Card Counting Question
Let's say, hypothetically, you were flat betting, and only deviated from basic strategy according to the true count. Would it be advisable to change strategy as the count goes up and down? To clarify, let's say the count was abnormally high. Would it be to my benefit to assume that the dealer's 2nd card is a ten? Also, if the count was abnormally low, would it be to my benefit to "copy the dealer" and stand on all hands 17 and above and hit on all hands 16 and below (including soft hands)? A detailed explanation is always appreciated. Thanks!
If the count is abnormally low then the only benefit to copying the dealer would be to continue to lose. If the count is abnormally high, just assuming the dealer's hole card is a ten hardly constitutes a strategy, and if it's that high, why flat bet. Counting and counting and counting is a chore. You don't do it just so you can ignore it's value.
Quote: TheMadSailorI just started card counting recently and I had a question:
Let's say, hypothetically, you were flat betting, and only deviated from basic strategy according to the true count. Would it be advisable to change strategy as the count goes up and down? To clarify, let's say the count was abnormally high. Would it be to my benefit to assume that the dealer's 2nd card is a ten? Also, if the count was abnormally low, would it be to my benefit to "copy the dealer" and stand on all hands 17 and above and hit on all hands 16 and below (including soft hands)? A detailed explanation is always appreciated. Thanks!
Card counting provides two benefits:
1. More accurate betting based on deck composition
2. More accurate playing based on deck composition
So yes, if you're counting cards, you should deviate from basic strategy based on your count. It's not as simple as assuming a dealer's card is a 10. There are deviations you need to make at certain count levels (called indexes). To get your index in the Hi-Lo count, you divide your running count by the number of decks left.
For example, in the Hi-Lo count in a 6-deck game with normal rules, you would hit a 16 vs. a dealer 10 with any positive running count (i.e. your index is above 0)
Check out "the Illustrious 18" strategy deviations -- these are most important. https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/card-counting/high-low/
All told, for shoe games, betting variation is far more important than playing deviations. But if for some reason you just want to make playing deviations, they will help you.
It should be noted that Hi-Lo is a counting system that is optimized for shoe games and betting power. If you want to count just for playing decisions, you should use a count that treats an ace as a bad card, not a good card like Hi-Lo.
Quote: TheMadSailorI just started card counting recently and I had a question:
Let's say, hypothetically, you were flat betting, and only deviated from basic strategy according to the true count. Would it be advisable to change strategy as the count goes up and down? To clarify, let's say the count was abnormally high. Would it be to my benefit to assume that the dealer's 2nd card is a ten? Also, if the count was abnormally low, would it be to my benefit to "copy the dealer" and stand on all hands 17 and above and hit on all hands 16 and below (including soft hands)? A detailed explanation is always appreciated. Thanks!
Ah, the play for comps formula. I know people who do just that. A friend flat bets $25 and makes about $20 an hour. He plays a six deck game with good rules and penetration, uses Hi-Lo, the Illustrious 18 plus a few more and wongs aggressively. He even ratholes to keep his lifetime wins down.
He's been flat bet by casinos so many times that he's decided to do just that and flat bet. He plays as long as he wishes and makes deviations from basic strategy without giving it a second thought. The casinos love him, he enjoys the social aspect and the hunt while earning decent comps.
This guy is a pro's pro with many years of experience who no longer travels due to health issues but is still as sharp as a tack. Do not expect similar results although I don't think it's unreasonable to shoot for break even with this approach.
This fellow is a lot of fun to play with. Sadly, he's a chain smoker so that leaves me out unless I can get a non smoking table. Even then he stands behind the table and lights up during the shuffle and has to constantly be shooed away.
Quote: TheMadSailorI just started card counting recently and I had a question:
Let's say, hypothetically, you were flat betting, and only deviated from basic strategy according to the true count. Would it be advisable to change strategy as the count goes up and down? To clarify, let's say the count was abnormally high. Would it be to my benefit to assume that the dealer's 2nd card is a ten? Also, if the count was abnormally low, would it be to my benefit to "copy the dealer" and stand on all hands 17 and above and hit on all hands 16 and below (including soft hands)? A detailed explanation is always appreciated. Thanks!
Would it be advisable to change strategy as the count goes up and down? Yes, you use play indices
Would it be to my benefit to assume that the dealer's 2nd card is a ten? No, this is how morons teach other morons to play
Also, if the count was abnormally low, would it be to my benefit to "copy the dealer". No, this one of the worst possible strategies you can use
The advantage of card counting comes primarily from bet variation; you could always just follow basic strategy. Reading your post, I don't think you know that.
When you play blackjack the house has an edge. That means over time you will lose money.
When you count you are able to determine when the deck is in your favor.
The goal is to win enough money during the times the deck is in your favor to compensate for all the times the deck wasn't in your favor.
To do this you have to raise your wager when the deck is favorable.
Tweaking basic strategy when the count is favorable will move the house edge but not enough to make back the losses.
That said, you could try to take full advantage of all advantage play and continue to flat bet and see how you do.
For example, you could stand at the table and count and only enter when the count is favorable. Then flat betting is ok because you didn't have to play through the losses. Of course you'd want to walk away at the right exit count. There are other advantage plays where you could make money just flat betting. Finding a weak dealer who flashes the hold card might be one.
On the Wizard of Odds Blackjack page, he discusses the odds of 3 popular plays under "Bad Strategies": I thought you might find this info useful.
