technics
technics
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 54
Joined: Jul 28, 2014
November 16th, 2021 at 1:41:57 PM permalink
I believe that the Wizard has stated that playing against the Dealer one on one (by yourself) is plus EV, My experience seems to confirm this as true . Curious as to everyone’s thoughts.
ChumpChange
ChumpChange
  • Threads: 124
  • Posts: 5058
Joined: Jun 15, 2018
November 16th, 2021 at 1:53:46 PM permalink
I don't count cards at the table so I would not know if it was +EV.
I would hope I'd win 40 hands ahead sooner than losing 40 hands behind.
billryan
billryan
  • Threads: 245
  • Posts: 16681
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
November 16th, 2021 at 2:13:54 PM permalink
Quote: technics

I believe that the Wizard has stated that playing against the Dealer one on one (by yourself) is plus EV, My experience seems to confirm this as true . Curious as to everyone’s thoughts.
link to original post



I'd be surprised if he said that, and would have to see the context. Playing one on one makes the game faster, with many more hands per hour. It doesn't change the house edge and it eliminates any possibility of scavenger plays.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
OnceDear
OnceDear
  • Threads: 64
  • Posts: 7503
Joined: Jun 1, 2014
November 16th, 2021 at 2:37:08 PM permalink
Quote: billryan

Quote: technics

I believe that the Wizard has stated that playing against the Dealer one on one (by yourself) is plus EV, My experience seems to confirm this as true . Curious as to everyone’s thoughts.
link to original post



I'd be surprised if he said that, and would have to see the context. Playing one on one makes the game faster, with many more hands per hour. It doesn't change the house edge and it eliminates any possibility of scavenger plays.
link to original post

Agree, Needs context. Might give more scope to exploit dealer errors.
Psalm 25:16 Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted. Proverbs 18:2 A fool finds no satisfaction in trying to understand, for he would rather express his own opinion.
billryan
billryan
  • Threads: 245
  • Posts: 16681
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
November 16th, 2021 at 3:15:14 PM permalink
There was a guy in AC who exploited the shuffle with his cuts, playing one on one but those are exceptions to the rule.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
aceside
aceside
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 566
Joined: May 14, 2021
November 16th, 2021 at 3:23:02 PM permalink
Quote: billryan

There was a guy in AC who exploited the shuffle with his cuts, playing one on one but those are exceptions to the rule.
link to original post


I believe playing blackjack one-on-one (solo) has a smaller variance per hand, than playing with another player. However, I haven’t found a mathematical proof for this problem. Can anybody step in on this problem?
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
  • Threads: 209
  • Posts: 11045
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
November 16th, 2021 at 3:33:54 PM permalink
Just a wild ass guess here, but I believe it involves playing multiple hands as well.

If you’re playing by yourself, and playing three hands, then 75% of all black jacks will be in one of your hands. I think that’s where part of the +EV comes from.
I invented a few casino games. Info: http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ ————————————————————————————————————— Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
aceside
aceside
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 566
Joined: May 14, 2021
November 16th, 2021 at 3:38:42 PM permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBear

Just a wild ass guess here, but I believe it involves playing multiple hands as well.

If you’re playing by yourself, and playing three hands, then 75% of all black jacks will be in one of your hands. I think that’s where part of the +EV comes from.
link to original post


You just brought up a new concept. Is it possible to beat the blackjack game just by varying the number of hands while flat betting all the way? Interesting!
billryan
billryan
  • Threads: 245
  • Posts: 16681
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
November 16th, 2021 at 3:39:11 PM permalink
I overheard a guy saying he won't play one on one because the dealer gets 50% of the BJs whereas with four players, he gets 20%.
While accurate, I think it is meaningless.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
aceside
aceside
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 566
Joined: May 14, 2021
November 16th, 2021 at 3:40:27 PM permalink
Quote: billryan

I overheard a guy saying he won't play one on one because the dealer gets 50% of the BJs whereas with four players, he gets 20%.
While accurate, I think it is meaningless.
link to original post


This is definitely meaningless. I agree.
billryan
billryan
  • Threads: 245
  • Posts: 16681
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
November 16th, 2021 at 3:44:10 PM permalink
Quote: aceside

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Just a wild ass guess here, but I believe it involves playing multiple hands as well.

