Blackjack Card Counting Questions From A Non-Blackjack Player

I've never really been a fan of blackjack. Saturday night, at a nearby casino, all of the Pai Gow Poker tables were full, and Three Card Poker has lost interest for me. I decided to sit down at blackjack. I know I was going to be in the wrong most of the time, so I quickly perused the WOO site, and looked at the Wizard's modified simplified basic strategy, which I was able to memorize in about 3 seconds. (Thanks!) Sat down, played a few hours, $10 a hand, and won $125 over the course of a couple of hours. I know I deviated from the modified simplified strategy a couple of times, and paid for it some of those times, and won despite my mistake the other times. I came in at mid-shoe, and asked the two other players if they minded. One asked that I wait a few hands, and I patiently did until he indicated I could join in. (I even learned etiquette from the Wizard!)

I still don't necessarily find blackjack all that appealing, but I could see it as an alternative to other games when either tables are full or I get bored of the other offerings.

Sunday was, of course, house cleaning day, so I spent most of the day online reading things. I got curious about some of the blackjack card counting, and found web pages about it to read. When I played 7-card stud regularly so many years ago, counting down an entire deck was extremely easy and I could keep track of every single card, and know what was left and quickly compute odds of my opponents having a hand. I thought that counting six decks worth of blackjack cards would be fairly difficult, however, based on something as simple as the hi-lo count, I could see it as being fairly easy. I downloaded an app for my phone that displays running and true counts at the click of a button, and after a few slow starts, I was able to discover that I could easily keep track of the running count. Determining the true count has yet eluded me. This is primarily because the app doesn't have a good visual show of how many decks are left in the shoe. While I didn't find that counting the hi-lo was difficult, I could see it as being a challenge in the midst of distractions like talking to fellow players, dealers, floor supervisors, waitresses, etc, etc.

However, at this time, I have no desire to be a card counter. I understand the advantage gained is minimal, and the amounts I'm willing to bet are probably not going to make much of a difference anyway. I gamble to enjoy myself and have fun, and I never assume I'm going to win any money. Winning is a pleasant side effect of the good time.

I did have questions, though. One is, most of the counting sites indicate that having a deck rich in 10s and As is good for the player, however they don't indicate why this is so. EDIT: I just read the Wizard's site on card counting, and now I understand why. Disregard.

All of the card counting methodologies seem to indicate that you bet low when the count is neutral or negative, and then increase your bet when the count is positive and thus in your favor. I wonder if anybody has tried to do the opposite. For example, if I would normally bet $25 a hand on blackjack, but then I notice that the count has gone negative, what if I lowered my bet to $10? In other words, instead of trying to capitalize on situations when the count/deck is in my favor, I simply want to minimize my exposure when the count/deck is not in my favor. This might make counting even simpler, as you may only have to keep track of 10s and As, and if too many of them have made their appearance, simple reduce your betting. If a lot of them have made their appearance, you could even excuse yourself from the table to go to the bathroom, and not come back until there's a new shoe. Has this ever been discussed/analyzed, and if so, please give me a link and I'm happy to go read about it.

In relation to the above, I also wonder if there is a change to strategy when the count becomes out of your favor. If there are many low cards left in the deck, do you start hitting on a 13 when the dealer has a low card? Or other similar changes.

I will admit that I enjoy reading about blackjack and card counting more than I like actually playing the game, so links are always welcome. I watched the movie "21" as well as read the book it was based on, as well as read the website that the Wizard has a link to (somewhere) to the guy who has the best claim to being the leader of the MIT blackjack teams. I enjoyed his website the best. I understand the book has to sell copies, and thus has some embellishments, and the movie had to make even more embellishments. So I much prefer the more realistic view on things.

Oh, a quick thing. I believe I read somewhere that no matter how many players are at the table, the basic strategy remains the same. And also that it doesn't matter how they are playing, whether basic strategy or flawed strategy, you would still play the basic strategy and not make adjustments. Are these statements correct?

The main thing to be aware of when tailoring your betting to the count is that it sends a signal to the dealer and the pit that you are following the count.
If you start making plays that are against basic strategy, this further signals them that you are counting the game.
Enough of these signals and enough chips in front of you and they will ask you to either stay at one level of bet or to play some other game.
This is called being flat betted or backed off.
just be aware that this happens fairly regularly.
The surveillance crew will often track a players behavior and pattern and call the pit if they notice you are following the count.

