How beatable is this game?

Most of my experience is with double-deck or 6-deck games -- I don't have much experience with single deck. So, there is this game...

Single Deck
3:2
S17
No resplits
No DAS
No drawing to split aces
Double on 10 or 11 only
Ro5 (not 6)
No mid-deck entry

House edge is not particularly high off the top, but they deal one round less than I'd like. The dealers seem competent.

Finding tables where I can play heads-up is not a problem (so I can play as many hands as I want, to fine-tune the penetration if necessary)

How good of a game is this? Is it beatable by just depth-charging, or will some bet variation be necessary as well? I am fine using a complicated count, including side-counts of several ranks (it's only a few hands)

My knowledge of single-deck is embarrassingly bad -- I simply haven't really encountered anything that seemed playable before.

Two guys walk into a bar. Which is surprising, because you'd think that the second guy would have seen the first guy walk into it and stopped.

Not great, but if I have to keep bumping this thread, the jokes are only going to get worse. Anyone?

this game looks plenty beatable to me with depth charging -- provided you keep several side counts.

Quote: sodawater

this game looks plenty beatable to me with depth charging -- provided you keep several side counts.

Thanks soda! This is what I was hoping. I'm writing and working through some simulations now.

I'm sure I'm reinventing the wheel here. Are there good resources available for single-deck play? All my books focus on multiple-deck and mention single-deck briefly, if at all.

Anyway, I'll see what my simulations turn up.

Quote: sodawater

this game looks plenty beatable to me with depth charging .

What is depth charging?

Quote: mickeycrimm

What is depth charging?

Flat betting and making strategy variations based on the count.

It's kind of hard to detect unless if the pit is also a very skilled player. My only concern is that the insurance play might give it away, but that is just too valuable to give up.

No I think depth charging refers to playing mutilple spots and betting more on the later spots.

AxiomOfChoice, how deep is the dealer penetration?

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

Flat betting and making strategy variations based on the count.

It's kind of hard to detect unless if the pit is also a very skilled player. My only concern is that the insurance play might give it away, but that is just too valuable to give up.

Close. Flat bet or bet minimum on the FIRST hand and increase from there. You can't beat single deck with flat betting. You must find a way to see the other players' cards for it to work.

Quote: sodawater

No I think depth charging refers to playing mutilple spots and betting more on the later spots.

That is correct.

Quote: 1BB

Close. Flat bet or bet minimum on the FIRST hand and increase from there. You can't beat single deck with flat betting. You must find a way to see the other players' cards for it to work.

There's a story in one of Ian Anderson's books about a counter beating a single deck game by making two huge flat bets, counting EVERYTHING, and only continuing in the game if the count was positive. He would just make an excuse to go to the bathroom when the count was negative. Essentially anti-wonging.

Thanks everyone. It looks like I was misusing the term "depth charging". I am still interested to see if this game can be beat with flat betting. It's looking unlikely. I'm not done yet though so I'll wait to see what the sims show. If I can't get a 1% edge it's probably not worth my time -- there are better games.

Keeping track of exact deck composition should not be that hard. Good bridge players keep track of every card, rank and suit, for the whole deck (sometimes you need to know if that 7 of hearts is good!) I'm looking at remembering ranks only for about 1/3 of the deck. With a bit of practice I'm sure I can do it.

Quote: sodawater

There's a story in one of Ian Anderson's books about a counter beating a single deck game by making two huge flat bets, counting EVERYTHING, and only continuing in the game if the count was positive. He would just make an excuse to go to the bathroom when the count was negative. Essentially anti-wonging.

I remember reading that this works in a 6-deck game with just an ordinary count. Never simulated it though so I can't say for sure. Personally I think that this would attract way too much attention in single-deck, unless if your goal is to make only a few bets per night.

Ro5 is limiting. 5 Players or 6 Players shuffles every round. HeadsUp plays 5 rounds. This is imortant because

1.) Playing 5 spots depth charging has a pen of about 17 cards. H.A. with shuffle/round is about 0.28% Basic.
2.) HeadsUp gets you 5 rounds totaling 28-29 cards. House Advantage here is 0.39% off the top, but can vary.

Heads up is only 4 rounds. Isn't that Ro5? 5 - num_players rounds? Or should I call this Ro4?

I am running sims now assuming playing 2 hands vs the dealer (and no other players). So 3 rounds of 2 hands.

My sims agree that HE off the top is .28% playing basic strategy (so my software works!) :) Adding in perfect insurance drops it to about .19% combined (.12% on the last round). It's not looking good -- I seriously doubt I'll be able to get a worthwhile edge flat-betting all 3 rounds.

I could probably (I'm guessing -- no sims to back this up) get an edge playing 5 or 6 spots, with larger bets on later spots. That has to stick out like a sore thumb though. The attraction of playing 2 spots alone vs the dealer is that it blends right in. Lots of people do this.

Oh well, if it doesn't work out it doesn't work out. There are other beatable games at this casino. I'm actually learning a lot more about the game. Single deck is... interesting!