Does True Count Alter Basic Strategy?

I've recently read Professional Blackjack and got interested in counting. I've managed to do some practise and keep track of the count pretty well on live tables.

I know basic strategy for the casinos in my country and understand how to play.

However, my question is, should I modify basic strategy when the count reaches a certain level?

Here is an example from my gaming recently:

• We were about 3 decks in (out of 8 decks)
• The true count was about 3.5
• I was dealt hard 16
• The dealer was dealt a 9

I took a card, as under the basic strategy this was the correct play. However, given such a high true count, should I have modified my strategy because of the additional high cards in the deck and the reduction in the number of lower cards?

As it happened I pulled a 10 and the dealer bust with 24. You can't win them all of course.

TIA for any advice or thoughts about my question.

I was about to say, "Think about it for a minute: if you don't deviate from basic strategy, then why bother counting?", but then I realized that I wasn't taking changing the amount of your bets into account.

There are a couple of situations in basic strategy where the size of the deck/shoe matters:
(a) With two decks or fewer, stand on hard 16 against a dealer's 10; with more than two decks, hit
(b) With two decks or fewer, double on soft 13 against a dealer's 5; with more than two decks, hit but don't double
While this doesn't answer your question directly, it does indicate that the composition of the deck can affect strategy.

The problem is, any strategy that depends on the count depends on the counting method.

My advice would be to start with a book more in tune with where your game is.
Blackjack Bluebook2 by Fred Renzey will guide you through the steps needed to win.
Your strategy will change according to the count. I know a guy who claims to know over 200 modifications , but learning 14 of them will work in 99% of the cases. Learning a half dozen will cover a bit more than half of them.
I'm sure others will disagree but I think Professional Blackjack is a bad choice as a first book on advanced blackjack.

I should have clarified that I was using standard Hi-Lo for keeping the count, and had increased my bets proportionally (more or less) with the true count.

Your post illustrates for me that there is definitely more for me to learn in this area, thank you.
Have you any recommendations on where to learn these aspects of the game?

Thank you for the recommendation. I also have Blackjack Attach by Don Schlesinger but have not yet read it.

I'll order the Fred Renzey book now and will look to begin to develop my gameplay further when the count favours it, thank you.

Although I'm not experienced enough to agree whether Professional Blackjack is not a great starter book (although I'm happy to accept your assertion), what I will say is that it definitely encouraged me to try for myself and gave me a real desire to learn more.

You seem to have a few books on Blackjack that you either not read completely or not read at all....Looks like a recipe for disaster!
If you had "really" read Wong's book, you wouldn't ask yourself and everyone if you have to change your Basic Strategy based on the count.
Do your homework first, then you may ask for clarifications.

How fucking rude. Fuck off

The index number for standing on 16 vs 9 rather than hitting is true count of +5, so if the TC was in the 3.5 range, technically the correct play was to hit, but it was close enough that it really makes little difference in longterm EV.

Professional blackjack is still a good book. Because conditions have changed since it was published it is slightly outdated. The counting and index numbers are all still good (valid). Hi-Lo count is fine. It has served me well for 16 years. What is a little outdated is the betting ramp information. If memory serves Wong used a base bet of $10 and raised by $10 increments at each true count. That is too slow of a ramp for todays games. You need to get up to your max bet quicker at a TC of about TC 4 or TC 5.

I think Wong also used the 100 max bet rule for a recommendation for a suitable BR which was kind of standard back then. With computers we have better ways to figure BR RoR today based on Kelly or a fraction of Kelly. I mean the 100 max bet rule isn't that far off as an estimate. We just have the capability to be more precise.

As you read blackjack Attack (hopefully BJ attack 3 version), that will become your go to book. BJ attack 3 has really held up well. Don Schlesinger participates at the blackjackinfo forum (owned by the same parent company as this site) should you have any questions you would like him to answer.

Thanks for the detailed response kwelj. I do own BJ Attack and it is the 3rd edition but as I mentioned in an earlier post I've not yet read it. I'll get straight onto reading it.

I've been scaling my bets in line with Wong's approach but it sounds like perhaps the raise should be more aggresive?

I was particularly interested in learning some quick rules for modifying betting strategy at certain true counts in order to leverage the best play at that level (as you alluded to in your first paragraph). Thanks again

Quote: nikcyt

I've been scaling my bets in line with Wong's approach but it sounds like perhaps the raise should be more aggresive?

Exactly! Because of worse conditions today, resulting in a higher house edge, you have to bet a little more aggressively than most of the older books recommend.

Quote: nikcyt

I was particularly interested in learning some quick rules for modifying betting strategy at certain true counts in order to leverage the best play at that level (as you alluded to in your first paragraph). Thanks again

Technically there are 100's of index plays, that would be the number that you hit, stand, double down, split differently than basic strategy. Luckily most occur so infrequently at such extreme counts that re rarely seen, they add almost nothing (a small fraction of a penny). Don is also know for the illustrious 18, which are the top 18 strategy changes. The ones that really add a some value. That is all you really need to know, so look up illustrious 18 in his book and learn those strategy changes and you will be fine.

