Starting Out - Still Worth It? And Time vs. Return

I've read through many messages on these informative boards, and I'd appreciate an informed perspective on the following.

First, to those who have recently started advantage play and to the experienced players, given the game's condition today, do you believe the effort to improve one's Blackjack skills worth it?

I am dismayed to read all the posts concerning 6:5 payouts, preferential or machine shuffles, horrible penetration, etc. etc. And the trend appears to be worsening. I'd be content to travel to a couple gambling destinations a couple times a year and try to make a decent profit while enjoying some downtime, a trip to the pool, and buffet. Is this still possible, or are even accomplished blackjack players throwing in the towel because the casinos can count on the one-armed bandit slaves to pump their coffers?

Second, if bankroll is not a major concern, but earning a decent return for time invested is, what do you recommend as far as games? Some of the more informative posts I've reviewed indicate, for example, playing a 6-deck shoe with $25 minimum bets is a waste because the shoe may turn positive for only 5-10 hands a round, and thus the expected return is very low. To counteract spending hours of time with only a paltry return (boring), would you recommend upping betting minimums on six-deck shoes to $100 with a $100-$400 spread, or seek out double deck games and limit play to an hour or so?

Thank you.

out of. You still have to draw winning cards.

You need a much larger spread on a shoe game than a 1-4. The games I play are mostly 6 deck games with 75%-80% penetration and I spread from 1 hand of $5 to 2 hands of $200. You also have to put in hundreds of hours before your win rate tends towards the expected value, indeed it is possible to be still be in the red after a few hundred hours. If you are only playing a few hours a year I would suggest playing double or single deck, this way you do not need such a large spread if you can find good rules, and hence your variance would be a lot lower.

"I spread from 1 hand of $5 to 2 hands of $200."

Interesting - this seems to be a much larger spread than I've seen recommended by other posters. And I assume that with a minimum of $5 and a max of $200, the $150+ bets are put down only a few times a session when the count is running very high, or just a few hands per shoe. It must be killer if one of these very big bets goes against you when the count is high.

"You also have to put in hundreds of hours before your win rate tends towards the expected value . . . ."

That's what I want to avoid - I'd prefer to strike in short sessions and take my profits and then go enjoy myself. I guess 6-deck shoes simply do not allow for this.

Thank you for the response.

starting out at a $5 waiting bet and watching the TC build slowly until you have two $200 boxes being split and doubled? That sounds like serious fun to me! Of course, if you don't get the cards, you have the ignominious result of having lost over a thousand dollars in one round when you had the best slug of the day skip past you while all around you the other players are celbrating their naturals and pat hands. On top of this is the embarassment of explaining to your wife and friends how you can be so far behind 'playing $5 a hand blackjack.'

Shoe games can be devasting with the fluctuations and exaggerated spreads.....even a mildly negative shoe can bleed you to death.

The limits of your spread depend primarily on your bankroll. Most players I know who are mining the shoe games have exaggerated spreads to fully exploit the infrequent highly positive TC's. This puts a lot of risk into the game but otherwise you are scraping by if you play most of the shoe. When the cards are favorable at the end of a shoe, you have to jump in with your boots on. The reason a relatively conservative 1-12 spread is recommended for the shoe game is due to cover restraints and bankroll limitations. It is generally concluded that you should only bet 1% of your bankroll for your maximum bet for a 13.5% ROR, and work backwards from there. This is the meaning of a 'full Kelly' betting matrix as I understand it, without re-sizing as your bankroll fluctuates.

You should play with the smallest minimum you can muster. When the high EV situations occur, the size of your bankroll is your guide to a comfortable maximum bet. Most experienced shoe specialists play significantly below the full kelly threshold.

Consider that 1-10 or 1-12 is the minimum spread to make the shoe game possible to beat consistently. As Joe has said, the best plan may be finding games of SD and DD so you can comfortably attack with a smaller spread.

scobee

If you're just "starting out" and looking for a good, solid return for time invested, I'd do my best to discourage you. The initial cost -- the time required to educate yourself -- is prohibitive. You should expect to spend at least 2-3 months in full time preparation before you're ready to pull a positive EV, and that's if you're lucky in the mentors you choose.

You can't just go into a casino, sit down at a table with some idea you heard from your brother-in-law (or read on this board), and expect to make a profit. You never could. And as you noted, at least 80% of the games they call "blackjack" nowadays are unplayable.

