Card Counting for the Recreational Player?

[DrEntropy]

I was wondering if there is a card counting method that is suitable for person who just plays blackjack for fun, but would like to do so as cheaply as possibly. The goal is to reduce the house edge to zero. This player is just looking to enjoy a bit of blackjack, not make money necessarily.

I would think that if you could flat bet from the beginning of the shoe, and then have some kind of measure of when you should quit when/if the deck becomes poor (I.e. wong out) this would probably not attract heat.

One example I looked at is to use the Hi-lo count. I simulated (using Cvdata) a hi-lo count with a wong-out at a TC of -1. (I.e. wong out when the running count is approximately the same as the number of decks remaining). The play percentage is about 50%, and for typical vegas rules (6D H17 DAS RSA) I compute a nearly break even game (~0.01% +- .01% player advantage).

Ok, so my questions:
A) Would this player get any heat for wonging out? I assume if you are going to face heat, you might as well bet ramp and get as much as you can while you can, and the 'recreational' strategy is foolish.
B) Is there anything that is easier then the Hilo that the player could use for a measure of when to wong out?

Thanks, and I did search the archives to see if this was discussed, but my search did not reveal anything. If someone knows of a previous discussion, a pointer would be appreciated.

TLDR: Is flat bet + wong out a reasonable strategy for the recreational player who doesn't want any heat?

 

[Ferretnparrot]

*you wont get heat if you never raise your bet.
*you can beat the game (by definition) by simply wonging out. though you wont exaclty be counting your money to find your actually making money because the return is trivial.

spreading 1-2 is better, and 1-3 better than that, if you have the money, do the biggest spread you are comfortable with.

I too take this position on heat and ellect to simply play super agressive whle i can, but this also involves putting lots of money into action, sometihng you may not feel comfortable with if you wish to play recreationally.

 

[WrongWayWade]

"Recreational" players

I was wondering if there is a card counting method that is suitable for person who just plays blackjack for fun, but would like to do so as cheaply as possibly. The goal is to reduce the house edge to zero. This player is just looking to enjoy a bit of blackjack, not make money necessarily.

I would think that if you could flat bet from the beginning of the shoe, and then have some kind of measure of when you should quit when/if the deck becomes poor (I.e. wong out) this would probably not attract heat.

One example I looked at is to use the Hi-lo count. I simulated (using Cvdata) a hi-lo count with a wong-out at a TC of -1. (I.e. wong out when the running count is approximately the same as the number of decks remaining). The play percentage is about 50%, and for typical vegas rules (6D H17 DAS RSA) I compute a nearly break even game (~0.01% +- .01% player advantage).

Ok, so my questions:
A) Would this player get any heat for wonging out? I assume if you are going to face heat, you might as well bet ramp and get as much as you can while you can, and the 'recreational' strategy is foolish.
B) Is there anything that is easier then the Hilo that the player could use for a measure of when to wong out?

Thanks, and I did search the archives to see if this was discussed, but my search did not reveal anything. If someone knows of a previous discussion, a pointer would be appreciated.

TLDR: Is flat bet + wong out a reasonable strategy for the recreational player who doesn't want any heat?

I doubt you can create an advantage this way. Just reducing the house edge from .50 to .00 doesn't really get me that excited, you are still just counting on positive variance just like any random gambler to make money. Wonging out doesn't sound very 'recreational' to me. You want to change tables all night long? Wonging in OR out a lot DOES generate heat.

For 'recreational' gamblers that want a legitimate method to raise your bet at the 'right' time without working hard at all, I highly recommend the OPPC count, (free at the link below, you can pay money for it from Scoblete as the 'Speed Count', but it's the same thing.) Your method of doing the hi-lo involves all the effort of real counting without really any of the benefit.

