Stand on soft 17 vs lower table minimum

Mohegan has $5 tables, where they hit a soft 17. On all other tables, it's stand on a soft 17. Standing on a soft 17 is a .24% benefit over hit, so I have read. Ignoring all other issues, is it better to sacrifice that benefit in order to play at a table with a lower minimum, assuming that you can bet the lower minimum when the count is negative. I am very new to counting and so want to limit the downside by betting a lower minimum while I see if I can count. I figure it's better to play at a $5 table, but "think" in $10 betting units. Bet $5 when the deck is against me, bet $20 when the true count is +2, $30 when it's +3, and so on. Even with a horrible negative True Count, hey - it's just $5. No need to get up and walk away, especially since at the $5 tables you can't just wander around and play when you want - there are only 10 or so $5 tables, max. Any thoughts?

Great site by the way. Been lurking for a while in the background, this is my first post. Looking forward to some interesting replies.

The edge from counting is very slim you should play the table with the best rules you can find that your BR can tolerate.

Play the S17 tables. When the minimum increases you will be grandfathered. Do not play in negative shoes. This means learning to wong in, out or both. This will enable you to get away with a lower betting spread while you learn.

If you must play the H17 games, don't attempt them until you learn the six changes in basic strategy but I really do hope that you will bypass them and try my suggestions.

Mohegan Sun is notorious for their abysmal penetration so pay close attention to each dealer's cut.

I've learned from reading threads here that "pen" really matters. I had noticed that it varies from dealer to dealer and sometimes from shoe to shoe with the same dealer. I found that the count will go high, I start wanting to bet more, and then the shoe is over. A mixed blessing - a welcome break in concentration (many units on the line does provide focus) - but you do want the positive situation to continue. With a deeper penetration, it would. The problem is that the few $5 tables do tend to draw a crowd, so if you do manage to get a seat, especially at one end of the table or the other, where I find it easier to count, you don't want to wong out (if that's the term) because you won't be able to quickly wong in. I have sometimes waited for more than fifteen minutes, circling the two pits where they have $5 tables, looking for a seat - any seat. If I notice someone running low on chips I will try to lurk in the background and see if I can keep the count until that person gets up, so that sometimes, rarely, I can get in in the middle of a shoe with a running count already established. But at the $5 tables you take a spot when it comes open, and then you are pretty well stuck. And, with only sometimes one pit open, with only 4 or 5 tables, I don't think it would look good to float around from table to table, even if you could, because of the attention it would draw. Or are card counters grinding it out at $5 tables no reason to set off any alarms? They're pretty safe from ruin due to $5 counters, I should think.

"Six changes in basic strategy" - do you mean the differences in basic from hit-soft-17 to stay-soft-17? I know of those differences and accommodate them depending on whether it's a hit or stand table.

But I also recall reading, somewhere, about adjustments to basic depending on true count. It would make common sense not to hit a 12-16, when basic says you should, if the count is very plus: more tens means a greater chance to get one of them and bust. I even remember seeing a chart of such adjustments, or maybe a ranking of the most beneficial ones. But I can't find a reference to it anywhere, now that I can count well enough that I have some room left over in my head for a few modifications to basic based on the true count. Is there such a list?

Yes, there is a list of many adjustments but the Illustrious 18 is what you should focus on for now. I believe you can search this forum for it. I did mean the changes in basic strategy. Not everyone is aware of them so I was making sure that you were.

I get the feeling I haven't convinced you to stay away from the $5 tables so let me elaborate on wonging out. You are allowed to take a break any time you choose to do so. Upon your request the dealer is required to place a lammer on your spot for 20 minutes. If the spot is that important to you, announce the time to the dealer upon leaving so it will be in his mind. You should be able to wong out by standing and taking a phone call, in which case you won't have to pick up your chips. You can also sit out hands and remain seated. Just use one of the many superstitions that are frequently heard at the tables and no one will be the wiser.

Ahh - the Illustrious 18. Found that reference, which is exactly what I was looking for, thanks.

As to $5 vs. $10, I guess I was confused as to "H17" vs. "S17". Does "H17" mean "Dealer Hits a soft 17" and "S17" means "Stands on a Soft 17"? Sorry to be such a newbie. So the $5 table is a H17 table, and you would recommend a S17, $10 minimum? But, there is no grandfathering involved here - the $5 tables at Mohegan are always $5 and never go up, the $10 tables never go down (although they might go up). The hitting 17 rules (H17/S17?) are actually stated in the felt of the tables themselves - the $5 tables say they hit soft 17s while the $10 tables say the opposite.