If you’re playing by yourself, and playing three hands, then 75% of all black jacks will be in one of your hands. I think that’s where part of the +EV comes from.
link to original post


You just brought up a new concept. Is it possible to beat the blackjack game just by varying the number of hands while flat betting all the way? Interesting!
link to original post



Being able to spread from one minimum bet to three large bets can be a great strategy if you are counting and do it at the right time. Randomly switching from one hand to three will simply let you play more hands in a shorter timespan. I don't see how it would let you overcome the house edge by itself.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
aceside
aceside
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 566
Joined: May 14, 2021
November 16th, 2021 at 3:46:20 PM permalink
Quote: billryan

Quote: aceside

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Just a wild ass guess here, but I believe it involves playing multiple hands as well.

If you’re playing by yourself, and playing three hands, then 75% of all black jacks will be in one of your hands. I think that’s where part of the +EV comes from.
link to original post


You just brought up a new concept. Is it possible to beat the blackjack game just by varying the number of hands while flat betting all the way? Interesting!
link to original post



Being able to spread from one minimum bet to three large bets can be a great strategy if you are counting and do it at the right time. Randomly switching from one hand to three will simply let you play more hands in a shorter timespan. I don't see how it would let you overcome the house edge by itself.
link to original post


This is exactly what is interesting!
Dieter
Administrator
Dieter
  • Threads: 16
  • Posts: 5858
Joined: Jul 23, 2014
Thanked by
Joeman
November 16th, 2021 at 5:01:27 PM permalink
If there is "nothing else going on", playing at a loaded table with tourists people making slow sidebets and taking a minute to read and ignore the strategy card they bought in the gift shop this morning theoretically helps you lose less cash money per comp earned (average bet * time on table).

If there is "something else going on", playing heads up should get you more rounds per hour, each of which may be +EV.
May the cards fall in your favor.
technics
technics
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 54
Joined: Jul 28, 2014
November 16th, 2021 at 7:50:41 PM permalink
Going from long term memory….. I believe that the reason stated was that when you play one on one vs the dealer you have a greater chance of getting “good” cards. Does that make sense?
BleedingChipsSlowly
BleedingChipsSlowly
  • Threads: 23
  • Posts: 1033
Joined: Jul 9, 2010
November 16th, 2021 at 10:06:54 PM permalink
Case against: If you are counting, you can’t sit out hands when the count is unfavorable. Perhaps better to have one or two other players who can play when you want to wait for a better count, but not a full table so you can play multiple hands when the count is favorable. Only one or two other players for a faster game than three or four other players.
“You don’t bring a bone saw to a negotiation.” - Robert Jordan, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia
jjjoooggg
jjjoooggg
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 1187
Joined: Jul 13, 2012
November 17th, 2021 at 12:13:34 AM permalink
1. If you are dealt after other’s face down cards, they won’t be in the running count as you make count based decisions.
2. If the count is high, a non AP may take a bust card away from the dealer when they should stand based on BS and deviations.
3. If you are first dealt, the count may change as players absorb cards. Changing a count based decision.
4. When the count is low, you may leave. When the count is high, you share high cards with other players.
5. A non AP may waste high cards when they should stand.
6, A non AP may give a dealer more opportunities to make a good hand by standing when they should hit.
Last edited by: jjjoooggg on Nov 17, 2021
Born in Texas and lived in Texas my whole life.
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
November 17th, 2021 at 8:41:47 PM permalink
The last card of your current hand could be the first card of your next hand in straight up play.
OnceDear
OnceDear
  • Threads: 64
  • Posts: 7503
Joined: Jun 1, 2014
Thanked by
moses
November 18th, 2021 at 3:09:19 AM permalink
Quote: moses

The last card of your current hand could be the first card of your next hand in straight up play.
link to original post

