Here are all the comments posted on the site, with the most recent discussions listed first. To participate in any of these discussions, you can reply on the article page.
Went to vegas first time. Slots left me ho hum. Thought I might like blackjack as you actually have to use your brain. So im reading up on all the basic stratigy. Will memorize that and not deviate from the rules. In a nutshell , please advise me. Like which tables. Where to sit. importance of SP and Dh. Im okay with moderate minimums.
Starting out, you are likely better off playing at a “shoe game”, where all the cards are dealt face up. Just make sure blackjack pays 3:2.
After you gain some experience, look for good rules in a 2-deck game, which will usually be dealt face down. Where you sit at the table matters very little.
For free, our own Strategy Trainer will coach you for basic strategy. If you’re looking for something to play offline, Casino Verite includes basically every feature you can imagine for practicing blackjack and card counting. It sells for $90 and runs on Windows PCs.
Hi Ken, Recently, during a visit to Genting Casino in Malaysia, I found out that they don’t offer Blackjack games anymore to ordinary players like me.The staff told me that it is only offered to high stakes players in the VIP rooms.Instead they offer pontoon and other variations of Blackjack games in the main Hall.
Why do some of your indices differ from Wong’s when using the same benchmark rules? For example you that the index for a hard 8 v a 6 is a double at TC 3, whereas Wong says it is at TC 1. There are quite a few other examples that differ greatly from yours can you explain why.
Index generation is trickier than it sounds, and some indexes are close calls over a range of numbers. I’m not sure what process the GameMaster used when creating his, but seeing small differences in some numbers is not surprising. He did say that his numbers were risk-adjusted indexes. (My opinion of RA indexes is that for the vast majority of players, they are not appropriate. Almost noone plays close enough to Kelly betting to make them relevant.)
I spent many hours fine-tuning the indexes on my advanced card set, and they are straight indexes, not RA. For this game my index for doubling 8v6 is TC +2, which happens to fall right in between Wong and GameMaster.
The good news is that even a 2-point difference in some numbers will not affect your results much, because the EV in these close call cases varies only slightly from one index to the next. The decisions where the differences are more pronounced are generally going to also be those where everyone agrees within a point plus or minus.
I’ve recently started training with your program very helpful thanks it just seems that on a pair of 4s againsts a 6 i woudve been better off doubling? also i always hit on a12 0r 13 against a 2 and more often than not i woudve been better off standing (based on my own tracking?thans
Splitting 4s vs a dealer 5 or 6 is better only when the rules allow double after split. If the actual numbers would help, here they are for a 6-deck S17 DAS game: Splitting 44v6 wins 0.168 of your initial bet on average. Hitting makes 0.124. Doubling makes only 0.104, making it the third-best option.
You mention hitting 13v2, which is not correct. You probably meant hitting 12 against a 2 or a 3 up. Again, just trust basic strategy. With (8,4) vs 2, hitting loses 0.254 of your bet on average. Standing is quite a bit worse, losing 0.291 of your bet on average.
Short-term results can be very misleading. Just trust the math.
The following may be a bit longish for this format. You may publish it or not as you choose.
The Five Reasons You Lose at Blackjack
This essay contains the remarkable claim that one of five possible situations can explain any loss at the Blackjack table, whether a single hand, a session or a life-time of play. It is comprehensive!
It is also arranged as a hierarchy. That is, if “Reason #1” explains a loss, no further reason is needed. If “Reason#1” is rejected, i.e. falsified, then proceed to “Reason#2” and so on.
Reason #1: God did not want you to win. Don’t ask me why; I have no especial insight into God’s mind.Perhaps playing Blackjack is sinful and losing a gentle expression of His/Her wrath. If you can’t accept this as the reason for losing go on to #2.
Reason #2: You played in a crooked game. This is a reason often suspected and sometimes claimed. For sure it has happened. There are many ways a dealer can cheat that are almost undetectable and many ways the house can cheat without even the dealer’s knowledge. However, I think such cheating is very rare in most large casinos. The casino can make tons of money without cheating and can not risk exposure and customer loss in a highly competative business. So on to #3.
Reason #3: You played poorly: you didn’t play a good basic strategy. The best way to play any card combination is well known and widely distributed. An occasional misplay is only human, but a systematic error will grind you down. I once played a table with a man who for 20 years would not hit any hand that might bust. He looked ground down. Fear of a bust is no reason to not take the best odds.