It's so easy, you can still BS with the dealers and players, and if you are spreading $10 to $80 or somethiing like that, you'll almost NEVER generate any heat. And you can still 'play all' and have a zero or positive edge, at worst, in a shoe game. Only having to count 5 of the 13 cards is cool. I don't use this anymore, but did for 4 years and my net win was 200 units.

http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/Easy_OPP_Card_Counting_System.htm

 

[DrEntropy]

For 'recreational' gamblers that want a legitimate method to raise your bet at the 'right' time without working hard at all, I highly recommend the OPPC count

I looked at this briefly... is it really that much easier then HiLo? I always found the primary challenge in card counting is remembering the count, not the actual counting. I will have to look into it further.

 

[toastcmu]

I looked at this briefly... is it really that much easier then HiLo? I always found the primary challenge in card counting is remembering the count, not the actual counting. I will have to look into it further.

I think it's a good place to start - once you get proficient at the OPPC, then you can add in the negative cards (10's & A's) to go to Hi-Lo running count.

Alternatively, you could just do the A/5 Count (Ace as -1, 5's as +1) as a very rudimentary system.

http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/wizardcount.html

-B

 

[Machinist]

Oh come now....hi-low is quite simple.....spend a couple of hours ...
I'm assuming you want to sit there with your sig/other wife or friends and play bj....Ya know even if your just half ass at counting.........how much could you really lose??? Its only a half percent against ya to start...
And if the count gets really really negative ......hop up and get another table.... or let your friends eat the cards..
I bet by the end of the nite you will have gained some real confidence in your counting ability.... Heat.. well that's totally dependent on the casino....
Depending on the casino......heck you might even get a meal comped.....

Machinist

 

[moo321]

Your best bet to make money with a small bankroll is to back-count. You can theoretically do this with like $100 at a $5 table. Just jump in when the count is good, and jump out when it goes bad.

 

[Renzey]

*you wont get heat if you never raise your bet.
*you can beat the game (by definition) by simply wonging out. though you wont exaclty be counting your money to find your actually making money because the return is trivial..

I see this as the most basic strategic premise of the game beyond basic strategy. Sim-wise, a six deck shoe w/S17, playing BS, flat betting and wonging out at all Hi/Lo running counts of -4 or lower brings it down to an even game. Doing this, you'll be playing 72% of the hands. You're only there when all your hands dealt are, on average, break even. You'll be sitting out that 28% of the hands which average -1.75%.

However, as long as you're already counting, just making a half dozen running count index plays will allow you to break even playing 80% of all hands (wonging out at -6 RC).

 

[Renzey]

Sim-wise, a six deck shoe w/S17, playing BS, flat betting and wonging out at all Hi/Lo running counts of -4 or lower brings it down to an even game.

Wait! Hold off on that! It doesn't look right -- (or feel right for that matter)! A quick math check on "hands-at-count" distribution makes that mode of play look more like a -.20% EV. Let me re-check my sim parameters.

 

[aslan]

Maybe we could prepare several strategies for playing a break even game, assuming an original house advantage of 0.5. For example, adding index plays, or spreading slightly (2x or 3x), or wonging out, or wonging in, or oppositional betting at higher amounts, or various combinations of the foregoing.

 

[DrEntropy]

Wait! Hold off on that! It doesn't look right -- (or feel right for that matter)! A quick math check on "hands-at-count" distribution makes that mode of play look more like a -.20% EV. Let me re-check my sim parameters.

I simmed 6D S17, DAS, RSA, 75% pen using CVdata, starting at new shoes and wonging out at RC <= -4, flat betting, I get player advantage +0.25% (IBA%), but you only play 44% of hands. However, I am new to CVdata and might be doing something wrong.

If I change that to wong out at RC <= -6, everything else the same I get +.16% (IBA) and play 58%.

For H17 things are worse of course, which is the more typical set of rules...e.g. wong out at RC -6 gives -.05% (IBA)

 

[Southpaw]

I simmed 6D S17, DAS, RSA, 75% pen using CVdata, starting at new shoes and wonging out at RC <= -4, flat betting, I get player advantage +0.25% (IBA%), but you only play 44% of hands. However, I am new to CVdata and might be doing something wrong.

If I change that to wong out at RC <= -6, everything else the same I get +.16% (IBA) and play 58%.