How do you mean? What's the significance?
At the bricks and Mortar I occasionally visit, one dealer gets ahead of himself and draws next card from the shoe. Very occasionally I can get a glimpse of that and say 'No. I think I'll stick' Messes with his head and that next card becomes his hole card (ENHC rules)
It annoys me when he pre-emts my decisions so I do anything to get back at him.
Psalm 25:16 Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted. Proverbs 18:2 A fool finds no satisfaction in trying to understand, for he would rather express his own opinion.
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
November 18th, 2021 at 7:07:25 AM permalink
For instance, suppose I have 16vs10 and the deck composition is 50% 10's/A's remainng and 50% other cards. Chances are I will bust or end up with 17. Neither would be enough to beat the nearly 50% chance of the dealer having a 10 in the hole.

So, by not hitting, there is a 50% chance the first card of my next hand will be an Ace or a 10.

Don S has written some interesting posts on the value of starting one's hand with a 10 or Ace.
Last edited by: moses on Nov 18, 2021
gordonm888
Administrator
gordonm888
  • Threads: 61
  • Posts: 5283
Joined: Feb 18, 2015
November 18th, 2021 at 10:41:54 AM permalink
Quote: moses

For instance, suppose I have 16vs10 and the deck composition is 50% 10's/A's remainng and 50% other cards. Chances are I will bust or end up with 17. Neither would be enough to beat the nearly 50% chance of the dealer having a 10 in the hole.

So, by not hitting, there is a 50% chance the first card of my next hand will be an Ace or a 10.

Don S has written some interesting posts on the value of starting one's hand with a 10 or Ace.
link to original post



I think its true that for a shoe with a high positive count, you would prefer to not consume cards without a good reason. So, for a hit?stand decision that is an incredibly close call, you might prefer to stand even if it has a slightly lower EV. But in practice, its hard to know when to make that play unless you are tracking the cards with a computer.
So many better men, a few of them friends, are dead. And a thousand thousand slimy things live on, and so do I.
billryan
billryan
  • Threads: 245
  • Posts: 16681
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
November 18th, 2021 at 10:46:03 AM permalink
It also assumes the dealer has a pat hand and won't take a card. Unless the count is insanely high, the chances of the dealer having a ten as the down card don't approach 50%. It sounds good on paper but has little practical use.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
jjjoooggg
jjjoooggg
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 1187
Joined: Jul 13, 2012
November 18th, 2021 at 12:56:07 PM permalink
Quote: moses

For instance, suppose I have 16vs10 and the deck composition is 50% 10's/A's remainng and 50% other cards. Chances are I will bust or end up with 17. Neither would be enough to beat the nearly 50% chance of the dealer having a 10 in the hole.

So, by not hitting, there is a 50% chance the first card of my next hand will be an Ace or a 10.

Don S has written some interesting posts on the value of starting one's hand with a 10 or Ace.
link to original post



I recall that if the count is high enough, not to split 8’s against a 10. And stand or surender on 8’s. 10 and 6 should also stand with a positive count. If the dealer has a small card face down, dealer may bust hitting a high card.

Playing with a full table will find yourself more often at the beginning of a shoe hovering around zero count at the house edge.

I have not played for a year til last nite. 6:5 bj table 6 deck, big house edge. Lost $300. I gambled.
Last edited by: jjjoooggg on Nov 18, 2021
Born in Texas and lived in Texas my whole life.
aceside
aceside
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 566
Joined: May 14, 2021
November 18th, 2021 at 1:00:29 PM permalink
Quote: gordonm888

Quote: moses

For instance, suppose I have 16vs10 and the deck composition is 50% 10's/A's remainng and 50% other cards. Chances are I will bust or end up with 17. Neither would be enough to beat the nearly 50% chance of the dealer having a 10 in the hole.

So, by not hitting, there is a 50% chance the first card of my next hand will be an Ace or a 10.