Reason #4: You had a string of bad luck: you didn’t win as many hands as average. Note that this is the same scenario as Reason#1, but does not invoke the intervention of a Higher Power. It’s purely mathematical, a normal variation from the mean. Knowing this, it is still amazing the variance you may experience from series to series in a Blackjack game. Now, the last reason. Everyone knows it, but presumes they are exempt.
Reason #5: Even with average luck, the house has a small edge. This edge seems to magnify in a long series of hands. Nevertheless, there is still hope. The possibility of better than average luck, i.e. a win, does exist. The probability of a win is reduced the longer you play, but never reaches zero. Some suggest that offers of travel, free play and generous comps can produce a win for the player that enjoys the game and the gaming environment. So, enjoy and good luck.
Wheelmarks
P.S.: I’m sure many will protest that i have included all the reasons for losing. I have heard (too many times): “You took my card. You took the dealer’s bust card. You didn’t hit and let the dealer have a winning card. You misplayed and now the whole shoe is out of order. You came in mid-shoe and ended my winning streak.” These beliefs, and innumerable variations are best described as superstitious mumbo-jumbo. There is no mathematical support for any of them. I did not cause you to lose, so stop getting angry and enjoy the game, or at least keep quiet and let me enjoy the game.
Determining the best play is not just about looking at the winning percentage. Instead, you must look at the average return of the hand considering wins, losses, and pushes. Basic strategy uses whichever play yields the highest average return.
It may be that a particular double-down wins more than 50% of the time, but there is still a better way to play the hand. (Ace,Ace) vs 5 is a good example. Doubling that hand does win more than 50% of the time, but splitting is better yet.
Thanks for the detailed answer Ken its appreciated. I always thought counters played more aggressively than the kelly due the fact that extremely high counts are rare. It was my understanding then that it is best to get your max bet out at TC 4 or 5. Don Schlesinger for example plays an extremely aggressive spread where his units go up to two as the TC increases slightly. Is this not a normal betting spread for a counter? Do you recommend playing a half Kelly? Or is this all personal preference depending on how high you want your ROR to be.
The Schlesinger spread you mention would be pretty normal. Optimal spreads will usually get your top bet on the table at +5. How you get there does influence your results, but really not all that much. Any ramp that gets you from your small bet at <+1 to your top bet at +5 is going to perform pretty well. My comments about RA indices and Kelly are based on the fact that almost all players undercount their bankroll, considering only the cash they have on hand at the moment for gambling. In truth, their effective bankroll is much bigger; they can replenish funds from other income sources, and they probably also have other assets that could be counted. Once you get into a large enough bank that these factors don't overwhelm the accounting, you can probably safely afford to bet more than you can easily get away with anyway. If you still are in a place where these calculations have value for you, then yes, betting half Kelly is a pretty good target in my opinion. There's still plenty of excitement in that. 🙂
I got into an argument with my dad about progressive loss betting systems. His argument was that in a casino where the minimum was extremely low and the maximum was extremely high the casino could be beat.
For example, say a casino offered a game with a 10 dollar minimum and a 1,310,720 dollar maximum (I know a casino would never offer this game but just assume they did for the purposes of the example). This would give you a 1-18 spread if you were to double your bet after every loss, not including splits and doubles. My dad argues that he could beat this casino because the chances of him losing 18 hands in a row is incredibly rare.
Assuming one plays perfect basic strategy the chances of losing this many hands in a row is approximately 1 in 262144. Is there a better way to explain this then to say that the potential small wins do not account for the possibility, however small it is, of losing 1,310,720 dollars.
Anyone have any ideas how I can convince my dad in an intelligent matter that he’s wrong?
An explanation of why basic strategy recommends certain plays is on my list of future blog topics, and maybe the new trainer can offer a link to that when it is available.
As for the emails not being optional when leaving a comment, thanks for letting me know! It’s fixed now, and comments no longer require an email address.
You combined BJINFO and CC.com into a single base … curious to know who the biggest contributors are 🙂
Went to vegas first time. Slots left me ho hum. Thought I might like blackjack as you actually have to use your brain. So im reading up on all the basic stratigy. Will memorize that and not deviate from the rules. In a nutshell , please advise me. Like which tables. Where to sit. importance of SP and Dh. Im okay with moderate minimums.