Winning at Today's games is really more about the bet spread than the strategy changes. You could probably skip all the strategy changes, and just play basic strategy with a decent bet spread and your results wouldn't change that much. But I recommend learning some, At the very minimum insurance and 16 vs 10 because they are the most important. But really learn 18. That is not too much to learn for anyone semi-serious about the game and winning.

Quote: nikcyt

How fucking rude. Fuck off

Better be rude than a fucking moron!

Quote: GMan

Better be rude than a fucking moron!

Now why did you go and do that? 3 days

What is going on? This nikcyt was tasha/nathan?

I thought that a possibility when I answered. but that's ok, I was sort of hoping someone else might find the info useful. But I have to admit, this will get tired real quick. Maybe one of you better detective types can give me a heads up next time. lol

People don't wear their f-bomb mask on the forum and get bounced.

Reminds me of one Counter who streamed live BJ play but he'd swear all the time and he'd get bounced within the hour from entire chains of casinos, but he said he was tossed for counting.

Quote: kewlj

What is going on? This nikcyt was tasha/nathan?

I thought that a possibility when I answered. but that's ok, I was sort of hoping someone else might find the info useful. But I have to admit, this will get tired real quick. Maybe one of you better detective types can give me a heads up next time. lol

Suspended only for profanity.
It's not Tasha.

KJ is a very learned player and gives good advice. And the advice he gave the OP was correct...............for his level of play most likely. I mean if he really read Professional BJ and didn't know what all the strategy index tables meant, he needs help. But I have to differ about one thing..............at least once the OP learns enough. Basic strategy variation IS important and DOES add a significant amount to your EV. Now it's nowhere near as big as betting variations but it is significant none the less.

Take a look at this when you get comfortable with what that means OP.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOEgqrwxVW0

(Blackjack Apprenticeships analysis)

Quote: OnceDear

Now why did you go and do that? 3 days

Not that anyone should be dropping f bombs respectfully but the OP did start it. Look at his post on the first page when he told GMan to F off. I'm not defending either but you should be fair/impartial/consistent in punishments/suspensions, should you not? LOL

Quote: MJGolf

Not that anyone should be dropping f bombs respectfully but the OP did start it. Look at his post on the first page when he told GMan to F off. I'm not defending either but you should be fair/impartial/consistent in punishments/suspensions, should you not? LOL

The OP had already been suspended for 3 days for his F-Bomb to GMan. Indeed he was suspended 5 hours before GMan's retaliation.

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/info/rules/5288-suspension-list/#post71165

Seems fair to me. Same offence: Same penalty.

Thanks. I replied prematurely without reviewing another thread as I only saw your post here against Gman. I stand corrected. =)

Hi and welcome,

I haven't looked at all the potential "cover plays", but if I was counting cards I would alter basic strategy by:


1. always standing on all hard 16s

. Overall, it doesn't cost you "too much EV" when the count is neutral (or negative), and you are betting "your minimum" bet.
. When the count is positive / "when you are betting bigger", standing is the correct play to make.

2. split your 2s vs an 8

. If you get this hand at the start of a fresh shoe (eg neutral count) then it costs you about 1.68%, but overall it only costs you about 1/134,000, when you take into account the chance of getting that particular hand, [1.68% (cost) x 0.04441...% (chance)]
. I think that if the true count is about +2 then it becomes the "correct play for an 8-deck game"

---
General: Changing your play style in conjunction with upping your bets, is probably a sure-fire way of getting your play "flagged by the casino"

General: Look for other basic strategy "error plays" that make you look a bit "stupid". Focus on plays that only cost you "a little bit in overall ev" (consider altering your basic strategy for some of the plays in the link below, focus on plays with a count of " 0 or higher" or "+1 or higher")


https://www.casinonewsdaily.com/blackjack-guide/illustrious-18/

---
spelling not checked etc

Look into card counters basic strategy.

This allows you to play hands the same way, avoiding the "tell" of playing the same hand differently at different times. There is some cost, but it is minimal as the hands played non-optimally are always hands with minimum wagers out. Hands with bigger wagers are always played optimally.

Your 16 vs 10 is the perfect example. Basic Strategy says to hit. For players counting it is an index of zero or 1 depending on how you do your indexes. So you should basically hit at zero and negative counts and stand on positive counts. So card counter basic Strategy says to stand. What this means is at counts of zero and negative counts, you are technically playing the hand incorrectly with your minimum wager out at a very tiny cost, but all other times, with larger wagers you are playing it correctly and you avoid the tell of playing the hand differently at different times.

Another is the 12 vs 2 or 3. Basic strategy says to hit. Card counters index (for Hi-Lo) is +3 and +2 , meaning you stand at 12 vs 3 at +2 and higher and stand stand 12 vs 2 at +3 and higher. So card counter BS is to stand, meaning a zero and +1 you are technically playing wrong, but at minimal cost and other times with bigger wagers out you are playing correctly.

If you exit negative counts aggressively (wong out) as I do, card counter basic strategy makes even more sense as there are less negative counts that you are technically playing incorrectly.

There are more, but insurance is the tough one. If you want to play insurance the same way and play it so it is correct when the bigger bets are out, then the Card Counter basic strategy is to always take insurance. However the cost of doing that is a little more than these other plays, so you may or may not want to include insurance as part of CCBS.