Don S has written some interesting posts on the value of starting one's hand with a 10 or Ace.
link to original post



I think its true that for a shoe with a high positive count, you would prefer to not consume cards without a good reason. So, for a hit?stand decision that is an incredibly close call, you might prefer to stand even if it has a slightly lower EV. But in practice, its hard to know when to make that play unless you are tracking the cards with a computer.
link to original post


I know you are an expert, so let me direct my question to you. When I play a 6-deck blackjack shoe flat betting all the way and all hands, I believe playing solo (myself) has a smaller variance per hand, as compared to playing with another player. Is this thinking mathematically correct?
jjjoooggg
jjjoooggg
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 1187
Joined: Jul 13, 2012
November 18th, 2021 at 1:38:27 PM permalink
Quote: aceside

Quote: gordonm888

Quote: moses

For instance, suppose I have 16vs10 and the deck composition is 50% 10's/A's remainng and 50% other cards. Chances are I will bust or end up with 17. Neither would be enough to beat the nearly 50% chance of the dealer having a 10 in the hole.

So, by not hitting, there is a 50% chance the first card of my next hand will be an Ace or a 10.

Don S has written some interesting posts on the value of starting one's hand with a 10 or Ace.
link to original post



I think its true that for a shoe with a high positive count, you would prefer to not consume cards without a good reason. So, for a hit?stand decision that is an incredibly close call, you might prefer to stand even if it has a slightly lower EV. But in practice, its hard to know when to make that play unless you are tracking the cards with a computer.
link to original post


I know you are an expert, so let me direct my question to you. When I play a 6-deck blackjack shoe flat betting all the way and all hands, I believe playing solo (myself) has a smaller variance per hand, as compared to playing with another player. Is this thinking mathematically correct?
link to original post



If the other players are less skilled, I think the variance will be more. How much more? Idk. There is already a-lot of variance playing solo.
Born in Texas and lived in Texas my whole life.
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
November 18th, 2021 at 2:14:23 PM permalink
Shoes are most likely a different story.

In a single deck. Let's say your 1st hand is 9,7vs10. 16 cards (2-5) will improve the hand to 18 to 21. 29 cards will break it. 4 will get you to 17. Those same 4 Aces would also start your next hand with an Ace while 15 tens still remain in the deck.

25 cards make the dealer stop. At 17 thru 20.
20 cards make the dealer hit. At 12 thru 16.
If 1 of 4 Aces are in the hole, conversation over.

IF 13 more cards 7-10 were to come out? And not one 2-5? Your chances of getting to 18 to 21 are still only 50%.
billryan
billryan
  • Threads: 245
  • Posts: 16681
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
November 18th, 2021 at 2:52:42 PM permalink
Quote: moses

Shoes are most likely a different story.

In a single deck. Let's say your 1st hand is 9,7vs10. 16 cards (2-5) will improve the hand to 18 to 21. 29 cards will break it. 4 will get you to 17. Those same 4 Aces would also start your next hand with an Ace while 15 tens still remain in the deck.

25 cards make the dealer stop. At 17 thru 20.
20 cards make the dealer hit. At 12 thru 16.
If 1 of 4 Aces are in the hole, conversation over.

IF 13 more cards 7-10 were to come out? And not one 2-5? Your chances of getting to 18 to 21 are still only 50%.
link to original post




Single deck BJ that pays 3-2 and doesn't have a crazy minimum is not a game available to most. I recently attended a charity night that advertised single deck,3-2. After driving almost three hours to the middle of nowhere, I found out the game was indeed single deck, but they shuffle after every round.
They had a side bet I've never seen. If you and the dealer both get a BJ, it pays $200. If the dealer BJ is in Spades, it pays double. I didn't stick around long, but it seemed like everyone was playing the sidebet.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
November 18th, 2021 at 3:00:57 PM permalink
Deck composition starts with a single deck of cards. Sort like the free throw line.. it's the best place to line up your shot.. For each deck added, the computing skews and difficulty increases. Thus estimates are necessary. But in single and double deck, knowing what is played and still remains is doable.

So heck yes, I want the straight up game with decent pen in 1 or 2 decks. More than two? I'd turn blue.