Starting out, you are likely better off playing at a “shoe game”, where all the cards are dealt face up. Just make sure blackjack pays 3:2.
After you gain some experience, look for good rules in a 2-deck game, which will usually be dealt face down.
Where you sit at the table matters very little.
Can you recommend a good computer game
For free, our own Strategy Trainer will coach you for basic strategy.
If you’re looking for something to play offline, Casino Verite includes basically every feature you can imagine for practicing blackjack and card counting. It sells for $90 and runs on Windows PCs.
Hi Ken,
Recently, during a visit to Genting Casino in Malaysia, I found out that they don’t offer Blackjack games anymore to ordinary players like me.The staff told me that it is only offered to high stakes players in the VIP rooms.Instead they offer pontoon and other variations of Blackjack games in the main Hall.
Yours Sincerely,
Bill
Why do some of your indices differ from Wong’s when using the same benchmark rules? For example you that the index for a hard 8 v a 6 is a double at TC 3, whereas Wong says it is at TC 1. There are quite a few other examples that differ greatly from yours can you explain why.
Index generation is trickier than it sounds, and some indexes are close calls over a range of numbers.
I’m not sure what process the GameMaster used when creating his, but seeing small differences in some numbers is not surprising. He did say that his numbers were risk-adjusted indexes. (My opinion of RA indexes is that for the vast majority of players, they are not appropriate. Almost noone plays close enough to Kelly betting to make them relevant.)
I spent many hours fine-tuning the indexes on my advanced card set, and they are straight indexes, not RA. For this game my index for doubling 8v6 is TC +2, which happens to fall right in between Wong and GameMaster.
The good news is that even a 2-point difference in some numbers will not affect your results much, because the EV in these close call cases varies only slightly from one index to the next. The decisions where the differences are more pronounced are generally going to also be those where everyone agrees within a point plus or minus.
I’ve recently started training with your program very helpful thanks it just seems that on a pair of 4s againsts a 6 i woudve been better off doubling? also i always hit on a12 0r 13 against a 2 and more often than not i woudve been better off standing (based on my own tracking?thans
Splitting 4s vs a dealer 5 or 6 is better only when the rules allow double after split.
If the actual numbers would help, here they are for a 6-deck S17 DAS game:
Splitting 44v6 wins 0.168 of your initial bet on average.
Hitting makes 0.124.
Doubling makes only 0.104, making it the third-best option.
You mention hitting 13v2, which is not correct. You probably meant hitting 12 against a 2 or a 3 up. Again, just trust basic strategy.
With (8,4) vs 2, hitting loses 0.254 of your bet on average. Standing is quite a bit worse, losing 0.291 of your bet on average.
Short-term results can be very misleading. Just trust the math.
The following may be a bit longish for this format. You may publish it or not as you choose.
The Five Reasons You Lose at Blackjack
This essay contains the remarkable claim that one of five possible situations can explain any loss at the Blackjack table, whether a single hand, a session or a life-time of play. It is comprehensive!
It is also arranged as a hierarchy. That is, if “Reason #1” explains a loss, no further reason is needed. If “Reason#1” is rejected, i.e. falsified, then proceed to “Reason#2” and so on.
Reason #1: God did not want you to win.
Don’t ask me why; I have no especial insight into God’s mind.Perhaps playing Blackjack is sinful and losing a gentle expression of His/Her wrath. If you can’t accept this as the reason for losing go on to #2.
Reason #2: You played in a crooked game.
This is a reason often suspected and sometimes claimed. For sure it has happened. There are many ways a dealer can cheat that are almost undetectable and many ways the house can cheat without even the dealer’s knowledge. However, I think such cheating is very rare in most large casinos. The casino can make tons of money without cheating and can not risk exposure and customer loss in a highly competative business. So on to #3.
Reason #3: You played poorly: you didn’t play a good basic strategy.
The best way to play any card combination is well known and widely distributed. An occasional misplay is only human, but a systematic error will grind you down. I once played a table with a man who for 20 years would not hit any hand that might bust. He looked ground down. Fear of a bust is no reason to not take the best odds.
Reason #4: You had a string of bad luck: you didn’t win as many hands as average.
