Playing Blackjack one on one with dealer
Quote: mosesQuote: gordonm888Quote: mosesFor 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.
Quote: billryanQuote: mosesQuote: gordonm888Quote: mosesFor 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.
Quote: ChumpChangeI 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.
Quote: billryanQuote: mosesQuote: gordonm888Quote: mosesFor 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!
Quote: mosesQuote: billryanQuote: mosesQuote: gordonm888Quote: mosesFor 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.
Quote: mosesIf 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.
Quote: billryanQuote: mosesIf 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.