Give me 7 or more rounds in single deck? I'd go Thorpe on you. 🤣

Going to 3 hands? And you're soon watching from the stands.😉
jjjoooggg
jjjoooggg
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 1187
Joined: Jul 13, 2012
November 18th, 2021 at 3:06:02 PM permalink
Quote: moses

It all starts with a single deck of cards. Sort like the free throw line.. it's the best place to line up your shot.. For each deck added, the computing skews and difficulty increases. Thus estimates are necessary. But in single and double deck, knowing what is played and still remains is doable.

So heck yes, I want the straight up game with decent pen in 1 or 2 decks. More than two? I'd turn blue.

Give me 7 or more rounds in single deck? I'd go Thorpe on you. 🤣

Going to 3 hands? And you're soon watching from the stands.😉
link to original post



If it’s a full table Id rather play 6 deck, I don’t like waiting during shuffling.
Born in Texas and lived in Texas my whole life.
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
November 18th, 2021 at 3:12:24 PM permalink
Quote: jjjoooggg

Quote: moses

It all starts with a single deck of cards. Sort like the free throw line.. it's the best place to line up your shot.. For each deck added, the computing skews and difficulty increases. Thus estimates are necessary. But in single and double deck, knowing what is played and still remains is doable.

So heck yes, I want the straight up game with decent pen in 1 or 2 decks. More than two? I'd turn blue.

Give me 7 or more rounds in single deck? I'd go Thorpe on you. 🤣

Going to 3 hands? And you're soon watching from the stands.😉
link to original post



If it’s a full table Id rather play 6 deck, I don’t like waiting during shuffling.
link to original post



I agree. I've bought houses in less time than it takes to shuffle 6 decks.
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
November 19th, 2021 at 3:43:11 AM permalink
Quote: gordonm888

Quote: moses

For instance, suppose I have 16vs10 and the deck composition is 50% 10's/A's remainng and 50% other cards. Chances are I will bust or end up with 17. Neither would be enough to beat the nearly 50% chance of the dealer having a 10 in the hole.

So, by not hitting, there is a 50% chance the first card of my next hand will be an Ace or a 10.

Don S has written some interesting posts on the value of starting one's hand with a 10 or Ace.
link to original post



I think its true that for a shoe with a high positive count, you would prefer to not consume cards without a good reason. So, for a hit?stand decision that is an incredibly close call, you might prefer to stand even if it has a slightly lower EV. But in practice, its hard to know when to make that play unless you are tracking the cards with a computer.
link to original post



Not so fast my friend. If we are talking shoes? Then yes, you need the brain of Rainman, the valor of Rambo, with an act of Forrest Gump. "I'm not smat man, but I know what a blackjack ez."

But a percentage count of knowing what has been played vs what still remains is very doable up to two decks.
billryan
billryan
  • Threads: 245
  • Posts: 16681
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
November 20th, 2021 at 8:29:56 AM permalink
Quote: moses

Quote: gordonm888

Quote: moses

For instance, suppose I have 16vs10 and the deck composition is 50% 10's/A's remainng and 50% other cards. Chances are I will bust or end up with 17. Neither would be enough to beat the nearly 50% chance of the dealer having a 10 in the hole.

So, by not hitting, there is a 50% chance the first card of my next hand will be an Ace or a 10.

Don S has written some interesting posts on the value of starting one's hand with a 10 or Ace.
link to original post



I think its true that for a shoe with a high positive count, you would prefer to not consume cards without a good reason. So, for a hit?stand decision that is an incredibly close call, you might prefer to stand even if it has a slightly lower EV. But in practice, its hard to know when to make that play unless you are tracking the cards with a computer.
link to original post



Not so fast my friend. If we are talking shoes? Then yes, you need the brain of Rainman, the valor of Rambo, with an act of Forrest Gump. "I'm not smat man, but I know what a blackjack ez."

