zengrifter
Banned
From: "zengrifter"
Subject:Re: BJ methodology refinements
To: BW CC: [email protected]
**Hello ! Yes I remember, the gallery! Is it a brick and mortar business as well?
----- Original Message -----
From: "BW"
Subject: BJ methodology refinements
> Dear ZG,
>
> I am writing you to thank you for the working methodolgy for playing
> 2dk you gave me a year or so ago. I came across your instructions
> just prior to a deer hunting trip to N. Wisconsin where I was also
> planning on playing some of the Indian Casinos. I came off with 330
> units in three days of play at four different places.
>
**Skill is being prepared for the positive (and negative) swings.
> I want to fine tune what you gave me (ie. play two hands in negative
> counts and one hand in positive counts while playing heads-up with
> Dealer; play one hand in neg. counts and one hand in pos. count
> while playing with two or more players).
**Should read 1hand in -counts, 2hands in +counts, with 2 or more (others' spots). If the rules preclude you from mid-entry of the second, start with 2hands and stay at 2hands unless the count goes south.
>
> First of all, is? this equally applicable to 4 and 6 Dk
>
**Yes and no - one difference is that you will need a larger effective spread than you use in 2Ds AND you will need to abandon most -count shoes beyond about -3 TC.
> Secondly, I am so comfortable playing two hands in neg. counts
> that I want to do the same when others are present. Is there a
> mathamatical reason why I shouldn't?
**Playing 2hands (or 3hands) in -counts eat/accelerate the -Ev decks/time, but if there are others at the table who are going to slow the game/reduce your +Ev anyway, I say let THEM EAT the -Ev/time, but then when you are in +Ev/time you become one of the pigs in a trough tussling to eat a limited amount of slop, get it?.
>
> A lot has been posted lately on the added value of playing two
> hands. Would you discourage that in positive counts until TC +4 or
> +5 is reached?
**Depending on the #others at the table it is not optimum, necessarily, to push to 2hands in a +count, heads-up for instance would be penalized statistically by doing so (except arguably on the last round).
**Notwithstanding, today's game requires more creativity to gain longevity and one of the areas that we have a lot of wiggle-room is in semi-cover betting - changing the routine constantly between 1-2-3hands, not clearly related to the count, is one way to achieve 'semi-cover' betting. The important 'balancing' aspect of this sort of mixed#hands gambit is that a sufficient spread is maintained throughout - for example on a good 2D betting 2-3x1u (2-3hands of 1u) in -counts a bet of 1x8-12u in +counts is reasonably sufficient IF you vacate a few -decks per hr - conversely, if you bet 2-3x5u in +counts your corresponding -count bet would be 1x1u, bet 2x6-7u in +counts and your -count bet is 1-2x1u, more art than science - the more -counts you can avoid altogether, the more leeway you have with reduced-spread and/or non-optimum +count bets.
>
> Part of my camo is to begin play with two units on each spot. When
> I win and the count drops (which it usually does) I have problems
> with how to lower my bet. Typically, I will remove one bet and play
> the remaining 2-unit bet. Then on the next bet, if still minus or zero,
> split the bet to two spots. Is this what you do or do you leave the
> two 2-unit bets up until you lose one...and then split to two 1-unit
> bets?
**Like I say, the more important element today is mixing-up the betting while being sure to maintain a sufficient spread across each face of the gambit - so it doesn't matter how you accomplish the chore of betting less in -counts and vice-versa BUT my preference in the instant case is to immediately divide the remaining bet into 2hands or even 3hands if allowed in -counts - this will increase your overall variance/risk because your average min bet has increased, as will your comp-value, so calculate more BR for increased variance when betting 2-3hands in -counts.
> Thanks again for your help.
**By the way, you are not my only world-class artist BJ student, I want to introduce you to Comrad Nadia Russ from Moscow - she is you will see a world-class renound artist - and she is connected if we ever play the Russian games safely - check her out her at - (Dead link: http://hometown.aol.com/nadiaruss3000/index.html)
**Nadia, check out BW's gallery and work at [deleted]
>
> BW (artguy)
>
> PS Two of these casinos had 2-dks and 4-dks cut to 80% (but with
> ndas on the 2-dk). Interested?
