How much is blackjack EV affected by the number of seats at the table?

I would like to first give thanks to the entire WOV community and Mike for all of the great info and great discussions. I have been playing blackjack a lot for a few months now and I have tried to soak up all of the pertinent math. My results at the casinos have been pretty good so far. There is one issue that I have run into that needs clarification. I live in Arizona and at the place that I frequent the most, the blackjack tables only have 6 seats instead of 7. I read once (and I cannot find the source right now) that the reason why some casinos do this is because it cuts the EV for card counters by a full half of a percent....and they are willing to lose out on the revenue that a 7th player would bring in order to hinder the advantage players. My understanding of BJ EV is that the best I could hope for with flawless counting is about 1.5% advantage, and this would cut me down to 1% if it is true. Since I only use the hi lo system and I don't think my count is completely flawless (but pretty close....sometimes I let myself get distracted when I'm checking my payout or organizing my chip stacks), I feel like I'm hovering around .5%-1% advantage. I am going to a new casino soon that sent me an offer in the mail for a comped room, and I found out that they only have 5 seats at their tables. My question for all of you experts is....am I going to be a full percentage point worse off at these 5-player tables than I would be at a 7-player table? If anyone would like to make an educated guess as to where my EV would end up in this situation, these tables play a 6-deck shoe, dealer hits on soft 17, no surrender, double is allowed on any first 2 cards, double is allowed after splitting, pairs can be split 3 times for a total of 4 hands, and only 1 card is dealt onto aces that are split. Blackjack pays 3/2. Thanks in advance for your input, as it will have an impact on how much money I choose to risk when I get there.

I'm fairly certain the number of other players does not affect the expected return of a counter (or a non-counter) at all. If anything they should add seats to discourage counters because more players equals a slower game which is bad for a counter.

HoleintheAce is right. It doesn't effect the ev of a counter. Unless you are using cover plays. See this.

http://www.qfit.com/card-counting-enp.htm

Quote: MindOverMatter

they only have 5 seats at their tables. My question for all of you experts is....am I going to be a full percentage point worse off at these 5-player tables than I would be at a 7-player table?

If it's a heads-up game, it doesn't matter how many chairs or betting circles are at the table. Did they offer you a private table?

How many hands are you allowed to play at once?

I don't have math to back it up, but my selective memory tells me that I don't like to play with more than 3 other player spots, anyway.

I'm wondering if the article you read was referring specifically to single deck. There it could possibly have a reduction in EV but only a tenth of a percent or so. Certainly nowhere near 1%. In shoe games there should be no difference at all. When a casino reduces the number of seats at a table they are shooting themselves in the foot by shuffling more and dealing less. They don't make a dime when the cards are not being dealt.

I'd be surprised if you found shoe games with only five spots. Again, it won't affect your EV. What will affect you EV is the amount of players at the table. The more players, the less hands per hour. The less hands per hour the less profit. This assumes that you are playing with an edge.

We're getting a little ahead of ourselves so let's take a look at the game you propose to play. As six deck games go, with the double whammy of and H17 and no surrender, this is not a great game. I get a .64% house edge which is more twice that of a decent six deck game. That doesn't mean it can't be beaten and that doesn't mean it can't be beaten by you. The question is can you beat it now?

For that to happen you'll need deep penetration, flawless play, index play with the I18 at a minimum, wonging, a large betting spread and a lot of patience. Even with all of that, I don't think you will enjoy anything close to a 1.5% edge. If I were pressed to ballpark it, I would put your hourly profit at somewhere between break even to maybe one base bet.

Thank you for your informative replies. I have not been offered a private table...I am a pretty small fish; I usually spread about 5-50. The most that I've ever bet on one hand was 150. I've made 11 serious visits and won 10 times, with an average take of about 100 bucks. The casinos here are pretty generous with food and drink comps, so I'm more than happy to win that amount each visit. Sometimes that takes me 20 minutes, sometimes it takes many hours. The 5-player table or "oversized gaming table" is marketed as being something that will make the players less cramped and more comfortable. I can see the point in that, because the 6-player tables that I've been playing on are very small and they get cramped when there are 6 people sitting down...there is barely enough room to put my drink, chip stacks, and cigarettes without infringing on someone else's space. To answer a question that was asked, I can play 3 hands max (at triple the minimum bet on each hand) or 2 hands for double the minimum. I tend to just play 1 at a time. I guess that brings up another interesting question that I have....I know that the wizard has stated that putting 100 bucks on 1 hand has exactly the same EV as putting 50 on 2 hands or 33 on 3 hands. Does this change when we are counting? Let's consider a scenario where the count is pretty hot. My gut tells me that if I am alone at the table and counting, I should stick with one hand...that way fewer cards come out and hopefully the count stays good for a while. But I could also see the logic in spreading big bets over 3 hands and "get it while the getting is good" so to speak. And if there are more people on the table, do I need to play as many hands as I can to try to get those good cards before the count swings back the other way? I think it's obvious that the count is going to vary more on average after each hand played when there are more players and more cards coming out, but I'm not sure what the optimal play would be here....or if it makes any difference at all. What do you guys think? Also, I have a question for 1BB....what does "index play with the I18 at a minimum" mean? I might be familiar with the concept, but I'm not familiar with the terminology.