But a percentage count of knowing what has been played vs what still remains is very doable up to two decks.
link to original post






Isn't that the same nonsense Hollywood has been protecting for years? " It's impossible to count an 8 deck shoe?
What garbage. If you can count a single deck, you can count 8 decks. The ratio of good to bad cards doesn't change no matter how many decks you have. For many balanced counts, you need to add another calculation for more decks, taking the running count and dividing it to get a true count, but use an unbalanced count and you don't need to do that.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
November 20th, 2021 at 8:37:55 AM permalink
Quote: billryan

Quote: moses

Quote: gordonm888

Quote: moses

For instance, suppose I have 16vs10 and the deck composition is 50% 10's/A's remainng and 50% other cards. Chances are I will bust or end up with 17. Neither would be enough to beat the nearly 50% chance of the dealer having a 10 in the hole.

So, by not hitting, there is a 50% chance the first card of my next hand will be an Ace or a 10.

Don S has written some interesting posts on the value of starting one's hand with a 10 or Ace.
link to original post



I think its true that for a shoe with a high positive count, you would prefer to not consume cards without a good reason. So, for a hit?stand decision that is an incredibly close call, you might prefer to stand even if it has a slightly lower EV. But in practice, its hard to know when to make that play unless you are tracking the cards with a computer.
link to original post



Not so fast my friend. If we are talking shoes? Then yes, you need the brain of Rainman, the valor of Rambo, with an act of Forrest Gump. "I'm not smat man, but I know what a blackjack ez."

But a percentage count of knowing what has been played vs what still remains is very doable up to two decks.
link to original post






Isn't that the same nonsense Hollywood has been protecting for years? " It's impossible to count an 8 deck shoe?
What garbage. If you can count a single deck, you can count 8 decks. The ratio of good to bad cards doesn't change no matter how many decks you have. For many balanced counts, you need to add another calculation for more decks, taking the running count and dividing it to get a true count, but use an unbalanced count and you don't need to do that.
link to original post



Big difference between counting and knowing.
ChumpChange
ChumpChange
  • Threads: 124
  • Posts: 5058
Joined: Jun 15, 2018
Thanked by
Kristmitchell
November 20th, 2021 at 8:47:10 AM permalink
I win more on negative counts without even increasing my bets on positive counts.
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Thanked by
ChumpChange
November 20th, 2021 at 8:55:25 AM permalink
Quote: ChumpChange

I win more on negative counts without even increasing my bets on positive counts.
link to original post



Of course. Less 10s to break your hand. Increased small cards to improve your hand without busting.
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
November 27th, 2021 at 2:32:34 PM permalink
Quote: billryan

Quote: moses

Quote: gordonm888

Quote: moses

For instance, suppose I have 16vs10 and the deck composition is 50% 10's/A's remainng and 50% other cards. Chances are I will bust or end up with 17. Neither would be enough to beat the nearly 50% chance of the dealer having a 10 in the hole.

So, by not hitting, there is a 50% chance the first card of my next hand will be an Ace or a 10.

Don S has written some interesting posts on the value of starting one's hand with a 10 or Ace.
link to original post



I think its true that for a shoe with a high positive count, you would prefer to not consume cards without a good reason. So, for a hit?stand decision that is an incredibly close call, you might prefer to stand even if it has a slightly lower EV. But in practice, its hard to know when to make that play unless you are tracking the cards with a computer.
link to original post



Not so fast my friend. If we are talking shoes? Then yes, you need the brain of Rainman, the valor of Rambo, with an act of Forrest Gump. "I'm not smat man, but I know what a blackjack ez."

But a percentage count of knowing what has been played vs what still remains is very doable up to two decks.
link to original post






Isn't that the same nonsense Hollywood has been protecting for years? " It's impossible to count an 8 deck shoe?
What garbage. If you can count a single deck, you can count 8 decks. The ratio of good to bad cards doesn't change no matter how many decks you have. For many balanced counts, you need to add another calculation for more decks, taking the running count and dividing it to get a true count, but use an unbalanced count and you don't need to do that.
link to original post



Counting 416 cards is as easy as 52? Garbage!
billryan
billryan
  • Threads: 245
  • Posts: 16681
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
November 27th, 2021 at 2:43:57 PM permalink
Quote: moses

Quote: billryan

Quote: moses

Quote: gordonm888

Quote: moses

For instance, suppose I have 16vs10 and the deck composition is 50% 10's/A's remainng and 50% other cards. Chances are I will bust or end up with 17. Neither would be enough to beat the nearly 50% chance of the dealer having a 10 in the hole.