>
**YES, including #tables open/shift/limits, etc.
** Cheers, ZG (griftguy)
Subject:Re: BJ methodology refinements
To: BW CC: [email protected]
**Hello ! Yes I remember, the gallery! Is it a brick and mortar business as well?
----- Original Message -----
From: "BW"
Subject: BJ methodology refinements
> Dear ZG,
>
> I am writing you to thank you for the working methodolgy for playing
> 2dk you gave me a year or so ago. I came across your instructions
> just prior to a deer hunting trip to N. Wisconsin where I was also
> planning on playing some of the Indian Casinos. I came off with 330
> units in three days of play at four different places.
>
**Skill is being prepared for the positive (and negative) swings.
> I want to fine tune what you gave me (ie. play two hands in negative
> counts and one hand in positive counts while playing heads-up with
> Dealer; play one hand in neg. counts and one hand in pos. count
> while playing with two or more players).
**Should read 1hand in -counts, 2hands in +counts, with 2 or more (others' spots). If the rules preclude you from mid-entry of the second, start with 2hands and stay at 2hands unless the count goes south.
>
> First of all, is? this equally applicable to 4 and 6 Dk
>
**Yes and no - one difference is that you will need a larger effective spread than you use in 2Ds AND you will need to abandon most -count shoes beyond about -3 TC.
> Secondly, I am so comfortable playing two hands in neg. counts
> that I want to do the same when others are present. Is there a
> mathamatical reason why I shouldn't?
**Playing 2hands (or 3hands) in -counts eat/accelerate the -Ev decks/time, but if there are others at the table who are going to slow the game/reduce your +Ev anyway, I say let THEM EAT the -Ev/time, but then when you are in +Ev/time you become one of the pigs in a trough tussling to eat a limited amount of slop, get it?.
>
> A lot has been posted lately on the added value of playing two
> hands. Would you discourage that in positive counts until TC +4 or
> +5 is reached?
**Depending on the #others at the table it is not optimum, necessarily, to push to 2hands in a +count, heads-up for instance would be penalized statistically by doing so (except arguably on the last round).
**Notwithstanding, today's game requires more creativity to gain longevity and one of the areas that we have a lot of wiggle-room is in semi-cover betting - changing the routine constantly between 1-2-3hands, not clearly related to the count, is one way to achieve 'semi-cover' betting. The important 'balancing' aspect of this sort of mixed#hands gambit is that a sufficient spread is maintained throughout - for example on a good 2D betting 2-3x1u (2-3hands of 1u) in -counts a bet of 1x8-12u in +counts is reasonably sufficient IF you vacate a few -decks per hr - conversely, if you bet 2-3x5u in +counts your corresponding -count bet would be 1x1u, bet 2x6-7u in +counts and your -count bet is 1-2x1u, more art than science - the more -counts you can avoid altogether, the more leeway you have with reduced-spread and/or non-optimum +count bets.
>
> Part of my camo is to begin play with two units on each spot. When
> I win and the count drops (which it usually does) I have problems
> with how to lower my bet. Typically, I will remove one bet and play
> the remaining 2-unit bet. Then on the next bet, if still minus or zero,
> split the bet to two spots. Is this what you do or do you leave the
> two 2-unit bets up until you lose one...and then split to two 1-unit
> bets?
**Like I say, the more important element today is mixing-up the betting while being sure to maintain a sufficient spread across each face of the gambit - so it doesn't matter how you accomplish the chore of betting less in -counts and vice-versa BUT my preference in the instant case is to immediately divide the remaining bet into 2hands or even 3hands if allowed in -counts - this will increase your overall variance/risk because your average min bet has increased, as will your comp-value, so calculate more BR for increased variance when betting 2-3hands in -counts.
> Thanks again for your help.
**By the way, you are not my only world-class artist BJ student, I want to introduce you to Comrad Nadia Russ from Moscow - she is you will see a world-class renound artist - and she is connected if we ever play the Russian games safely - check her out her at - (Dead link: http://hometown.aol.com/nadiaruss3000/index.html)
**Nadia, check out BW's gallery and work at [deleted]
>
> BW (artguy)
>
> PS Two of these casinos had 2-dks and 4-dks cut to 80% (but with
> ndas on the 2-dk). Interested?
>
**YES, including #tables open/shift/limits, etc.
** Cheers, ZG (griftguy)