Quote: MindOverMatter

the 6-player tables that I've been playing on are very small and they get cramped when there are 6 people sitting down...there is barely enough room

I know that feeling. Slightly smaller than standard tables with 7 spots and 7 chairs is crowded. That extra .28 inches makes far more difference than one might think.

Where do they set the shuffle card?

Quote: MindOverMatter

Thank you for your informative replies. I have not been offered a private table...I am a pretty small fish; I usually spread about 5-50. The most that I've ever bet on one hand was 150. I've made 11 serious visits and won 10 times, with an average take of about 100 bucks. The casinos here are pretty generous with food and drink comps, so I'm more than happy to win that amount each visit. Sometimes that takes me 20 minutes, sometimes it takes many hours. The 5-player table or "oversized gaming table" is marketed as being something that will make the players less cramped and more comfortable. I can see the point in that, because the 6-player tables that I've been playing on are very small and they get cramped when there are 6 people sitting down...there is barely enough room to put my drink, chip stacks, and cigarettes without infringing on someone else's space. To answer a question that was asked, I can play 3 hands max (at triple the minimum bet on each hand) or 2 hands for double the minimum. I tend to just play 1 at a time. I guess that brings up another interesting question that I have....I know that the wizard has stated that putting 100 bucks on 1 hand has exactly the same EV as putting 50 on 2 hands or 33 on 3 hands. Does this change when we are counting? Let's consider a scenario where the count is pretty hot. My gut tells me that if I am alone at the table and counting, I should stick with one hand...that way fewer cards come out and hopefully the count stays good for a while. But I could also see the logic in spreading big bets over 3 hands and "get it while the getting is good" so to speak. And if there are more people on the table, do I need to play as many hands as I can to try to get those good cards before the count swings back the other way? I think it's obvious that the count is going to vary more on average after each hand played when there are more players and more cards coming out, but I'm not sure what the optimal play would be here....or if it makes any difference at all. What do you guys think? Also, I have a question for 1BB....what does "index play with the I18 at a minimum" mean? I might be familiar with the concept, but I'm not familiar with the terminology.

Index play is deviating from basic strategy as dictated by the count. There are dozens of these playing variations and you can learn as many as you like. Don Schlesinger developed the Illustrious 18 which covers the most effective ones in descending order. Enter I18 into the search at the top of this page.

You're on the right track on playing multiple hands and there is also good information here on that. Just use the trusty search feature.

Now for goodness sake quit smoking!

That makes sense 1BB, I already think about the count on hands like 16 vs 10 and quite a few others...and dieter, just for the record I am not overweight hahaha....and the shuffle card is usually set at about 1.5 decks, sometimes closer to 1. I've seen the shoe become almost empty while dealing the last hand if there are a lot of small cards or splits at the end.

Quote: MindOverMatter

just for the record I am not overweight hahaha....

No worries! I'm sure I carry just enough extra to make up for you.

Still, if you take 7 "98 pound weaklings" and shove them in a phone booth, it's gonna be "cozy".

Quote: MindOverMatter

at the place that I frequent the most, the blackjack tables only have 6 seats instead of 7. I read once (and I cannot find the source right now) that the reason why some casinos do this is because it cuts the EV for card counters by a full half of a percent....and they are willing to lose out on the revenue that a 7th player would bring in order to hinder the advantage players. Thanks in advance for your input, as it will have an impact on how much money I choose to risk when I get there.