Remember the big thing with CCBS is that you are playing wrong at a slight cost only when your minimum wager is out and playing correctly at all other times when larger wagers are out AND you have eliminated the tell of playing certain hands one way and differently at different counts.

Quote: OnceDear

The OP had already been suspended for 3 days for his F-Bomb to GMan. Indeed he was suspended 5 hours before GMan's retaliation.

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/info/rules/5288-suspension-list/#post71165

Seems fair to me. Same offence: Same penalty.

No off-setting penalties?

In Inside the Edge "KC" describes a few circumstances where he deviates from basic strategy. I don’t necessarily agree with his altering basic strategy to the point of doubling a hard nine against a dealer ten face up just because the count is plus 3 - I don't think plus 3 is quite enough to justify that, especially on multiple hands with a hard nine in one deal. While not related to the count, he also describes seeing the hole card or having the dealer TELL the hole card, yes I've experienced that, in a scenario like that, sure, I've altered basic strategy greatly.

Quote: OnceDear

The OP had already been suspended for 3 days for his F-Bomb to GMan. Indeed he was suspended 5 hours before GMan's retaliation.

/forum/info/rules/5288-suspension-list/#post71165

Seems fair to me. Same offence: Same penalty.

And when I came back to this ridiculous thread, how was I to know that he was already suspended?
Don't expect me to lay down when this guy treat me like that.

Same offense...you see things you're own way!

Quote: MDawg

In Inside the Edge "KC" describes a few circumstances where he deviates from basic strategy. I don’t necessarily agree with his altering basic strategy to the point of doubling a hard nine against a dealer ten face up just because the count is plus 3 - I don't think plus 3 is quite enough to justify that, especially on multiple hands with a hard nine in one deal. While not related to the count, he also describes seeing the hole card or having the dealer TELL the hole card, yes I've experienced that, in a scenario like that, sure, I've altered basic strategy greatly.

I think you misunderstood something, there is no way he doubled hard 9 against a 10. What would multiple hands have to do with it? How would a dealer know the hole card in order to tell it to you?

Quote: WTflush

How would a dealer know the hole card in order to tell it to you?

Under 'Dealer Peek' rules, if the dealer has a face card or ten face up, he 'peeks' at the hole card to see if it's an ace. Certain subliminal actions, such as hesitation can reveal a hint of the card's value. A careless or cheating dealer might be more helpful.
In the UK, under UK rules, if cards are accidentally revealed, such as if they come from the shoe face up, then they can be backed up and redealt, even if the player knows what they are. I've benefited from that a few times :o)

Quote: OnceDear

Under 'Dealer Peek' rules, if the dealer has a face card or ten face up, he 'peeks' at the hole card to see if it's an ace. Certain subliminal actions, such as hesitation can reveal a hint of the card's value. A careless or cheating dealer might be more helpful.
In the UK, under UK rules, if cards are accidentally revealed, such as if they come from the shoe face up, then they can be backed up and redealt, even if the player knows what they are. I've benefited from that a few times :o)

Do you know of any casinos that still lift the card to peek at it? If so I'd love to know where! Every casino I've been to uses a peeking mirror, and you can't see the value of the card just whether or not it's an ace (or a 10/face if the card is rotated 90 degrees).

I have seen cases where a card is exposed as it comes out of the shoe (happens all the time on CSM dealt games) and the floorperson has allowed everyone to play the hand out. Might vary by casino and/or jurisdiction.

I suppose a decently skilled card mechanic could view their own hole card as they deal it in a handheld game, but I can't imagine a scenario where they'd reveal that to the player unless you were bribing them which sounds like a good way to end up in handcuffs.

Quote: WTflush

I think you misunderstood something, there is no way he doubled hard 9 against a 10. What would multiple hands have to do with it? How would a dealer know the hole card in order to tell it to you?

The only reason (and a good one!) to double 9 vs 10 is if you have seen the dealer's hole card and his total (hole card + 10) is now between 12-16. This would have nothing to do with a +3 count, but the +3 will certainly add to the advantage you get from this play.

Turning Stone, in upstate NY had that rule for many years. They also wouldn't change the decks very often so the tens tended to get slightly bowed. It was like fishing in a barrow.

The smaller casino in Searchlight used to have the dealers peek, but they no longer have table games.
I'd imagine there are a few small casinos that don't want to spring for the mirrors, which someone told me were licensed and not sold.

Quote: GMan

The only reason (and a good one!) to double 9 vs 10 is if you have seen the dealer's hole card and his total (hole card + 10) is now between 12-16. This would have nothing to do with a +3 count, but the +3 will certainly add to the advantage you get from this play.

I can't think of a better way to show the house their dealer is weak than doubling down on a nine vs. a ten. A pro would slow roast the situation, while a moron would microwave it.

Quote: billryan

I can't think of a better way to show the house their dealer is weak than doubling down on a nine vs. a ten. A pro would slow roast the situation, while a moron would microwave it.

Ah! This is of course a completely different debate :-)
What's mathematically better isn't always the best move in the casino.