There's no silver bullet. No "trick" like "play pitch and avoid the shoes." Each opportunity has to be evaluated on its merits.

Even after you've gone through the required syllabus, you can expect to lose about 40% of your sessions. Sometimes you will lose a lot. That's why it's called gambling.

ETF

Is spending the three months learning advantage play worth the trouble to you? Know that if you play perfectly your slim advantage over the casino will be subject to constant fluctuations (I know, oxymoronic). As ETF has said, this training will allow you to win maybe six times out of ten. The only thing consistent about the game of blackjack is your frustration. You may win ten hands in a row with a small bet in your box and lose ten in a row with your higher EV bets all in the same series. Believe me, that is not 'breaking even.' The fantasy is that you can somehow limit variance or risk in this game by lowering your spread and playing 'safer.' It is not unusual for a counter to have a session that will swing from being ahead 100 units to being down as much, ending up with eight hours of play showing no profit or a loss. But these fluctuations are 'normal,' not unexpected, and within the ranges of standard deviation. Without training, the rollercoaster is only going downhill....the ride varying only in speed of descent. Unless you are one lucky fellow, in which case everything you do seems to pay off.

It is one maddening pursuit, relentlessly inconsistent. Unless you learn the math your chances are slim and none.

Those golden temples are financed by players being ground to dust who attempt to beat a negative game. Counting cards might allow you to stay above water while you are unlucky instead of drowning. It is no game for the faint of heart.

MHO

scobee

Hello, ET Fan.

I guess you might be missing the facetious component of my post...or then again it may just be the opportunity to drill some sense into my thick head again that inspires you to your litany.

Point taken...although in 24 pt. bold headline it looks a little austere to me at the top of my page. Are you saying that those who have fun are destined to lose? Sometimes working hard at something you enjoy can be....dare I say it? nah, not here.

Anyway, I assume that any mention of the 'F- word' from these fingers will amount to an invitation to be rapped on the knuckles from the dreaded 'zipper.' I can't say I didn't ask for it.

Suffice it to say my trip report from the Labor Day excursion to the GNW will not contain the least mention of any kind of enjoyment whatsoever. I will try to insert "adjective deleted" at any point my enjoyment intrudes on the hard work involved.

If it is okay with you, my policy will be to only have f** in the hours spent outside the classroom of the casino.

With all due respect,

scobee

True, as it is also true that variance and fluctuation, in their most natural forms are, well, quite natural and normal occurrences.

No fun without encountering nature's flux son, and when Cat Stevens sang--once upon a time-- " where will the children play? " I believe he was lamenting the fact that repetitive consistency was fast becoming the numbing gestalt of our modern, authority loving--and oh so serious--age.

Remember this insight kid: play ends where ownership begins, and the giving oneself away--into play--is to give up one's ( own ) self into the unexpected inconsistency of the moment. The moment is where the the fun begins, providing you give yourself away to it, and its blessed inconsistency. BJ, and it's mind boggling inconsistency, is merely one way of encountering this.

Their is a telling ambivilence which I have taken note of since I began perusing this board many moons ago. The ambivilence is that Blackjack is a game to-be-played ( which we all know--right? ) yet so many poster's here are so completely obsessed with belonging to " the BJ 21 debate club " that they remind one of so many mideivel clergymen contesting how many angels can fit on the point of a needle.

Surely these posters are ambivilent and insecure, for they seek a kind of perverse ego fullfiment in their various arguments here, as they claim to have ownership over some bit of BJ esoterica which they simply have to share again...and again...and again. Or maybe they just like to argue " the finer point. " YUK!!

Consistency is the hobgobblin of small gonads kid, and the goal in Blackjack, as in life, should be to throw one's self into play much more, and to bark out proclamations much less. BJ and its very inconsistency is why I have fun playing it--how else should it be?

They should just back up the truck, and load the money into my car.

Sincerely,
ETF

BJ and its very inconsistency is why I have fun playing it--how else should it be?

But I like rollercoaster rides....always have. Keep it Simple wanted a no frills climb up Magic Mountain. I go for the Grizzly complete with rickety boards, clattering wheels, and stomach churning drops and rises. And I will jump out of the car, run right back up that ramp and take the ride again. If that makes me a 'kid', so be it.

