amateur mistakes

[BoSox]

My strategy for leaving games depends a lot on my spread. Like if you are playing a table with a higher minimum, but your bankroll is such that you can't spread high then you have to exit more aggressively.

Reading between the lines here in your example I would NOT play at tables that force me to alter my spread because of bankroll considerations period. Now the irony here is that when I play the higher minimum tables which is often, I also use a slightly smaller spread,"but mix it up at times" as part of using a over betting at a higher level, under funded table act and exit more aggressively. Which is more about projection, and being welcomed back.

 

[ZeeBabar]

AH, so my post was not all bad!!

Kewlj, I play DD games and usually there is only 1-2 tables so I play all and the negative indexes help. I have to hit a 12 with 4-6 quite often.

On another note, when do you not hit an A7 against a 9? Is there a negative index where you stand on it? Also, doubling an A8 pisses ploppies the worst!

 

[BoSox]

ZeeBabar, on a side note, I think you should take off at least a month from playing the game resulting from the severe traumatizing experience you have undergone directly related to Mr Schlesinger's apparent lack of patience with you. Hopefully Doctor Wong, or Norm Watt does not also say anything negative about you in another poor post, I mean truthful thoughts this week. I am not sure you could mentally handle all of this at once.

 

[Meistro]

On another note, when do you not hit an A7 against a 9?

A7 v 9 is always a hit AFAIK. A7 v A becomes a stay at +1 in a S17 game.

 

[ZeeBabar]

ZeeBabar, on a side note, I think you should take off at least a month from playing the game resulting from the severe traumatizing experience you have undergone directly related to Mr Schlesinger's apparent lack of patience with you. Hopefully Doctor Wong, or Norm Watt does not also say anything negative about you in another poor post, I mean truthful thoughts this week. I am not sure you could mentally handle all of this at once.

Bosox, I can handle it. You know, I kept getting thrashed on the other forum for posting repetitive questions. Two things happened. One, I hung on there and did learn a lot, enough to at least not be a consistent loser and on the black side. Guys like Chaperone, ECT and 21forme, Kj, They did help me even as some attempted to humiliate me. Some of those posts I made Lead to long threads but now, that forum is almost dead because most are too scared to post and get beaten up. Second while I may have repeated a question, there seem to be interest from many who care about the answers, not who posted the original question.

 

[KewlJ]

1.) ramp up too slowly. A lot of the books, from the 80's and 90's offer some sort off generic betting ramp that is ramping up too slow for today's games. One that immediately comes to mind, is one of the first books I read, Stanford Wong's Professional Blackjack. Wong had a standard ramp (he used different terminology, which I now forget) that was $10 for all TC's below +2, $20 @ +2, +30 @ +3, $40 @ +4, $50 @ +5 and so on. He referred to $10 as his "unit" and raised in $10 increments per true count.

Almost as if on que: New member on another popular site, 6 deck game, mediocre rules, bet spread $10 @ +1, $20 @ +2, $30 @ +3, $40 @ +4, $50 @ +5. Newer players seem to all get this idea that they have to ramp up by their minimum bet amount, one true count at a time.

 

[Meistro]

What they should be doing is sizing their bets in proportion to their advantage. That is the best way to make money at blackjack.

 

[KewlJ]

related to Mr Schlesinger's apparent lack of patience with you.

When I answer a members question, I try to consider that I am not just answering a question or offering advice to that specific member but that there are other members reading who might not want to post that may be in the same position, or even that someone may come along in the future reading past posts and benefit. That makes it a little easier not to get too frustrated with one guy who is repetitive or seems slow to learn. But boy, Zee, is a challenge.

Bosox, I can handle it.

It is odd ZeeBabar, you do show some thick skin when it comes to these message boards, but yet at the blackjack table you, you don't show that same characteristic, instead worrying way to much what other players think or say. Try to work on that.

 

[KewlJ]

What they should be doing is sizing their bets in proportion to their advantage. That is the best way to make money at blackjack.

Yes. That is a little bit advanced for very green players, but this fall back idea of ramping up one minimum wager at a time per true count is a very bad practice.

I also don't like the notion of the minimum wager being any sort of measurement for increasing wagers. The minimum wager is just that, the minimum amount you can bet (usually table minimum) during negative Ev rounds. It should have nothing to do with how much you increase. That I learned rom the big player school of blackjack.

If I am playing a $25 table, my minimum wager is $25. But the amount I increase is usually is much more than $25. My $25 minimum wager is a fraction of what I jump between true counts. That makes for not only a healthy bet spread which you need for reasonable profitability, but something equally important, a reasonable quick betting ramp. I really think this betting ramp concept is not understood and implemented very well by not only newer players, but many experienced players as well.

 

[Meistro]

What is your take on betting cover KewlJ? For example, not increasing after a loss or decreasing after a win, even if the count calls for it? Do you try to have some alternative story about how you are betting, such as being a gambler who likes to press with his wins, or do you simply size with the count?