Yes, sometimes you modify basic strategy based upon the count.

Check out the 1/26 edition of Gambling With An Edge. It's on Bob Dancer's Radio Page. (Note that this episode incorrectly indicates the Wiz as co-host).

Laurie C tells some great MIT stories, including one time where the count was so negative, she doubled on 13 vs 7, and won.

konceptum-

Lowering your bet when the count goes negative is a form of wonging out, without leaving the table or sitting out hands. Even more effective in shoe games, would be to stop playing altogether at true count -1. If done right, you won't have to leave the table in many cases and you won't have to hit those 13s vs low cards. If you chose to "play all" then there are adjustments to be made. Look up the Illustrious 18. These are basic strategy deviations for both plus and minus counts, the most important being the insurance decision.

Your last two statements are 100% correct.

I too enjoy the theory much more than the practice. What you described, starting with a high bet then dropping your bet with the count and then back up, is a form of cover play. Cover plays are used to make counting less suspicious to the casino staff. If you enjoy reading about that kind of thing I strongly, strongly suggest Burning the Tables in Las Vegas. It's a book describing card counting at higher limits and all the cover plays and such that go along with it.

As said earlier, leaving when the count is negative is known as "Wonging", after Stanford Wong, author of Professional Blackjack. However it's an extremely suspicious move. If the staff already suspected you of counting and you wong out of a double deck it's very easy for the pit supervisor to pick up the discards and count them down to confirm their suspicions. It is a great move in a somewhat crowded casino on a shoe game though. The opposite is "wonging in" or back-counting a game then entering when the game has a decently positive true count. This is generally how teams operate, with one bettor on each table flat betting while tracking the count then signaling to a big bettor when it's the count is high.

Also, you are correct, the actions of others at the table have no effect on the basic strategy whatsoever.

Converting to the true count is definitely a pain in the ass, but if you want to get into counting and skip that part, try learning some unbalance counts. Snyder's Red Seven is the most popular, I believe, but personally I like Fred Renzey's KISS III which is published in Blackjack Bluebook II. You sacrifice some efficiency by using a different counting system that only has a running count and requires no true count conversions.

I believe all of your questions have been answered by the other posters. I've been studying counting since last summer and actively practicing it in casinos since September of last year, and what I've learned over that short time is that it's barely worth it. To make any kind of decent money, you need to have a huge bankroll, and the art of counting and getting away with it is much more difficult that the science of the actual counting itself.

With all that said, I still enjoy it as a challenge to win against the casinos on their own turf. I am up a modest sum and have yet to backed off anywhere, but I can look back through my records and see a few crazy runs of positive variance that pretty much account for all of my winnings. Those could have just as easily been negative variance events, and I'd be in the red even though I'm competent. I know the Wizard says this on his pages that you've read already, but it bears repeating: if you pursue card counting (or any advantage play), your bankroll will suffer through wild swings and only in the long run will you show a profit. Be ready for it.

Quote: AcesAndEights

I believe all of your questions have been answered by the other posters. I've been studying counting since last summer and actively practicing it in casinos since September of last year, and what I've learned over that short time is that it's barely worth it. To make any kind of decent money, you need to have a huge bankroll, and the art of counting and getting away with it is much more difficult that the science of the actual counting itself.

...if you pursue card counting (or any advantage play), your bankroll will suffer through wild swings and only in the long run will you show a profit. Be ready for it.

Very well said. Outside of team play, professional card counting usually requires a bankroll that makes the profit per hour not worth it. If you want to make $100/hour you'd want to a bankroll of roughly $50,000. If I could devote $50,000 exclusively to card counting then I'd want a higher profit per hour, which would require a higher bankroll, etc. Team play comes with its own large set of problems.

P.S. Love your signature.

Quote: PopCan

P.S. Love your signature.

Thanks, I tried to come up with something clever when I signed up for this board. The more I read it the more lame it sounds though. I'll change it when I come up with something better.

Thanks for the information and the book recommendation.

I have so far been too bogged down with getting basic strategy right, to really be effectively counting even a simple count. Numbers seem to stick with me pretty good, so I think I could do OK if I would quit getting brain freeze on the basic strat.