I've played at the $5 tables long enough that I know that wonging with a "lammer" (terms, terms, everywhere terms...) is only done at then end of a shoe for a bathroom break. Leaving in the middle of a shoe just isn't done. Never seen it. Skipping a hand or two is done, but it's rare, usually occurs after a bad beat, like the dealer drawing a five card 21 or having two blackjacks in a row. So that would work. But not too often. I can weather a bad count when I am betting only $5 a hand, so there's no real need to wong out.

With those distinctions, and the idea that I think there's less attention paid to us folks down here in $5 Blackjack Steerage while you guys are all up on the First Class deck counting cards, do you still recommend $10 S17?

Quote: rhodyBob

Ahh - the Illustrious 18. Found that reference, which is exactly what I was looking for, thanks.

As to $5 vs. $10, I guess I was confused as to "H17" vs. "S17". Does "H17" mean "Dealer Hits a soft 17" and "S17" means "Stands on a Soft 17"? Sorry to be such a newbie. So the $5 table is a H17 table, and you would recommend a S17, $10 minimum? But, there is no grandfathering involved here - the $5 tables at Mohegan are always $5 and never go up, the $10 tables never go down (although they might go up). The hitting 17 rules (H17/S17?) are actually stated in the felt of the tables themselves - the $5 tables say they hit soft 17s while the $10 tables say the opposite.

I've played at the $5 tables long enough that I know that wonging with a "lammer" (terms, terms, everywhere terms...) is only done at then end of a shoe for a bathroom break. Leaving in the middle of a shoe just isn't done. Never seen it. Skipping a hand or two is done, but it's rare, usually occurs after a bad beat, like the dealer drawing a five card 21 or having two blackjacks in a row. So that would work. But not too often. I can weather a bad count when I am betting only $5 a hand, so there's no real need to wong out.

With those distinctions, and the idea that I think there's less attention paid to us folks down here in $5 Blackjack Steerage while you guys are all up on the First Class deck counting cards, do you still recommend $10 S17?

The grandfathering will occur at the $10 tables. As long as you are not gone for more than 20 minutes you will not lose your lammer. When the table minimum goes to $15, $25 or even $50 your minimum will still be $10. If you wong out you will only be playing positive hands where you will be raising your bets anyway.

You can ask for a lammer or sit out a hand any time. It can be after one hand or many hands. There are no rules on this except for the 20 minute time limit. Play the S17 $10 tables.

I chose the $5 tables at Gold Coast and bet $10 most of the time. I bet 5 only when I was slumping. I swear most of the hand I was dealt were hard. Most of the Time I ended with pat hands but the dealer hand the down cards. Where I was able to excellent was with splits and doubles. Betting 10 most of the time allowed a 1-6 bet spread where at 5, I was looking at a spread of 12. All the tables I saw and played were h17.

I will continue played at $5 tables until I have 200-300 units at a higher limit table. Being able to back down your bet is a good thing.

Quote: rhodyBob

Mohegan has $5 tables, where they hit a soft 17. On all other tables, it's stand on a soft 17. Standing on a soft 17 is a .24% benefit over hit, so I have read. Ignoring all other issues, is it better to sacrifice that benefit in order to play at a table with a lower minimum, assuming that you can bet the lower minimum when the count is negative. I am very new to counting and so want to limit the downside by betting a lower minimum while I see if I can count. I figure it's better to play at a $5 table, but "think" in $10 betting units. Bet $5 when the deck is against me, bet $20 when the true count is +2, $30 when it's +3, and so on. Even with a horrible negative True Count, hey - it's just $5. No need to get up and walk away, especially since at the $5 tables you can't just wander around and play when you want - there are only 10 or so $5 tables, max. Any thoughts?

Great site by the way. Been lurking for a while in the background, this is my first post. Looking forward to some interesting replies.

I play $5 tables with H17 instead of $25 tables with S17. H17 versus S17 is less important for a counter than a regular player because the dealer busts the A-6 hand more often as the count goes up, when your bets are highest. Surrender is more important for a counter than a regular player because you will surrender more hands at higher counts, which shaves more off the house edge. Where I play, they offer surrender only at H17 tables.