 

[Meistro]

I feel like it is advantageous to make your bets appear natural, so if the count is increasing you press by just sloppily throwing a few greens on top, aiming to get at or near your optimally calculated bet size for the true count, but not going for absolute precision because you want to appear like you are just throwing a bet out there or pressing because you won, not betting according to some predetermined schedule. I guess what I am trying to say is the most important thing is to look like a regular gambler who is not really thinking about his decisions at all, instead of like a calculating blackjack machine.

 

[KewlJ]

What is your take on betting cover KewlJ? For example, not increasing after a loss or decreasing after a win, even if the count calls for it? Do you try to have some alternative story about how you are betting, such as being a gambler who likes to press with his wins, or do you simply size with the count?

I don't like cover period, betting or playing. Generally, I believe that we are playing to such a slim advantage, that we just can't afford to give much back. And in a perfect world with no heat, nor back off concerns, I wouldn't. I haven't found that world yet. In this world with heat concerns, my top priority of longevity and doing everything I can to extend longevity, conflicts with this no cover period attitude. So I have incorporated some betting cover type strategies.

Not so much the not increasing after a loss or decreasing after a win. I don't follow that rule. But what I do like to do as much as possible is on a winning hand increase from the bet and paid winnings. In most cases that is a parlay, meaning most you can do is double your bet, with BJ's and dd/split wins, you can increase more than double. This thinking comes from a pit friend who I value his opinion that says it is unnatural for a player who wins his bet to bet more than the chips in play (original bet plus winnings). In other words if you bet $50 and won, it is rather unusual for a player to then bet more than $100. To do this he has to go to his chips in front of him rather than the chips in play. Now on a losing bet, you have to go to your chips anyway, so you can increase / decrease almost at will. Even fairly large jumps could just come off as chasing after a loss. I mean I wouldn't jump minimum to my max bet in one jump, but you can jump a couple levels. You are going to your chips anyway.

So I sort of set my ramp and spread up to easily accommodate this parlaying (after a win) action. The way I do that is to work backwards from my max bet. best way to explain this is to give a generic example. Let's say I determine my max bet is $600. I place that at TC +4. I believe max bet needs to be out by TC +4. If you wait any later, TC's just don't occur often enough to benefit you. So I bet $600 @ tc +4, halving that, I would bet $300 at tc +3. This allows for parlaying on a winning wager. halving that, I bet $150 at tc +2.

Now the problem area is tc +1. Most players would figure that tc +1 is about even Ev-wise. At actual true count +1, probably still slightly -Ev for most games, but if you subscribe to the bin theory that the TC +1 "bin" encompasses, tc +1 to TC +1.99, the Ev for entire bin is just slightly positive (for most games).
Still not worthy of much of an increase. But I would increase. I would increase to $75 just to smooth out the ramp and avoid making a jump from my minimum wager of $25 to my +2 tc wager of $150. Whether Ev is even or slightly negative or slightly positive at tc +1, the cost is minimal and the benefit of avoiding that bigger jump worth it.

Now the math and computer "purists" will argue that, setting up your ramp in this manner is less than optimal. And there is some truth to that. There is a cost. But my top priority is longevity, and this compromise, is optimal to me for that objective.

 

[KewlJ]

I feel like it is advantageous to make your bets appear natural, so if the count is increasing you press by just sloppily throwing a few greens on top, aiming to get at or near your optimally calculated bet size for the true count, but not going for absolute precision because you want to appear like you are just throwing a bet out there or pressing because you won, not betting according to some predetermined schedule. I guess what I am trying to say is the most important thing is to look like a regular gambler who is not really thinking about his decisions at all, instead of like a calculating blackjack machine.

Yeah pressing can work. You see regular players doing that all the time. I prefer parlaying, as I just mentioned, but whatever works. All you really want to avoid is something that looks very unnatural like winning a $50 bet and betting $300 on the next hand.

 

[KewlJ]

I guess I should also share my view on decreasing after a win, since it was asked. I don't worry about decreasing my wager nearly as much as increasing, with the exception of the biggest of 'tells', decreasing back to minimum at the shuffle after a max or bigger wager.

Other than this biggest of tells, I decrease at will. The most common course of action after a win, is to bet the same amount. So the player is pulling back the winning chips anyway. So what difference does it make if you pull back only some of the winning chips, all of the winning chips, or even all of the winning chips plus some of the original bet. It's all the same action as long as you are not too 'awkward' about it.

The truth is some of these things, we all, myself included, probably over think. Some of these things probably don't matter as much as we think. Unless someone is really watching you, really evaluating your game, in which case you are probably in trouble anyway.

