Which Casino?
August 4th, 2015 at 3:46:02 PM
permalink
There are only a few casinos within a couple of hours of where I live, and I try and make it out to them about once a month. The casinos in this particular group offer Single Deck, H17, NDAS, Double Any 2, RSA, 3:2 BJ, No Surrender.
One casino is kinda run-down, and the tables are almost completely empty most of the time. When I play there, I'm usually playing head-on with the dealer, and at most with 1-2 other people if anybody else joins in. With that, I can get a lot of hands in before a shuffle (4-5 hands) as well as a lot of hands per hour, but being one of the only players on the floor at a given night, I get a bit more scrutiny from the pit. Once I jumped from $5 to $40 on a good count, and they shuffled up on me immediately.
The casino right across the street is a lot nicer, but the tables are almost always full. Even if I'm lucky to find a table with only a few players, the other seats usually fill up soon after with all the foot traffic they have. Consequently, the dealer usually shuffles every two hands, so any benefit I get from a high count is wiped out every other hand. It's also quite a bit more lax, so I can range my bets without anybody noticing. There was even one time the dealer noticed a lot of small cards on a previous round (TC +7 or +8; I was drooling) and she advised one of the players to play two hands that round. (The dealer then got BJ on a 10-up, so go figure)
My question is, given these two casinos, would you rather play at the run-down one with fewer players, more deals per shuffle, more hands per hour, and more heat? Or would you rather play at the nicer casino with more players, but fewer hands per hour, fewer deals per shuffle, and less heat? Both have pretty good penetration, but obviously it takes a little longer to get to the same point in the deck when playing head-on.
Side notes: My count is Hi-Opt 1, spread $5 - $40 on TC 1 - 4, and I'm slowly learning the indices from -6 to 6. There's not a lot of opportunity to Wong-out: at the run-down casino because you're often the only one playing, and at the nicer casino because they often ask you to give up your seat for potential players if you sit out. I've done a few EV and SD calculations just on Excel, and I've realized I need to play a LOT of hours for my game to even remotely pay out. However, I'm not sure if I would rather play at the run-down casino with the added scrutiny and everything. I play rated at the nicer casino, and they offered me a free room after only a few times of playing there.
One casino is kinda run-down, and the tables are almost completely empty most of the time. When I play there, I'm usually playing head-on with the dealer, and at most with 1-2 other people if anybody else joins in. With that, I can get a lot of hands in before a shuffle (4-5 hands) as well as a lot of hands per hour, but being one of the only players on the floor at a given night, I get a bit more scrutiny from the pit. Once I jumped from $5 to $40 on a good count, and they shuffled up on me immediately.
The casino right across the street is a lot nicer, but the tables are almost always full. Even if I'm lucky to find a table with only a few players, the other seats usually fill up soon after with all the foot traffic they have. Consequently, the dealer usually shuffles every two hands, so any benefit I get from a high count is wiped out every other hand. It's also quite a bit more lax, so I can range my bets without anybody noticing. There was even one time the dealer noticed a lot of small cards on a previous round (TC +7 or +8; I was drooling) and she advised one of the players to play two hands that round. (The dealer then got BJ on a 10-up, so go figure)
My question is, given these two casinos, would you rather play at the run-down one with fewer players, more deals per shuffle, more hands per hour, and more heat? Or would you rather play at the nicer casino with more players, but fewer hands per hour, fewer deals per shuffle, and less heat? Both have pretty good penetration, but obviously it takes a little longer to get to the same point in the deck when playing head-on.
Side notes: My count is Hi-Opt 1, spread $5 - $40 on TC 1 - 4, and I'm slowly learning the indices from -6 to 6. There's not a lot of opportunity to Wong-out: at the run-down casino because you're often the only one playing, and at the nicer casino because they often ask you to give up your seat for potential players if you sit out. I've done a few EV and SD calculations just on Excel, and I've realized I need to play a LOT of hours for my game to even remotely pay out. However, I'm not sure if I would rather play at the run-down casino with the added scrutiny and everything. I play rated at the nicer casino, and they offered me a free room after only a few times of playing there.
August 4th, 2015 at 4:53:10 PM
permalink
Full tables at single deck just doesn't work for counting. I would choose the run down casino.
Do a thorough assessment of all playing conditions. Visit all shifts, pay attention to the pits, find any sympathetic dealers and try to determine the heat level.
Showing a 1-8 spread could be the reason you were shuffled up on. A 1-4 spread may be more tolerable. Just spread $10 to $40. I would, for the most part, play all. Wonging out just isn't that feasible in single deck. Once you know their comfort level you can always place a few $5 bets. Are you using an ace side count? Do you play rated?
Do a thorough assessment of all playing conditions. Visit all shifts, pay attention to the pits, find any sympathetic dealers and try to determine the heat level.
Showing a 1-8 spread could be the reason you were shuffled up on. A 1-4 spread may be more tolerable. Just spread $10 to $40. I would, for the most part, play all. Wonging out just isn't that feasible in single deck. Once you know their comfort level you can always place a few $5 bets. Are you using an ace side count? Do you play rated?
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth. - Mahatma Ghandi
August 4th, 2015 at 6:27:18 PM
permalink
I'm not an AP/Counter, so this is FWIW, but I think you should consider mid-range starting your bets, at 10-15 and go down if the table goes south, and keep your top bet $40, so your spread isn't going to get you so much attention. But I'd definitely prefer the slower, shabbier casino for your play.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
August 5th, 2015 at 8:41:19 AM
permalink
I play rated at the nicer casino but have not yet at the shabbier one. They're under different management, but I wouldn't be surprised if they share info, especially since they're the only casinos around for hundreds of miles. I've only started counting in the last year, so I haven't fully integrated an Ace side count into my play, but I try to when I'm not too fatigued.
I'll try condensing my spread; from the numbers I've run, that'll hurt my winning rate, but not as much as playing at a full table. I may also try hitting the nicer casino at slower times - maybe during the weekdays.
I'll try condensing my spread; from the numbers I've run, that'll hurt my winning rate, but not as much as playing at a full table. I may also try hitting the nicer casino at slower times - maybe during the weekdays.
