Wonging?

What is "wonging"?

...backcounting the cards until the count indicates a positive expectation and then playing until the count goes south, getting out when it gets to negative or neutral expectation.

is to minimize apparent spread.

flat bet of spread 1-2 for a good game wonging,

You would need a good game. You can make a profit flat-betting or with a small spread in good games. In a six-deck, S17, DAS game, a player with a $10K bankroll who can find a game penetrated to 5 decks can make $23.08 for every 100 hands seen using a unit of $64.10, playing to a 5% ROR. If he uses a 1-2 spread, his unit would be $43.29 and he could make $29.87 for every 100 hands seen. Add late surrender to the same game, and a player with a 10K bankroll who wants to play to a 5% ROR could use a unit of $80.65 for a profit of $34.68. A 2-1 spread can be played with a unit of $52.91 and an expectation of $42.33 per 100 hands seen.

Obviously, some adjustments would have to be made to play to whole units, but it is an example of how a Wonging approach can be used. It should be pointed out that your profit per hand played is much higher, but I am talking about hands seen, not necessarily played. One good thing about the higher bet needed for Wonging is that, with a large enough bankroll, you will get comp offers immediately and will get mail offers as well, if you choose to be rated.

My book will have an extensive set of charts that lay out the bet spreads, the betting units needed and the expected value for a variety of shoe games using the Wonging style. It will also have similar information for the use of an exit strategy, which can be played profitably to a 1-4 spread in six deck shoe games.

make me laugh.you make 23 bucks per 100.thats all fine and dandy.guess how long its going to take you to reach 100 positive hands played.a long ass time.most people will quit playing after months of walking around all day for shoes to go positive so they can reach that 100/hands 23.00 mark.thats why john may writes books.i would have to make at least 100 an hour to go through all that trouble.

Those figures aren't hands played, they are hands observed. They are calcultaed to a $10K bank, with a 5% risk of ruin. Want to earn more? Either raise your acceptable ROR or increase your bank. The 100 hands seen will mean that you will play about 25 hands an hour or so to get that profit if you are in a casino with a decent number of tables. Most of the large Las Vegas casinos qualify.

I THOUGHT THE WIN PER 100 in bjrm MEANT HANDS PLAYED??can you elaborate?if you punch in wong in at +1 with the hilo count they give you a win per 100 at that game-which means you play 100 hands at +1 or greater- which like you said you will only play about 25 of those positive hands in a hour???

You are just placing a bet of zero when the TC < +1. Therefore, your bet will be zero for about 75 hands per hour. The rest of the hands you observe (ones with TC>=+1) will require actual chips when betting.

Regards,
MF

no wonder i have been doing so well.so your saying if the count is-15 and you take a piss- those hands that you miss until the shuffle count towards the hundred?

Based on the Help files in BJRM 2000, when you are using it in the backcounting (Wong) mode, it shows you the results for 100 hands observed, not played. If you want the per hand figure, there is a box for that. Note the SD for the "per hand" figure as opposed to the SD for the "per 100 hands." If it were SD per 100 hands played, it would be the per hand SD times 10, which is the square root of 100. It is not. You can assume 25-27 hands per hour actually played with the Wong feature of BJRM.

that you could count those extra negative rounds if you were absolutely sure that the count would never go positive again. But, since that situation will probably never occur unless you are playing deeply delt single deck, it would be best just to count the hands that you actually see.

Regards,
MF

make me laugh.you make 23 bucks per 100.thats all fine and dandy.guess how long its going to take you to reach 100 positive hands played.a long ass time.most people will quit playing after months of walking around all day for shoes to go positive so they can reach that 100/hands 23.00 mark.

I think perhaps an apology is in order. What do you think?

regards,
adhoc

i still think 23 bucks isnt enough to play the shoes,but after thinking you need 4 hours to reach 100 hands- i was wrong about how long it would take.i guess that was an apology.i still dont like shoes because of all the table hopping looking for positive hands.

I was merely giving some examples of the effect of Wonging. I used a $10K bankroll and a 5% ROR as the basis for my examples. The original point of the thread was that one could use a very small spread with Wonging strategies and thereby avoid heat. I simply verified that with my examples. Each person who plays must pick the style of play that suits his needs and bankroll. There is no one "right" way to approach the game.

Another approach that can be taken with shoes is the use of an exit strategy. Unless you can find a six deck game penetrated to a half-deck, Wonging and exit strategies can produce far more profit than play-all and they can deflect heat with a little creative bet ramping. Given the reduction in good double and single deck games that is occuring all over Las Vegas, shoe play may be the best bet, all things considered, unless you want to play Super Fun 21 or 6:5 blackjack.

I don't believe in the cover aspect of wonging. You might reduce your apparent spread but don't you think that an astute pit will realize rather swiftly that you only play positive situations.
Wonging might be an option for an underbankrolled player who is starting out but for professionals it's not a serious proposition mainly because of the implied working conditions.
Or would you accept an office job if you had to stand all the time?

Francis Salmon