 

[Meistro]

Even more unnatural than adding chips is buying in, when you still have chips in front of you. I remember once near the end of the shoe, at the time I was using a spread of 2 x 40 units at TC +4, going from table min to table max without much concern. So when the true count skyrocketed and I went from a modest bet to 2x table max I bought in for enough chips to make the bet even though I had a pile of six hundred or whatever in front of me, and the dealer was surprised and remarked "but you still have chips in front of you". In retrospect it probably would have been wiser to just go all in on one hand and then if I bust rebuy big and if I won go to 1x table max. Of course too if you get a double down or split this is an excellent opportunity to spike your bet especially if you win because now there is a mountain of chips in your betting square at the end of the hand. Of course most of these rebuy issues can be averted by keeping a stash of chips.

 

[KewlJ]

Of course most of these rebuy issues can be averted by keeping a stash of chips.

Great advice, Meistro! This should be a strong consideration for anyone with longevity concerns or priorities.

 

[Meistro]

The nice thing about a stash to is it can keep the floorman away from your table, because if you buy in for 1k cash then usually the floor man has to come over and verify it.

 

[BoSox]

1.) ramp up too slowly. A lot of the books, from the 80's and 90's offer some sort off generic betting ramp that is ramping up too slow for today's games. One that immediately comes to mind, is one of the first books I read, Stanford Wong's Professional Blackjack. Wong had a standard ramp (he used different terminology, which I now forget) that was $10 for all TC's below +2, $20 @ +2, +30 @ +3, $40 @ +4, $50 @ +5 and so on. He referred to $10 as his "unit" and raised in $10 increments per true count.

So to get your max bet of say $120, or $160 (1-12 or 1-16 spread), you aren't going to be max betting until a TC of +12 or +16. which rarely happens. So basically anyone going by this type of ramp is playing a game with a 1-5 spread of so, because you just aren't going to get true counts of more than +5 very often....not often enough to be beneficial. Don't get me wrong, still a lot of good information in Professional Blackjack or other books from this era that does transfer to today's games, but the betting ramps used are too slow.

I also don't think that minimum wager placed at TC's below +2 should be considered the unit and bets raised by that increment, but that's probably getting into another discussing. For the purpose of this discussion, lets just keep it at "ramping up too slowly".

I think one of the more important aspects that new players should learn first is what their negative or positive edge is at exactly each true count sequence they will be playing against, based on the exact rules of the game and cuts they are receiving before considering making up betting ramps. Frankly there are often huge differences in EV plus/minus edges that must be considered to have any legitimate chance of actually betting properly. For example taken from BJ Attack 3rd Edition in Chapter 10, on page 223, Table 10.19 (7.0/8 S17 DAS LS) at a +1 TC shows an EV % edge of +.48 with an optimal bet of $38, and a practical bet of $40. Now on page 225, Table 10.23 ( 7.0/8 H17) at a +1 TC shows an an EV edge of 0.00, with an optimal bet of$7, or $8 dollars with a pratical bet of $5 to $10 now without players knowing these numbers they very well could be over betting or under betting their entire betting sequence, by large amounts of money.

Another aspect to consider for spreading your bets, depending on where you play," with the availability,or lack of other casinos close by" heat tolerance and the length of your session can and does affect just how much you can show, and how you play your game. Certain areas of say, on the east coast currently, some players do not have the option of quantity, subsequently a different style of play is required, as there is no hit and run options, it is what it is. I agree players need to get their top bets out sooner although I play good games and make my largest jump in units at a lower count when it is less obvious. I received good lessons over the years from reading every bigplayer post that I saw. Thank you Don Schlesinger, and bigplayer.

 

[ZeeBabar]

I guess I should also share my view on decreasing after a win, since it was asked. I don't worry about decreasing my wager nearly as much as increasing, with the exception of the biggest of 'tells', decreasing back to minimum at the shuffle after a max or bigger wager.

Other than this biggest of tells, I decrease at will. The most common course of action after a win, is to bet the same amount. So the player is pulling back the winning chips anyway. So what difference does it make if you pull back only some of the winning chips, all of the winning chips, or even all of the winning chips plus some of the original bet. It's all the same action as long as you are not too 'awkward' about it.

The truth is some of these things, we all, myself included, probably over think. Some of these things probably don't matter as much as we think. Unless someone is really watching you, really evaluating your game, in which case you are probably in trouble anyway.

Kewlj, I always start every deck with a minimum bet, regardless of the last bet I placed in the previous deck. I don't agree that it is a big tell cause most ploppies also start a new deck with their lowest bet.

 

[KewlJ]

I don't agree that it is a big tell cause most ploppies also start a new deck with their lowest bet.

I would re-think this Zee. Retreating back to the minimum wager at the shuffle is absolutely the biggest tell of a card counter, especially after ending the last shoe with a max or bigger bet out.

Unfortunately, there are not many options for avoiding it. You can leave at the shuffle as I do, or you can not return all the way back to minimum wager, as Zengrifter has at times suggested. I don't like this non-minimum wager for shoe games as it is just too costly. @DD, you can afford to do that a bit more. As a matter of fact, my normal DD spread goes both ways. The advantage of this, is pit, surveillance need to see both negative counts as well as the max bets counts to see your full spread.