So, by not hitting, there is a 50% chance the first card of my next hand will be an Ace or a 10.

Don S has written some interesting posts on the value of starting one's hand with a 10 or Ace.
link to original post



I think its true that for a shoe with a high positive count, you would prefer to not consume cards without a good reason. So, for a hit?stand decision that is an incredibly close call, you might prefer to stand even if it has a slightly lower EV. But in practice, its hard to know when to make that play unless you are tracking the cards with a computer.
link to original post



Not so fast my friend. If we are talking shoes? Then yes, you need the brain of Rainman, the valor of Rambo, with an act of Forrest Gump. "I'm not smat man, but I know what a blackjack ez."

But a percentage count of knowing what has been played vs what still remains is very doable up to two decks.
link to original post






Isn't that the same nonsense Hollywood has been protecting for years? " It's impossible to count an 8 deck shoe?
What garbage. If you can count a single deck, you can count 8 decks. The ratio of good to bad cards doesn't change no matter how many decks you have. For many balanced counts, you need to add another calculation for more decks, taking the running count and dividing it to get a true count, but use an unbalanced count and you don't need to do that.
link to original post



Counting 416 cards is as easy as 52? Garbage!
link to original post



You aren't counting 416 cards. You are counting the next card out. Do you find it harder to count the first card of the shoe than the 17th? the 35th card? If the answer is yes, you shouldn't be counting. If the answer is no, then why would the 254th card be any different than the 35th or the 253rd?
If you are using a balanced count, you have to divide by half decks, or quarter decks but I use KISS/TK0 which produces a true count without dividing by anything.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
November 27th, 2021 at 2:52:28 PM permalink
If you lose count you get a reshuffle every 6 or 7 rounds. You have the ability to know what has been played and what still remains.
billryan
billryan
  • Threads: 245
  • Posts: 16681
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
November 27th, 2021 at 3:38:08 PM permalink
Quote: moses

If you lose count you get a reshuffle every 6 or 7 rounds. You have the ability to know what has been played and what still remains.
link to original post



With 500 cards, you can be off by a card or two, and if losing track of the count is an issue, you shouldn't be playing for money.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
November 27th, 2021 at 3:44:07 PM permalink
Quote: billryan

Quote: moses

If you lose count you get a reshuffle every 6 or 7 rounds. You have the ability to know what has been played and what still remains.
link to original post



With 500 cards, you can be off by a card or two, and if losing track of the count is an issue, you shouldn't be playing for money.
link to original post



I agree. But you know your count is perfect over 500 cards? Hmm.. doubtful.

If 4 Aces get played in the first round, I know I'm not getting a blackjack for the next 5 or 6 rounds. On the flip side, if no Aces have been played after 5 rounds, spreading to two hands with alot of tens still remaining, I have an advantage' not just a threshold.
billryan
billryan
  • Threads: 245
  • Posts: 16681
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
November 27th, 2021 at 3:57:23 PM permalink
Where do you find games that deal out six rounds of SD BJ? In Vegas, you are lucky to get three. Last time I played SD, they shuffled after every round.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
November 27th, 2021 at 4:02:49 PM permalink
Reno.
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
November 29th, 2021 at 4:58:32 AM permalink
Getting back to the statement thread.

Playing one on one against the dealer is advantageous IF you KNOW exactly what has been played and what remains to be played. Or if you know the percentages of high cards remaining vs low cards.

If not, you are playing thresholds. So, if that is the case, it doesn't matter how many are at the table.
jjjoooggg
jjjoooggg
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 1187
Joined: Jul 13, 2012
November 29th, 2021 at 10:45:43 AM permalink
Quote: moses

Getting back to the statement thread.

Playing one on one against the dealer is advantageous IF you KNOW exactly what has been played and what remains to be played. Or if you know the percentages of high cards remaining vs low cards.

If not, you are playing thresholds. So, if that is the case, it doesn't matter how many are at the table.
link to original post



If you are playing double deck in first position and make a count based deviation, the count can drastically change as the players recieve cards.