For H17 things are worse of course, which is the more typical set of rules...e.g. wong out at RC -6 gives -.05% (IBA)

If you were willing to calculate the TC, I think you'd be able to get in more hands while maintaining the same advantage. (You'd still be flat-betting of course). This is simply because wonging-out when at a RC of = -6 when there are only 2 decks left is much more theoretically (perhaps not practically, though) advisable than wonging out at RC = -6 when there are five decks left.

In effect, you'd be able to retain an equivalent advantage without feeling like your strategy mandates you to leave the table after the first round when the two ploppies next to you pull blackjacks off the top of the shoe.

SP

 

[DrEntropy]

If you were willing to calculate the TC, I think you'd be able to get in more hands while maintaining the same advantage. (You'd still be flat-betting of course).
SP

My original post used the TC (wong out at TC<=-1). To get play percentage up, I also tried TC <= -2, that plays ~ 70% of hands, and does better then break even in a S17 game. In H17 it loses (-0.1%) but not so badly. You can make it up and get back to even by giving up on flat betting and doubling your bet at a TC >= +5. I suppose that happens rarely enough (~ 3% of hands) that you probably wouldn't get heat, but I am not sure. But I don't know if a recreational player should be interested in quibbling over 0.1% changes?

 

[UK-21]

Recreational play? I haven't read through the whole thread, but skimming over it I can't see any references to the amount of play / expected number of hours at the tables?

If it's expected to be only a few hours every couple of months, then these discussions about the edge effect of the H17 rule, and similar considerations, become largely academic - variance will swamp all of the finer points of the maths (someone else's term I should say).

As to the issue of the wong-out point, for someone playing for some entertainment I think this is taking things a bit far. With a HE of half a per cent when flat betting and playing BS, for a recreational player that's pretty good odds? Add into the mix some of the composite deviations explained in Mr Renzey's BJBB3 and the HE reduces even more. It never gets to zero, but there isn't too much left in it. I suspect that if 7 players at a table all adopted this approach and flat bet the table min of $5, the longer term HE on the group might not even be enough to cover the overheads of providing the game? (Certainly the case in the UK, where my nearest casino you can play BJ, with the S17 rule, for £2.00 a hand).

If you want to go beyond that, and play with an advantage and with a longer term expectation of winning some money, then all of the finer points discussed need to be considered to maximise the small advantage that CC gives. There is a disadvantage to crossing this line of course, the variance and swings that result from spreading bets upwards. Something that, perhaps, the average recreational player (as against recreational counter) might wish to avoid?

I think there's a distinction to be made between "recreational player and "recreational counter/AP", although I should say it's not my suggestion that anyone should be pigeon-holed.

 

[DrEntropy]

If it's expected to be only a few hours every couple of months, then these discussions about the edge effect of the H17 rule, and similar considerations, become largely academic - variance will swamp all of the finer points of the maths (someone else's term I should say).

This is a good point, however I do enjoy academic discussions anyway. In the instant case lets assume this hypothetical 'recreational' player plays at the $10 level four times a month for a 3 hour session each time. At 80 hands an hour, he is paying about $60 a month long term. (Standard deviation for the month is about $340). Affordable entertainment, but suppose our player also enjoys a challenge (and is starting to get bored of basic strategy, with BJBBII mods) and would get even more entertainment value out of learning some card counting skills. Then by learning Hi-Lo he can use that skill to at least learn when to leave a bad shoe and perhaps throw some extra bets out there (doubling on a win) when the count is very high. There would be some satisfaction to be had in mastering that skill and eliminating the house edge, without presumably generating any heat. But on this last point it is pure conjecture. I am sure there are places that would sweat a $10 player who spreads 1-2 on a 6D game.

 

[paddywhack]

I doubt that one

I am sure there are places that would sweat a $10 player who spreads 1-2 on a 6D game.

Seems really unlikely. 1-6 spread, maybe, but 1-2 is really benign.

