and find things not very crowded, such as late on Sunday night/early Monday morning when I can stay that long.

I don't have problems remembering BS for 1d vs Nd games, and I don't have problems with TC computation, dividing by whole numbers or by fractions, so that isn't a constraint. I have no doubt that if I could play 2d the way I _want_ to play it, I could make a fortune. But I don't believe 1-100 bet spreads would last more than a couple of hands. :)

The one with the dumbest dealer !

I've never seen a dealer with his I.Q. on his name tag. :)

I suuggest you read Blackjack Attack, which has a lot of information on this very subject. In particular, it has a rating system, SCORE, which is used to compare different playin conditions. Also, join greenchip, which has many discussions on this subject in the archives.

provides the best return mathematically and with heat issues considered.

Well said.

Gorilla Player, to start getting an idea where to play, one can use the calculator on www.bjstats.com, to do a simple comparative analysis to put things in perspective. Your assessment becomes particularly simplified if you plan to use "even" betting amounts (5, 10, 25; not, for example, $17.53).

Consider the following numbers for a low roller, with optimal betting ramps:

Game 1. Bank $5k, 2D, H17, pen 0.8 remaining, spread $5 to $40: Win rate $13.13; Score 26

Game 2. Bank $10k, 6D, H17, DAS, pen 1.5, spread $5 to $80: Win rate &15.44; Score 15

When you compare these two, note the very similar win rates, but the glaringly different Score. Note the different bankroll to support each of these games.

Now throw in a 2D game betting to the same bankroll as in Game 2:

Game 3. Bank $10k, 2D, H17, pen 0.8, spread $10 to $80: Win rate $26.42; Score 26.

Note that for the same bankroll and max bet as the 6D Game 2, you increase the Score and win rate by a factor of 1.7.

Before you give up on 6D games however, if you can get Late Surrender, consider:

Game 4. Bank $10k, 6D, S17, LS, pen 1.5: Win Rate $36.64; Score 35.

This example shows why counters will hunt high & low :-) for Surr.

Another comparison, betting greens:

Game 5. Bank $20k, 2D, H17, pen 0.8, spread $25 to $200: Win rate $52.47; Score 26

So: nice win rate, but calls for a bigger bank.

One last fun example that shows the importance of bet spread:

Game 6. Bank $20k, 6D, H17, DAS, spread $25 to $150;; Win Rate $1.48; Score 3

The calculators on that site also provide N0 values - very entertaining.

I agree with Panama Rick: read BJA 3 etc.

One can also consider other factors when deciding which games to play, such as comps, anonymity, scenery, etc., at the different games.

Good luck,

:: ::

Someone here mentioned how easy they would "lose the count". I haven't had the problem too often, but here are some cases where I did "lose it".. :)

1. Was playing in a game (6d) where the running count was all the way up to 31. Cocktail waitress walks up, _very_ will built. Guy next to me says (after she leaves) "38 at least." Guy on 3rd base said "no, more like 36". Guy on first base said "wrong, 39-40." Dealer said "you are all wrong, she's a 37". I had absolutely no idea what the count was at that point. :)

2. Running count at +12, son walks up and says Alabama 13, Southern Miss 14, nearing the half. Guy to my left repeats "13-14? Damn". Guy to my right says "Bama is favored by 10, go Eagles (this was in Biloxi obviously). By the time all those scores were bandied about, and I was interested, suddenly I thought "what was the count"?

3. Vegas. June. Playing with a decent running count that put the TC at 3, in a 2d game. Suddenly dealer stops dealing cards, after giving everyone their first card and 2 of us our second card. He is just standing there. Finally I ask "OK, what's up"? He points his index finger, moving nothing else. I look, and there is this incredible young female, wearing a completely transparent outfit. And when I say transparent I _do_ mean transparent. After she passed, and we resumed, the dealer hollered over to the pit boss, "I need two new decks of cards, these are soaking wet." Everyone laughed. I was hoping he had gotten them as I had no idea what the count was. I had "2" on the brain, but I was afraid that was caused by the face-on view of this particular young lady. :)

In any case, thanks for the advice. I've been looking for BJA at the local book stores, I may just resort to ordering. It seems to get high marks. Other books left me cold. Uston's books were fun to read. Thorp's was the first real "system" book I read. Blackjack your way to riches really left me cold as the author was way too full of himself and it seems that many of the "spread" comments were simply wrong...

pay on a push, pay when you don't have cards, push on a loss & other things too. Just my observation.

although I am not sure how to recognize such a dealer without playing and noticing the mistakes. I've seen this more frequently on the graveyard shift where some dealers work a second job and come in afterward for a shift at dealing, with their mind numb...

their name & face. Bad habits are hard to break.