The reason that some casinos reduce the number of spots is for player, and to a lesser extent dealer, comfort and service. A 7 spot table can be very crowded and uncomfortable. Also, the dealer may have trouble remembering the 1st spot's total by the time he deals to spot 7. After the dealer finishes his hand, he may have to waste a second or two totaling spot 1's total and comparing it to his. Fewer spots makes it easier to memorize player totals, which leads to a faster game overall.

For unskilled players, fewer spots leave fewer opportunities for players to enter, exit, and "play wrong"...which means less likelihood of others " ruining the order of the cards".

As for advantage play, a 7 spot table may lead to more dealer errors and/or opportunities to cap bets. In team play, 7 spots also allow more "spotters" as well as more open spaces for the "big player" to enter. More spots also allow a solo advantage player more opportunities to play 2 or more spots.

That's about it for now. I hope this helps you.

Quote: nvr55xx

The reason that some casinos reduce the number of spots is for player, and to a lesser extent dealer, comfort and service. A 7 spot table can be very crowded and uncomfortable. Also, the dealer may have trouble remembering the 1st spot's total by the time he deals to spot 7. After the dealer finishes his hand, he may have to waste a second or two totaling spot 1's total and comparing it to his. Fewer spots makes it easier to memorize player totals, which leads to a faster game overall.

For unskilled players, fewer spots leave fewer opportunities for players to enter, exit, and "play wrong"...which means less likelihood of others " ruining the order of the cards".

As for advantage play, a 7 spot table may lead to more dealer errors and/or opportunities to cap bets. In team play, 7 spots also allow more "spotters" as well as more open spaces for the "big player" to enter. More spots also allow a solo advantage player more opportunities to play 2 or more spots.

That's about it for now. I hope this helps you.

Dealer errors I understand but capping bets is not an advantage play unless going to jail is an advantage. There is no gray area, capping bets is cheating and illegal. I'm in no way saying that you are advocating this, I'm just reminding everyone.

Quote: 1BB

Dealer errors I understand but capping bets is not an advantage play

The house uses similar strategies to protect the game from cheating as to limit skilled play, yes?

Quote: Dieter

The house uses similar strategies to protect the game from cheating as to limit skilled play, yes?

No. Skilled play gets you backed off. Cheating gets you arrested. If you mean they come to those discoveries through the same means (floors and surveillance), then yes.

Incidentally, on the topic of number of seats at the table, NINE-seated tables are becoming more and more popular in WA. Cram as many people on one table as you can so you don't need a second dealer. Obviously as these tables are introduced, SOPs must be revised for game protection improvement.

I pose this question. The number of seats at a table doesn't (substantially) affect an individual's EV. On the flip side, does it affect the house's overall EV? After all, one good dealer hand could wipe out seven, or nine player hands.

Quote: Deucekies

I pose this question. The number of seats at a table doesn't (substantially) affect an individual's EV. On the flip side, does it affect the house's overall EV? After all, one good dealer hand could wipe out seven, or nine player hands.

No, because the houses expected value is inverse of the player's. If I play a $100 hand of blackjack using basic strategy and my expected loss is 50 cents, than the house has an expected win of 50 cents. A 9 handed game would have the same EV for the casino as it would if the players were split between two tables, although it would be higher variance.

Thanks again to everyone who took the time to respond to my thread. The trip is over and I thought you guys might be curious about how things went. First of all, the tables actually had 6 spots after all, so their website must be showing incorrect information. I ended up having a profitable night (about 2 base units per hour of play, and I played for a long time), and I experienced what I would call countermeasures for the first time (I've only been playing for a few months). It started when I decided to sit out for a while when the count was bad and there were no players waiting in line, and the dealer yelled for the pit boss saying "Are you seeing this?" Maybe because I had a lot of chips on a low-limit table....anyways, the heat increased continually from that point. There were a number of times that the dealers were yelling to the floor people reporting the move I had made. Things really got interesting when they started bringing the game to a halt while the dealer removed all of the cards from the shoe and did a long, elaborate house shuffle. I have never seen people hand-shuffling on a shoe table, and they did it a number of times. The first time that this happened, I asked the dealer why he was doing it and he responded by saying that his boss had told him that he had to. At least when all was said and done, the good guys won again. The way things went though, I wouldn't be surprised if I get banned pretty soon. Good luck and good counting, guys.