 

[zoomie]

Maybe we could prepare several strategies for playing a break even game, assuming an original house advantage of 0.5. For example, adding index plays, or spreading slightly (2x or 3x), or wonging out, or wonging in, or oppositional betting at higher amounts, or various combinations of the foregoing.

Sure, can be done. One page spreadsheet, I'm sure. I've done it for SP21, and it takes something like a spread from 1x1 to 2x2. The BJ player advantage ramp is not as steep, so it may be 2x3.

 

[UK-21]

I agree with Paddywhack - a 1-6 spread on a 6 deck, H17, game is about right to eradicate the HE and deliver an evens game (assuming play all approach). Spreading anything less will mean still playing at a disadvantage. In the UK I play recreationally, and spread 1-8 on the 6 deck, S17, games generally offered. With the use of a spreadsheet I calculated this provides a longer term advantage of 0.45% - nothing to write home about. It is possible to spread wider on the occasions that a shoe's composition favours the player - we don't have "heat" as such, and the only stories I've heard of people being asked to leave the premises is after someone has made a complaint about their behaviour, or they are being disruptive, disorderly etc.

This sort of makes the point, that if you don't have sufficient bankroll, or are not able and willing, to spread 1-8+ (on a shoe game), there's little point in counting - you might just as well, play BS and take advantage of the free booze on offer (although we don't have that here). True, leaving a game at neg counts will improve on the HE, but with a starting HE of +/-0.5%, I can't personally see the nominal reduction in the HE is worth the effort. Just me though.

 

[aslan]

I agree with Paddywhack - a 1-6 spread on a 6 deck, H17, game is about right to eradicate the HE and deliver an evens game (assuming play all approach). Spreading anything less will mean still playing at a disadvantage. In the UK I play recreationally, and spread 1-8 on the 6 deck, S17, games generally offered. With the use of a spreadsheet I calculated this provides a longer term advantage of 0.45% - nothing to write home about. It is possible to spread wider on the occasions that a shoe's composition favours the player - we don't have "heat" as such, and the only stories I've heard of people being asked to leave the premises is after someone has made a complaint about their behaviour, or they are being disruptive, disorderly etc.

This sort of makes the point, that if you don't have sufficient bankroll, or are not able and willing, to spread 1-8+ (on a shoe game), there's little point in counting - you might just as well, play BS and take advantage of the free booze on offer (although we don't have that here). True, leaving a game at neg counts will improve on the HE, but with a starting HE of +/-0.5%, I can't personally see the nominal reduction in the HE is worth the effort. Just me though.

You got a .45 advantage spreading 1 x 6, which is equivalent to the house advantage in reverse (at least for games in the US). I think you could spread a little lighter to achieve an even money game. I am running out the door to Atlantic City as we speak so I won't see your reply until Saturday night earliest.

 

[UK-21]

Your right. Playing for a couple of hours at the table mins and spreading 1-8 on a six deck shoe yields an EV of about £5.50 (or just under three if you want to measure it in units). Certainly nothing that's going to break anyone's bank. So, in this case, it'd be about entertainment value and the challenge, not the expectation.

One reason why I consider risk, relative to the amount of chips I buy in for, when playing - and don't double up on max bets on, say, 9v2 where there's a relatively big window for the dealer to draw a winning hand. I've been given a drubbing on the forum for making this point in the past. So by doing as you suggest, and decreasing the spread, although the EV will reduce down from a fiver or so (not much to lose £/$ wise there), you would be avoiding the risks of larger losses from losing hands with big bets out but probably still enjoying the same entertainment value?

If the entertainment value is derived from winning, rather than playing, then there just might be a problem in the background somewhere?

Conclusion? If you're not able and willing to make a 1-6 bet spread then there's really no point in going to the effort of counting the cards. Certainly nothing new in that. I think there's just as much entertainment value in (a) playing BS knowing I'm not giving too much away (b) people watching (c) taking full advantage of the comps and freebies offered to keep me in the house (if free alcohol was offered in UK casinos, I'm sure I would have suffered liver failure by now - I could quite happily consume more than a fiver's worth of booze an hour!!!!).

Trust your trip was profitable.