Card counters don't like other people to wongin?
September 13th, 2012 at 12:05:32 AM
permalink
I think if someone jump into the middle of a shoe with great TC, that guy with share your positive EV.
In other words, that wonger will reduce your Win Rate.
So I think this is very important for counting condition. For instance, if I saw a lot of wonger walking around, I shouldn't sit & play because when the count is great, other people with share my EV! So card counters DO hate card counters.
Is this a correct concept? Thanks for reading this threat.
In other words, that wonger will reduce your Win Rate.
So I think this is very important for counting condition. For instance, if I saw a lot of wonger walking around, I shouldn't sit & play because when the count is great, other people with share my EV! So card counters DO hate card counters.
Is this a correct concept? Thanks for reading this threat.
Great
September 13th, 2012 at 12:29:39 AM
permalink
deleted
Last edited by: sodawater on Oct 1, 2018
September 13th, 2012 at 3:09:29 AM
permalink
Most counters will not play with another counter at the table and if they wonged in without realizing it will leave as soon as possible. If your table does not have a no mid-shoe entry sign players will be jumping in. Spread to multiple hands in high counts and wong out if the shoe tanks. Let them eat the cards until the shuffle.
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth. - Mahatma Ghandi
September 13th, 2012 at 4:03:42 AM
permalink
Quote: sodawateryes the wonger is using up your good cards if the deck equalizes immediately... but it's only slightly more likely that he will take good cards than bad cards.
That's a common misbelieve in counting. There is no "equalization" happening, the statistically expected true count in the future is the one currently observed.
Once you reach a true count of +3, the expected true count at the last card is also +3. The reason is simple to understand: The true count is a function of the remaining card distribution. However drawing cards will not change the card distribution (since the draw is random). Hence the expected true count after the draw is precisely the same.
One of the reasons you don't want other players (counters or non-counters) on your table at a favourable true count: No, they don't "steal" your good cards (i.e. take more good cards than bad cards) ... they simply make you play less hands before the cut card pops up. (The other reason is heat obviously).
September 13th, 2012 at 6:34:45 AM
permalink
Quote: MangoJThat's a common misbelieve in counting. There is no "equalization" happening, the statistically expected true count in the future is the one currently observed.
Once you reach a true count of +3, the expected true count at the last card is also +3. The reason is simple to understand: The true count is a function of the remaining card distribution. However drawing cards will not change the card distribution (since the draw is random). Hence the expected true count after the draw is precisely the same.
One of the reasons you don't want other players (counters or non-counters) on your table at a favourable true count: No, they don't "steal" your good cards (i.e. take more good cards than bad cards) ... they simply make you play less hands before the cut card pops up. (The other reason is heat obviously).
This is correct. There is technically no equalization. The reason you don't want people wonging in is they may cause you to play less hands before the cut card.
Wisdom is the quality that keeps you out of situations where you would otherwise need it
September 13th, 2012 at 6:42:20 AM
permalink
deleted
DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!
September 13th, 2012 at 7:51:08 AM
permalink
The problem with playing with a wonger is that his wonging reduces the percentage of +EV hands you get to play.
As a simple example, let's say you're playing one hand heads-up against the dealer on a 6D shoe with 5/6 pen. After the first four decks, the TC rises to +4 with one deck left before the cut card. Fifty-two cards equates to about 20 hands, so playing one hand heads-up against the dealer, you're licking your chops, thinking, "I've got 10 rounds left with a TC of +4... woo hoo!"
But now the evil card counter wongs in and promptly spreads to two hands. Since now each round uses four hands (yours, the two for the ECC, and the dealer's), you now have only 5 rounds before the cut card. Thus, the ECC has cost you five juicy rounds.
To illustrate this more fully, I ran two CVData sims. In the first (the column labeled "Play Alone"), a heads-up HiLo counter pays all on a 6D, S17, DA2, DAS game with 5/6 pen, using a 1:15 spread. In the second (the columns labeled "Play w/Wonger" and "Wong at +4"), a Wonger jumps in and plays two hands on all rounds on which the TC>=+4. Below are the TC distributions (I trimmed off TC's above +15 and below -10 to make the output shorter) seen in both cases:
Thus, if we look at the TC=4 row, we see that heads-up, the play-all player plays 3.05% of his total hands at this TC. However, when the ECC jumps in, we see that the play-all player now plays only 2.09% of his total hands at a TC of +4. Conversely, if we look at the -2 row, we see that the presence of the ECC has increased the player's percentage of these hands from 7.58% to 7.85%.
To put it more succinctly, alone the player has an IBA of 1.311%; with the ECC, his IBA is only 0.827%.
Hope this helps!
Dog Hand
As a simple example, let's say you're playing one hand heads-up against the dealer on a 6D shoe with 5/6 pen. After the first four decks, the TC rises to +4 with one deck left before the cut card. Fifty-two cards equates to about 20 hands, so playing one hand heads-up against the dealer, you're licking your chops, thinking, "I've got 10 rounds left with a TC of +4... woo hoo!"
But now the evil card counter wongs in and promptly spreads to two hands. Since now each round uses four hands (yours, the two for the ECC, and the dealer's), you now have only 5 rounds before the cut card. Thus, the ECC has cost you five juicy rounds.
To illustrate this more fully, I ran two CVData sims. In the first (the column labeled "Play Alone"), a heads-up HiLo counter pays all on a 6D, S17, DA2, DAS game with 5/6 pen, using a 1:15 spread. In the second (the columns labeled "Play w/Wonger" and "Wong at +4"), a Wonger jumps in and plays two hands on all rounds on which the TC>=+4. Below are the TC distributions (I trimmed off TC's above +15 and below -10 to make the output shorter) seen in both cases:
TC Play Play w/ Wong at
Alone Wonger +4
15 0.01% 0.01% 0.44%
14 0.02% 0.01% 0.64%
13 0.03% 0.02% 0.92%
12 0.07% 0.04% 1.30%
11 0.08% 0.04% 1.84%
10 0.15% 0.08% 2.62%
9 0.21% 0.11% 3.79%
8 0.51% 0.27% 5.64%
7 0.51% 0.27% 8.45%
6 1.04% 0.57% 13.17%
5 1.44% 0.82% 21.27%
4 3.05% 2.09% 39.09%
3 3.53% 3.12%
2 7.29% 7.36%
1 11.04% 11.45%
0 41.03% 42.72%
-1 11.55% 11.97%
-2 7.58% 7.85%
-3 3.67% 3.79%
-4 3.12% 3.22%
-5 1.46% 1.50%
-6 1.04% 1.07%
-7 0.51% 0.52%
-8 0.50% 0.51%
-9 0.20% 0.21%
-10 0.15% 0.15%
Thus, if we look at the TC=4 row, we see that heads-up, the play-all player plays 3.05% of his total hands at this TC. However, when the ECC jumps in, we see that the play-all player now plays only 2.09% of his total hands at a TC of +4. Conversely, if we look at the -2 row, we see that the presence of the ECC has increased the player's percentage of these hands from 7.58% to 7.85%.
To put it more succinctly, alone the player has an IBA of 1.311%; with the ECC, his IBA is only 0.827%.
Hope this helps!
Dog Hand