I liked your "BJ 21 debate club" equals the mediaeval clergy analogy. I am reminded of the Copernican vs Ptolemic universe debates led by Galileo during the 16th century. Natural phenomena observed by newly developed technology showed the clergy that the Bible might have been wrong about the center of the solar system being the Earth. The heretics were hounded and imprisoned but the cat was out of the bag. Controlling this game is like trying to stuff a tornado into your lawn-sized Hefty. The internet is filled with hot air like a constantly expanding balloon. The elasticity is infinite, like the universe itself.

We play because we are children at heart. We want our chance to be a winner. We observe and voice opinions based on our experiences of the world and are often victims of our own preconceptions. We step up to the batter's box because it is our nature to believe we can hit a home run instead of striking out. Practice makes it more likely we can 'see the ball' and 'make good contact.' Blackjack is a game of inches and statistics, like baseball. All I am saying is when you are at the plate, put some pine tar on the bat, get a good grip, and swing away. If you have diligently worked on your fundamentals during spring training, you stand a better chance of finding that gap in the defense and making a hit. Of course, you could just strike out again, too. But I think, you, like many of us, didn't come to the park to lay down a bunt with the bases loaded. To me, counting gives us a chance to double in a couple of runs with men on base in the late innings when it really counts.

Enough with the sports metaphors. Well, maybe one more... Awful disappointing when your long fly ball is caught on the warning track, but you gave it a good whack, right?

Playing is F** because of the variance. ETF will have my head on a platter for this statement but, what the hey....it's only words in thin air on an internet forum, you know what I mean?

Here's looking at you, Kid.

scobee (The 'Hitman')

"But I like rollercoaster rides....always have. Keep it Simple wanted a no frills climb up Magic Mountain."

I'm going to assume you meant this along the lines of I seek little pain and modest gain. Your assessment is correct. I'd like to minimize losses and come out profitable without sitting at the tables for 12 hours per day.

I don't get a thrill from the action - I'm more content to sample some buffet and catch a couple shows and order drinks at the pool than mindlessly pump five-dollar bills into computer-controlled slots or lay out black across the felt of the craps table. And I become mildly distressed when I see honest people rifling through purse or wallet for one last chance at a sure thing (read: certain loss). I think we've all had that feeling, namely, "I've got to get the hell away from here," because you get sick of good people getting taken.

This mild disdain for the casinos is increasing, however, as I read about the goings-on concerning decreased blackjack payouts, shuffle machines, ill treatment, and the like. If this trend continues, I will no longer frequent Vegas, and vacation elsewhere.

Hence, my goal is to learn all I can from the good people here and extract a small profit on my infrequent trips to Vegas, winning a few dollars along the way. I still am not certain if it is still possible in this environment, but some of the posts have been encouraging. If I enjoyed the action more, as you and others seem to, I think I'd be more inclined to give it my all at blackjack.

I think, that even with all the abstractive digressions, what is pertinent is that counting will give you a chance to beat the casino advantage. You have to choose good games and avoid the rest. There are fanatic moments here, but you will get good advice, generally speaking. Your goals are clear and reasonable.

" I think we've all had that feeling, namely, "I've got to get the hell away from here," because you get sick of good people getting taken. "

You have already recognized a cardinal rule. If for any reason you feel uncomfortable playing, now is not too soon to leave.

Not every game at every casino is completely set up to take advantage of the suckers. There are still some excellent games in Vegas. You are discriminating, just apply that good judgement to when, where, and how you play. Most gamblers love the action and get in over their heads. You seem to be smarter than most. Remember to define your risk/reward ratio before you begin.....Obviously you have different ideas about this game than someone who will play twelve hours because he has a perceived advantage. Vegas has much to offer in terms of entertainment beyond blackjack, as you have already observed. Even Pai Gow and Baccarat can be enjoyed with minimum risk to your wallet, if you are prudent. Obviously there are many attractions away from the gaming tables.

When you decide to visit Vegas, there will be plenty of good people here to help you decide how to find the best games. I am no authority about Vegas....or for that matter anything about this game. I just felt like responding to some of my buddies here and hopefully in the process let you know what is involved in advantage play. I think what you are beginning to understand is that luck is stronger than skill, but skill will definitely help the long run. Since you have no long term plans for this game, keep the bets in a comfortable range and use what you can to diminish the casino edge. I leave the rest to your judgement and the good advice of more knowledgeable players than myself.

Regards,

scobee