Quote:Bad Strategies
Three popular bad strategies encountered at the blackjack table are: never bust, mimic the dealer, and always assume the dealer has a ten in the hole. All three are very bad strategies. Following are my specific comments on each of them, including the house edge under Atlantic City rules (dealer stands on soft 17, split up to 4 hands, double after split, double any two cards) of 0.43%.
Never bust: For my analysis of this strategy I assumed the player would never hit a hard 12 or more. All other decisions were according to correct basic strategy. This "never bust" strategy results in a house edge of 3.91%.
Mimic the dealer: For my analysis of this strategy I assumed the player would always hit 16 or less and stand on17 or more, including a soft 17. The player never doubled or split, since the dealer is not allowed to do so. This "mimic the dealer" strategy results in a house edge of 5.48%.
Assume a ten in the hole: For this strategy I first figured out the optimal basic strategy under this assumption. If the dealer had an ace up, then I reverted to proper basic strategy, because the dealer would have peeked for blackjack, making a 10 impossible. This "assume a ten" strategy results in a house edge of 10.03%.
WoO Blackjack
Quote: beachbumbabsMad Sailor,
On the Wizard of Odds Blackjack page, he discusses the odds of 3 popular plays under "Bad Strategies": I thought you might find this info useful.
WoO Blackjack
Good link babs, should answer his question pretty well =p.
Mad Sailor, I also discuss this in full in the A-Z card counting thread on page 2. Dig around a bit to try to find your answers (tons of people ask similar questions), then if you don't see much (doubtfully), feel free to ask away =).
Quote: Romes
Mad Sailor, I also discuss this in full in the A-Z card counting thread on page 2. Dig around a bit to try to find your answers (tons of people ask similar questions), then if you don't see much (doubtfully), feel free to ask away =).
LOL +4,000,000
Quote: beachbumbabsMad Sailor,
On the Wizard of Odds Blackjack page, he discusses the odds of 3 popular plays under "Bad Strategies": I thought you might find this info useful.Quote:Bad Strategies
Three popular bad strategies encountered at the blackjack table are: never bust, mimic the dealer, and always assume the dealer has a ten in the hole. All three are very bad strategies. Following are my specific comments on each of them, including the house edge under Atlantic City rules (dealer stands on soft 17, split up to 4 hands, double after split, double any two cards) of 0.43%.
Never bust: For my analysis of this strategy I assumed the player would never hit a hard 12 or more. All other decisions were according to correct basic strategy. This "never bust" strategy results in a house edge of 3.91%.
Mimic the dealer: For my analysis of this strategy I assumed the player would always hit 16 or less and stand on17 or more, including a soft 17. The player never doubled or split, since the dealer is not allowed to do so. This "mimic the dealer" strategy results in a house edge of 5.48%.
Assume a ten in the hole: For this strategy I first figured out the optimal basic strategy under this assumption. If the dealer had an ace up, then I reverted to proper basic strategy, because the dealer would have peeked for blackjack, making a 10 impossible. This "assume a ten" strategy results in a house edge of 10.03%.
WoO Blackjack
If you assume a 10 in the hole you'll be hitting many hands of 17, 18 and 19.
Quote: 1BBQuote: beachbumbabsMad Sailor,
On the Wizard of Odds Blackjack page, he discusses the odds of 3 popular plays under "Bad Strategies": I thought you might find this info useful.Quote:Bad Strategies
Three popular bad strategies encountered at the blackjack table are: never bust, mimic the dealer, and always assume the dealer has a ten in the hole. All three are very bad strategies. Following are my specific comments on each of them, including the house edge under Atlantic City rules (dealer stands on soft 17, split up to 4 hands, double after split, double any two cards) of 0.43%.
Never bust: For my analysis of this strategy I assumed the player would never hit a hard 12 or more. All other decisions were according to correct basic strategy. This "never bust" strategy results in a house edge of 3.91%.
Mimic the dealer: For my analysis of this strategy I assumed the player would always hit 16 or less and stand on17 or more, including a soft 17. The player never doubled or split, since the dealer is not allowed to do so. This "mimic the dealer" strategy results in a house edge of 5.48%.
Assume a ten in the hole: For this strategy I first figured out the optimal basic strategy under this assumption. If the dealer had an ace up, then I reverted to proper basic strategy, because the dealer would have peeked for blackjack, making a 10 impossible. This "assume a ten" strategy results in a house edge of 10.03%.
WoO Blackjack
If you assume a 10 in the hole you'll be hitting many hands of 17, 18 and 19.
Then you should assume the next card out of the shoe is a 10, and never hit a 12 or higher...and never hit 6 or lower since you're more likely to take the dealer's bust card than to improve your hand. Always split 10s, split 5s against 2-6, and it probably be safe to split 9s against an Ace, but not 8s.
Quote: Sonuvabish
Then you should assume the next card out of the shoe is a 10, and never hit a 12 or higher...and never hit 6 or lower since you're more likely to take the dealer's bust card than to improve your hand. Always split 10s, split 5s against 2-6, and it probably be safe to split 9s against an Ace, but not 8s.
MadSailor,
Disregard this advice; you're being kidded. Maybe you'll find it funny in a couple of years. :P
Just read the Wizard's page, check out some of the Appendices. Then read the page again every couple weeks, after you've gone and played. It's like Where's Waldo; there's so much information there, different things will jump out at you each time you review it. Good luck!