Practice your counting while using a strategy training program like hitorstand.
It will keep you on your toes while you train.

Quote: odiousgambit

I have so far been too bogged down with getting basic strategy right, to really be effectively counting even a simple count. Numbers seem to stick with me pretty good, so I think I could do OK if I would quit getting brain freeze on the basic strat.

Yeah, don't even start learning to count until basic strategy is burned into your brain, and by that I mean your spinal cord, it should be an involuntary reaction. Okay that may be an overstatement, but you really don't have the time or spare brain cycles to think about your playing decisions while you are counting. I still take longer than I would like on the soft doubling decisions.

Once you start counting you will have to unravel some of these decisions since you will be making different plays based on the count and index numbers. But if you are going to play shoe games, betting the count is much more important than the playing decisions.

A question to which I wish I had the answer, and which I'm sure is in one of my blackjack books somewhere, is how much you sacrifice in a 6 or 8 deck game by just playing basic strategy and varying your bet. I'm pretty sure in these games, making playing deviations accounts for very little (less than 20%?) of your long-term edge.

@konceptum

Quote:

In relation to the above, I also wonder if there is a change to strategy when the count becomes out of your favor. If there are many low cards left in the deck, do you start hitting on a 13 when the dealer has a low card? Or other similar changes.

Generally one is taught to leave the table if the count is negative... thus one shouldn't see this situation. OTOH playing to a low negative count does aid in covering your counting, so there is a low negative count in which its OK to hit 13 vs. 2, but thats about all. For all intents and purpose, playing to -1 or -2 can be OK, but not "professional".

Well, all a larger bankroll does is reduce risk of ruin. You could play the same game with an expected $100/hr with, likely, far less than a $50K bank. But your risk of ruin would be higher.

You could play the exact same game with the same expected $100/hr with a $1MM roll. You have the same expected gain of $100/hour but with a much smaller risk of losing committed bankroll.

It's always a trade-off of expected gains vs risk of losing all (=size of bankroll) isn't it?

Really?! Sucking it up and playing 60 hrs per week and making $24K a month isn't good enough? You'd want more? Doesn't seem like the worst return on investment with $50K at, you make it sound, almost no concern at all of losing all $50K.

I understand what you are saying though - it does seem to take a depressingly large amount of bankroll to reduce one's risk of ruin to an acceptable level (whatever "acceptable" might mean to a player) and still expect a "satisfying" (whatever that means) return.

To AcesAndEights - the "wild swings" is the very reason why one begins with a unit bankroll large enough to withstand the 1 and 2 and 3 standard deviation events that happen with predictable frequency. Don't cry later when you lost because a 1 or 2 standard deviation occurred. That covers 95% or so of all results. The trick is knowing all this ahead of time so you can later look back at any point in time and say and know exactly how lucky or unlucky you were after so many rounds.

If one's actual results are outside 3 or 3.5 or 4 standard deviations at any point in time, at some point, one must ask oneself is it me or bad luck?

Ultimately, that's why sim software is useful - define the rules of the game you expect to play, define the pen, define back-counting or not, define $roll, define your counting system, define $spread and at what counts, define whether you will use playing strategy deviations based on count or just basic strategy, define whether you will opt out of a shoe when the count hits a defined negative value, define rounds played per hour, etc.

You know, if you are only-back-counting kind-of-thing, one bets totally differently with the same $roll than if one is "playing-all" and yet still have same risk of ruin.
One plays fewer rounds per hour but with a higher EV per round.

Whatever - I enjoy reading about it more than doing it too.

Counting is relatively easy as the first poster discovered. Getting away with it for a long time is the difficult part.
Converting running counts to true counts TC) is not that difficult either. You can use either 1 deck or 1/2 deck aproximation for 6-8 decks. And if your estimate is a bit off it does not matter that much. Say you have a running count of 10 with around 3 to 2.5 decks left. You have a TC of 3 (10/3) or 4 (10/2.5). Whatever estimate you use you bet more depending on the betting scheme you use and it does not matter that much if you slighly overstimated your TC to 4 whereas it is 3. Of course the more accurate you are, the better and the more Ev you get but you still get most of teh Ev even if your estimates are not that good.
If you practise a lot and play a lot, basic and counting become second nature. The skill comes with getting away with it especially if you play for decent stakes.