Your risk of ruin, and other factors like deck penetration, should determine what table you play at, not H17 v. S17. There is not a .24% benefit for a counter, that's for a basic strategist. It makes no sense for me to play at a high limit table because the risk is too high, regardless of the slightly better odds. If you are betting $10 per card, you are betting exactly like I do. X dollars times count = bet. Most use a more rational scheme, with a max bet at +4 or 5. Unless you are being extremely conservative, too conservative, with your betting, you cannot afford to play high limit without increasing your risk of ruin to unacceptable levels, so I strongly suggest staying at low limit tables.

Quote: BizzyB

I play $5 tables with H17 instead of $25 tables with S17. H17 versus S17 is less important for a counter than a regular player because the dealer busts the A-6 hand more often as the count goes up, when your bets are highest. Surrender is more important for a counter than a regular player because you will surrender more hands at higher counts, which shaves more off the house edge. Where I play, they offer surrender only at H17 tables.

Your risk of ruin, and other factors like deck penetration, should determine what table you play at, not H17 v. S17. There is not a .24% benefit for a counter, that's for a basic strategist. It makes no sense for me to play at a high limit table because the risk is too high, regardless of the slightly better odds. If you are betting $10 per card, you are betting exactly like I do. X dollars times count = bet. Most use a more rational scheme, with a max bet at +4 or 5. Unless you are being extremely conservative, too conservative, with your betting, you cannot afford to play high limit without increasing your risk of ruin to unacceptable levels, so I strongly suggest staying at low limit tables.

That seems odd. You would think the better rules like surrender would be at the S17 tables.

In rhodyBob's case, there are only six $5 H17 tables at Mohegan Sun not ten. They are very crowded nights and weekends. They are crowded mornings as well because they open only a few of them. You'd be lucky to get 50 hands per hour.

The answer to your ? involves your spread of wagering... $5 to 20 might do better at a H17. Betting $10 or $20 at S17 might not be to your bankroll's taste. Consider this little nugget if flat-betting. $5 x .0056 = 2.8 cents to the House. $10 x .00335 = 3.35 cents to the House. Also, consider that as the TC increases in a H17 game, the Dealer is more likely to draw to Hard-17: its the neutral and negative counts that hurt.

Quote: 1BB

That seems odd. You would think the better rules like surrender would be at the S17 tables.

In rhodyBob's case, there are only six $5 H17 tables at Mohegan Sun not ten. They are very crowded nights and weekends. They are crowded mornings as well because they open only a few of them. You'd be lucky to get 50 hands per hour.

High stakes ploppies hate surrender, and there's partially good reason. Casinos profit from surrender because it increases the effective house edge through increased opportunities for ploppy errors, while allowing the casino to advertise a lower theoretical edge.

If he can't afford a high stakes table he shouldn't be there. If he bets double the kelly criterion, he is likely to lose his bankroll, regardless of advantage. Alternatively, if he starts at a $25 min and adds $10 per positive true count, he won't even have an advantage over the house in a play-all situation.

Quote: 98Clubs

The answer to your ? involves your spread of wagering... $5 to 20 might do better at a H17. Betting $10 or $20 at S17 might not be to your bankroll's taste. Consider this little nugget if flat-betting. $5 x .0056 = 2.8 cents to the House. $10 x .00335 = 3.35 cents to the House. Also, consider that as the TC increases in a H17 game, the Dealer is more likely to draw to Hard-17: its the neutral and negative counts that hurt.

right. it's when your betting the table minimum that the S17/H17 matters most. it doesnt matter so much that you should decrease your spread just to get that rule. If you bet $10 per true count at a five dollar table, you should bet $50 at a $25 table for you to get the benefit of the rule.

Quote: BizzyB

High stakes ploppies hate surrender, and there's partially good reason. Casinos profit from surrender because it increases the effective house edge through increased opportunities for ploppy errors, while allowing the casino to advertise a lower theoretical edge.

If he can't afford a high stakes table he shouldn't be there. If he bets double the kelly criterion, he is likely to lose his bankroll, regardless of advantage. Alternatively, if he starts at a $25 min and adds $10 per positive true count, he won't even have an advantage over the house in a play-all situation.

I've often said that if everyone used surrender properly the casinos may not offer it. I haven't seen anything to worry about yet.