Quote: MindOverMatter

Thanks again to everyone who took the time to respond to my thread. The trip is over and I thought you guys might be curious about how things went. First of all, the tables actually had 6 spots after all, so their website must be showing incorrect information. I ended up having a profitable night (about 2 base units per hour of play, and I played for a long time), and I experienced what I would call countermeasures for the first time (I've only been playing for a few months). It started when I decided to sit out for a while when the count was bad and there were no players waiting in line, and the dealer yelled for the pit boss saying "Are you seeing this?" Maybe because I had a lot of chips on a low-limit table....anyways, the heat increased continually from that point. There were a number of times that the dealers were yelling to the floor people reporting the move I had made. Things really got interesting when they started bringing the game to a halt while the dealer removed all of the cards from the shoe and did a long, elaborate house shuffle. I have never seen people hand-shuffling on a shoe table, and they did it a number of times. The first time that this happened, I asked the dealer why he was doing it and he responded by saying that his boss had told him that he had to. At least when all was said and done, the good guys won again. The way things went though, I wouldn't be surprised if I get banned pretty soon. Good luck and good counting, guys.

Yeah, you just can't sit out negative counts and just sit there. You might get away with this once if you lost a few hands in a row, by saying something about the shoe being horrible and you want to wait for a new shoe, but generally you have to make at least SOME effort to disguise what you are doing. Take a bathroom break, or make or receive a phony phone call. Also use that opportunity to switch tables, if there is a fresh shuffle starting at a nearby table.

Quote: kewlj

Yeah, you just can't sit out negative counts and just sit there. You might get away with this once if you lost a few hands in a row, by saying something about the shoe being horrible and you want to wait for a new shoe, but generally you have to make at least SOME effort to disguise what you are doing. Take a bathroom break, or make or receive a phony phone call. Also use that opportunity to switch tables, if there is a fresh shuffle starting at a nearby table.

Very good point....I had already taken 2 long bathroom breaks and I couldn't believe the way the shoes kept coming out....true counts of -5 or worse, over and over. I think I just got frustrated and thought to myself "Screw it then, I'm just going to sit here and either wait for a new shuffle or for the count to get better". In the moment, I didn't care if I got banned or not. I learned my lesson, though. Every visit has been a chance for me to evaluate what I did wrong and what I did right, and make adjustments accordingly.

Quote: MindOverMatter

Very good point....I had already taken 2 long bathroom breaks and I couldn't believe the way the shoes kept coming out....true counts of -5 or worse, over and over.

Well, no wonder you were winning.

Do they normally use an automatic shuffling machine? If so then the elaborate shuffle is strange. Most likely the pit does not know what they are doing. If it was a hand shuffle, and the high cards kept coming out off the top, they might have suspected you of shuffle tracking, which would explain going to a more elaborate shuffle.

Excellent point, Axiom, and one which I had not yet considered. The table does use ASM, but I honestly have no specific knowledge of whether these setups have weaknesses in how the shuffling mechanism works. I just always consider every new shuffle to be a new start. I try to bet small and wait until a shoe comes that goes positive and play off of that. Maybe this staff does think it's more likely that I'm gaining an edge by shuffle tracking rather than a counting method. If so, you're right and they don't know what they're doing. I think that the connection between big gaming and hollywood is interesting....I watched Rain Man the other night for the first time in 15 years and I thought it was comical when the one security guy tells the other that nobody can count six decks....and everybody I know who finds out I'm playing BJ references the movie 21 and 80% of them tell me with a serious demeanor that what I'm doing is illegal, and I can get arrested, etc...kudos to Mike and a lot of the other guys at AmericanCasinoGuide for at least being honest with the average bettor. Those who have accurate, extensive knowledge of the math involved and the mental acuity to crunch numbers like a machine have a positive EV....everyone else does not.

If it's an ASM then I have no clue what they were doing, and, likely, neither do they.

Maybe they had heard the signs to look out for when looking for a shuffle tracker, and saw those same signs with your play (high cards come out off the top, then the player wongs out) and it didn't occur to the guy that, since it's an ASM, that is not a possibility.

I have heard of people getting heat for counting at CSM games. Don't assume that the guy in the suit has a functioning brain. Some of them are good, but many of them just have a checklist of things to look out for with no actual understanding of what they are doing. Determining which type you are up against is useful (no point making cover plays if the guy watching has no clue what's going on -- it's not cover if he doesn't know basic strategy)

On a related note, I ran across a very good dealer recently, who had basic strategy down cold. He kept pointing it out (not in an annoying way) every time I deviated (count-based, of course). He was entertaining too -- again, not in an annoying way. An all-around good dealer. I tipped him when I left the table.