Note that this is the same scenario as Reason#1, but does not invoke the intervention of a Higher Power. It’s purely mathematical, a normal variation from the mean. Knowing this, it is still amazing the variance you may experience from series to series in a Blackjack game. Now, the last reason. Everyone knows it, but presumes they are exempt.
Reason #5: Even with average luck, the house has a small edge.
This edge seems to magnify in a long series of hands. Nevertheless, there is still hope. The possibility of better than average luck, i.e. a win, does exist. The probability of a win is reduced the longer you play, but never reaches zero. Some suggest that offers of travel, free play and generous comps can produce a win for the player that enjoys the game and the gaming environment. So, enjoy and good luck.
Wheelmarks
P.S.: I’m sure many will protest that i have included all the reasons for losing. I have heard (too many times): “You took my card. You took the dealer’s bust card. You didn’t hit and let the dealer have a winning card. You misplayed and now the whole shoe is out of order. You came in mid-shoe and ended my winning streak.” These beliefs, and innumerable variations are best described as superstitious mumbo-jumbo. There is no mathematical support for any of them. I did not cause you to lose, so stop getting angry and enjoy the game, or at least keep quiet and let me enjoy the game.
Why some of your winning possibility are over 50%, but not come to basic strategy chart?
Determining the best play is not just about looking at the winning percentage. Instead, you must look at the average return of the hand considering wins, losses, and pushes. Basic strategy uses whichever play yields the highest average return.
It may be that a particular double-down wins more than 50% of the time, but there is still a better way to play the hand. (Ace,Ace) vs 5 is a good example. Doubling that hand does win more than 50% of the time, but splitting is better yet.
For more discussion of why you can’t just use win-rate to decide how to play a hand, see Why Splitting Tens is a Bad Move.
Thanks for the detailed answer Ken its appreciated. I always thought counters played more aggressively than the kelly due the fact that extremely high counts are rare. It was my understanding then that it is best to get your max bet out at TC 4 or 5. Don Schlesinger for example plays an extremely aggressive spread where his units go up to two as the TC increases slightly. Is this not a normal betting spread for a counter? Do you recommend playing a half Kelly? Or is this all personal preference depending on how high you want your ROR to be.
The Schlesinger spread you mention would be pretty normal. Optimal spreads will usually get your top bet on the table at +5. How you get there does influence your results, but really not all that much. Any ramp that gets you from your small bet at <+1 to your top bet at +5 is going to perform pretty well. My comments about RA indices and Kelly are based on the fact that almost all players undercount their bankroll, considering only the cash they have on hand at the moment for gambling. In truth, their effective bankroll is much bigger; they can replenish funds from other income sources, and they probably also have other assets that could be counted. Once you get into a large enough bank that these factors don't overwhelm the accounting, you can probably safely afford to bet more than you can easily get away with anyway. If you still are in a place where these calculations have value for you, then yes, betting half Kelly is a pretty good target in my opinion. There's still plenty of excitement in that. 🙂
I got into an argument with my dad about progressive loss betting systems. His argument was that in a casino where the minimum was extremely low and the maximum was extremely high the casino could be beat.
For example, say a casino offered a game with a 10 dollar minimum and a 1,310,720 dollar maximum (I know a casino would never offer this game but just assume they did for the purposes of the example). This would give you a 1-18 spread if you were to double your bet after every loss, not including splits and doubles. My dad argues that he could beat this casino because the chances of him losing 18 hands in a row is incredibly rare.
Assuming one plays perfect basic strategy the chances of losing this many hands in a row is approximately 1 in 262144. Is there a better way to explain this then to say that the potential small wins do not account for the possibility, however small it is, of losing 1,310,720 dollars.
Anyone have any ideas how I can convince my dad in an intelligent matter that he’s wrong?
If you could somehow put it into operation, this portal would be even more awesome than it is now.
Drop me a line, Harold …
… after you read The Zengrifter Interview.
ZG: [email protected]
An explanation of why basic strategy recommends certain plays is on my list of future blog topics, and maybe the new trainer can offer a link to that when it is available.
As for the emails not being optional when leaving a comment, thanks for letting me know!
It’s fixed now, and comments no longer require an email address.
Thanks for the feedback. Once I get the new trainer going, I would at least consider looking at what’s involved for Spanish 21.