If you are playing last position face down double deck, you are making count based decisions without knowing the actual running count.
Born in Texas and lived in Texas my whole life.
billryan
billryan
  • Threads: 245
  • Posts: 16681
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
November 29th, 2021 at 11:05:37 AM permalink
I'm still waiting to see if Mr. Wizard ever said one on one was a player advantage and what the context is.
Just playing one on one with a dealer does not put the player at an advantage.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
billryan
billryan
  • Threads: 245
  • Posts: 16681
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
November 29th, 2021 at 11:10:01 AM permalink
I'm still waiting to see if Mr. Wizard ever said one on one was a player advantage and what the context is.
Just playing one on one with a dealer does not put the player at an advantage.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
November 29th, 2021 at 11:18:04 AM permalink
One on one. The last card of your current hand is often the first card of your next hand. Not something you can Sim.

For instance, if the deck is exhausted of 2 thru 5, there is no point in hitting 16. If the deck is out of Aces, no one is getting a blackjack. There are many more. But these are the obvious.

The player is in control. Be smart enough to find your advantage situations. If not, then you just another threshold player chasing variance.
Last edited by: moses on Nov 29, 2021
jjjoooggg
jjjoooggg
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 1187
Joined: Jul 13, 2012
November 29th, 2021 at 11:36:03 AM permalink
Quote: billryan

I'm still waiting to see if Mr. Wizard ever said one on one was a player advantage and what the context is.
Just playing one on one with a dealer does not put the player at an advantage.
link to original post



In general, i dont think that the amount of players matter. Yet, likely an infinitesimal difference.
Last edited by: jjjoooggg on Nov 29, 2021
Born in Texas and lived in Texas my whole life.
billryan
billryan
  • Threads: 245
  • Posts: 16681
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
November 29th, 2021 at 12:15:40 PM permalink
Someone who tracks every card might occasionally be able to do what Moses says, but the lost scavenger opportunities would negate any perceived advantage.
In any event, he is talking about needing a skill few players possess.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
November 29th, 2021 at 1:00:10 PM permalink
Quote: billryan

Someone who tracks every card might occasionally be able to do what Moses says, but the lost scavenger opportunities would negate any perceived advantage.
In any event, he is talking about needing a skill few players possess.
link to original post



Good point. Only about 5 players that I'm aware of understand the concept. There are more scavenger opportunities in the double deck game rules. Single deck is a matter of letting the game come to you. Thus a percentage count provides a higher frequency of large bets without giving up strong deck compositions.

In other words, don't turn a positive deck into a negative one by getting 10s and Aces that get you to 25 and 26.
Use them as the first card of your next two hands with more money bet.

If your bet minimum is $50 and a column count turns 10 losing hands by standing on 16 into winning hands a month. That's an extra $1k in my pocket. Very doable for a frequent player.
jjjoooggg
jjjoooggg
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 1187
Joined: Jul 13, 2012
November 29th, 2021 at 2:01:14 PM permalink
If you are still counting, you must be under the threshold for back offs. Also, other cities seem to have different priorities on counters. I think my face is burned. Not sure why. But, i believe that im in the A book for the last 8 years. ive only played twice in the past 3 years. A year ago, I was trespassed when i visited Vegas to cash old chips and ended up playing 2 days in the same casino with a 1 : 8 spread. I underestimated the concern over counters in general. Im sure some dont care about counters. But some seem to care. Im somewhat sure that they saw me and did nothing numerous times. Im busy with another non casino endeavor. I think i did everything a counter would desire at 1k hrs in multiple states. So i am considering moving on. Theres other things i want to do. Maybe ill switch to another game. I havnt mountain biked in 8 years. Im surrounded by farmland.

By the way. I think that reno was the place i was met with above avg resistance before i played my first hand. If you are accepted there, that is something.

Id like to think of myself as the dark oz of the west coast.
Last edited by: jjjoooggg on Nov 29, 2021
Born in Texas and lived in Texas my whole life.
  • Jump to: