Blackjack Bet Spread

Card counting sites usually show a betting ramp that slowly rises ... One or two units at a time as the count rises. At the same time, the slight winning advantage of counting is calculated against a 1-8 or 1-12 spread.

Given that high counts are rare, doesn't that small spread eliminate the actual player edge?

It's not that the small spread is used to eliminate the player edge, it's the fact that if you went from 1 bet to anything more than 2 or 3, you would find yourself banned or barred from playing blackjack, especially if it was for any length of time. For example, say you bet 1-2 units for 45 minutes and suddenly the count finally gets high and you go from 2 units to 12. Doesn't that seem awful suspicious?

-B

I understand the need for discretion. My question is a statistic/mathematic one. If the house has an edge for all the times that the count is under 1, which must be more than half the time, and then the player has a minuscule edge only when the count is one or above, simply doubling one's bet for what amounts to less than half the time ought not make up for the expected loss. It disturbs me that nearly all betting ramps I have seen recommend staying at two units through counts of two or three. Given the rarity of counts higher than that, and the slim player advantage even at those high counts (I can't tell you how often the dealer gets the two tens or the blackjack when I get to a high count!!! - and remember, a dealer blackjack or win beats multiple other hands - so our highly touted individual blackjack hand 3-2 advantage is really a 4,5, or 6 to one house advantage when considering the table overall) from when and where does the counters' advantage come?

Quote: babydoc42

from when and where does the counters' advantage come?

When you get blackjack, you get 3:2. When the dealer gets blackjack, he gets 1:1. When the count is high, the frequency of blackjacks increases.

(I also understand the dealer win versus all players is not an appropriate comparison when discussing the individual hands' outcome ... but my two hands both lose to the casino's blackjack).

The players edge increases as the count rises. The 1% to 2% you commonly hear is an average figure. Dealer will bust more stiffs when faced with them. Dealer cant double, split, surrender, vary his play or insure either. You can though.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

The 1% to 2% you commonly hear is an average figure.

Correct, and 2% is pretty optimistic for a counter spreading 1-12 on an average to good shoe game. Your expectation increases by approximately 1% for each true count increase, so if you're playing in a game with a 0.5% house edge, you have a 0.5% edge with a TC of 1 (this is very simplified, but you get the point). Most counters will have their max bet (top of the spread) out at a TC of 5 or 6, when they're playing with around a 4.5-5.5% edge over the house. Optimal betting spreads are determined by the frequency distribution of each count, as well as the edge for each (again, an oversimplification), but even if you were playing with a 0.5% negative expectation 75% of the time and a 2% edge 25% of the time, you would still come out on top, even without altering the size of your bets. This is one way to look at it.

Bottom line: the wins from betting big in high counts outweigh the losses from betting small (or nothing!) in neutral or negative counts.

I believe your edge increases or decreases about 0.5% per true count in a standard shoe game, not the 1% you mentioned. The highest running count I ever had was a whopping +44 with about a deck and a half left in an 8 deck game for a TC of about +30!

Yes it's 0.5%. At TC +5 the advantage is 2% give or take. Did you have a lot of pushes in that +30 count?

Quote: 1BB

Did you have a lot of pushes in that +30 count?

Many. On the last hand though, with a RC of +32, I got the 20 and the dealer somehow found 6 up. I split to 4 hands and doubled 2 that aces fell on. She, as I figured, busted her 16.