Tracey Waterman
New Member
is there techiques that will burn card by playing to two hand on shoe or double deck to get a positive count.
bj techiques
- Thread starter Tracey Waterman
- Start date
Rob McGarvey
Well-Known Member
I Don't Understand What You are Asking
wong out
in other words,he's asking: is there a way to burn cards in a negative count to get to a positive count by playing two hands. I wouldn't think so because you double your negative ev playing 2 hands in a neg count. Best thing is to wong out till next shuffle if the count gets too bad. Bathroom, silent cell phone call or just put your hands up, "no mas".
in other words,he's asking: is there a way to burn cards in a negative count to get to a positive count by playing two hands. I wouldn't think so because you double your negative ev playing 2 hands in a neg count. Best thing is to wong out till next shuffle if the count gets too bad. Bathroom, silent cell phone call or just put your hands up, "no mas".
zengrifter
Banned
wong-out may be best, but...
... there are other approaches, such as spreading to 3 or more hands in neg-counts, that have been proven effective. zg
... there are other approaches, such as spreading to 3 or more hands in neg-counts, that have been proven effective. zg
Sonny
Well-Known Member
Card eating
It sounds like Tracey is asking about card eating. Although this can give a slight increase in pitch games, it will be almost useless in shoe games. ZenGrifter is right about the consolidation betting strategy, but it is meant for deeply dealt pitch games and will be too weak for an average shoe game. Eating cards by taking an extra hit or an extra split will not be enough to turn the entire shoe in your favor. Since 75% of the time the counts will be negative, your misplays could easily overcome the slight advantage you are fighting so hard for.
So yes, there are ways to eat extra cards in negative counts but if it is not done properly it could easily deteriorate your advantage. In most cases the juice just isn't worth the squeeze.
-Sonny-
It sounds like Tracey is asking about card eating. Although this can give a slight increase in pitch games, it will be almost useless in shoe games. ZenGrifter is right about the consolidation betting strategy, but it is meant for deeply dealt pitch games and will be too weak for an average shoe game. Eating cards by taking an extra hit or an extra split will not be enough to turn the entire shoe in your favor. Since 75% of the time the counts will be negative, your misplays could easily overcome the slight advantage you are fighting so hard for.
So yes, there are ways to eat extra cards in negative counts but if it is not done properly it could easily deteriorate your advantage. In most cases the juice just isn't worth the squeeze.
-Sonny-
I don't understand this
Let's say they are 100 cards left and both the dealer and each player use 2.5 cards per hand.
Let's assume the count will remain negative during the next 50 cards and see what happens with both strategies:
1. If I play 1 hand, I will bet 10 rounds at a disadvantage (my 10 hands will use 25 cards and the dealer will use the remaining 25 cards).
2. If I play 2 hands, I will bet 6-7 rounds at a disadvantage on both hands, which is like betting 12-14 rounds at a disadvantage (my 7 hands will use about 30-35 cards and the dealer will use the remaining cards).
From this simple comparison, I would tend to say:
- when the count is negative, I'll play only one hand,
- when the count is positive, I might want to play 2.
There must be something I'm missing, but what?
Royam
Let's say they are 100 cards left and both the dealer and each player use 2.5 cards per hand.
Let's assume the count will remain negative during the next 50 cards and see what happens with both strategies:
1. If I play 1 hand, I will bet 10 rounds at a disadvantage (my 10 hands will use 25 cards and the dealer will use the remaining 25 cards).
2. If I play 2 hands, I will bet 6-7 rounds at a disadvantage on both hands, which is like betting 12-14 rounds at a disadvantage (my 7 hands will use about 30-35 cards and the dealer will use the remaining cards).
From this simple comparison, I would tend to say:
- when the count is negative, I'll play only one hand,
- when the count is positive, I might want to play 2.
There must be something I'm missing, but what?
Royam
Sonny
Well-Known Member
How about this way...
> Let's say they are 100 cards left and both the dealer and each player use 2.5
> cards per hand.
Good so far. Let's also say that the cut card is after the 50th card in the pack.
> Let's assume the count will remain negative during the next 50 cards and see
> what happens with both strategies:
>
> 1. If I play 1 hand, I will bet 10 rounds at a disadvantage (my 10 hands will
> use 25 cards and the dealer will use the remaining 25 cards).
This way, if your minimum bet is $50, you are putting $500 on the table in negative situations.
> 2. If I play 2 hands, I will bet 6-7 rounds at a disadvantage on both hands,
> which is like betting 12-14 rounds at a disadvantage (my 7 hands will use
> about 30-35 cards and the dealer will use the remaining cards).
But what if you spread to 2 hands of 1/2 of a unit. For example, if you regular minimum bet is $50, you could spread to 2 hands of $25. This way you are only playing 7 rounds of $50, or $350 before the cut card comes out. You have eaten away an extra 3 rounds and spent $150 less money. Also, because of the slight covariance between the hands you are actually better off than playing 7 hands of $50 and Wonging out the rest of the pack.
> From this simple comparison, I would tend to say:
> - when the count is negative, I'll play only one hand,
> - when the count is positive, I might want to play 2.
Ah, but playing multiple hands in a positive situation will also eat cards, so you may get less hands dealt when you have the advantage. You will be eating away the few good hands you get while playing through the same number of negative hands. This is not good. Even with the proper bet sizing on your multiple hands (78% for 2 hands, 53% for 3 hands...I think) you could still be getting less money on the table in good situations. This means less profit.
This is why you must be very careful about your consolidation betting or card eating strategy. As I said below, improperly eating cards can easily overcome your advantage. Don Schlesinger's "Blackjack Attack" covers this in great detail.
-Sonny-
> Let's say they are 100 cards left and both the dealer and each player use 2.5
> cards per hand.
Good so far. Let's also say that the cut card is after the 50th card in the pack.
> Let's assume the count will remain negative during the next 50 cards and see
> what happens with both strategies:
>
> 1. If I play 1 hand, I will bet 10 rounds at a disadvantage (my 10 hands will
> use 25 cards and the dealer will use the remaining 25 cards).
This way, if your minimum bet is $50, you are putting $500 on the table in negative situations.
> 2. If I play 2 hands, I will bet 6-7 rounds at a disadvantage on both hands,
> which is like betting 12-14 rounds at a disadvantage (my 7 hands will use
> about 30-35 cards and the dealer will use the remaining cards).
But what if you spread to 2 hands of 1/2 of a unit. For example, if you regular minimum bet is $50, you could spread to 2 hands of $25. This way you are only playing 7 rounds of $50, or $350 before the cut card comes out. You have eaten away an extra 3 rounds and spent $150 less money. Also, because of the slight covariance between the hands you are actually better off than playing 7 hands of $50 and Wonging out the rest of the pack.
> From this simple comparison, I would tend to say:
> - when the count is negative, I'll play only one hand,
> - when the count is positive, I might want to play 2.
Ah, but playing multiple hands in a positive situation will also eat cards, so you may get less hands dealt when you have the advantage. You will be eating away the few good hands you get while playing through the same number of negative hands. This is not good. Even with the proper bet sizing on your multiple hands (78% for 2 hands, 53% for 3 hands...I think) you could still be getting less money on the table in good situations. This means less profit.
This is why you must be very careful about your consolidation betting or card eating strategy. As I said below, improperly eating cards can easily overcome your advantage. Don Schlesinger's "Blackjack Attack" covers this in great detail.
-Sonny-
zengrifter
Banned
see "inverse hand spreading"