Counting and vertical/horizontal betting

[NoNeedForLuck]

Today I was reading that book "Play Blackjack Like the Pros" by Kevin Blackwood. I find it quite interesting On page 80 I noticed vertical and horizontal spread betting known as card eating. I find it quite useful. So when your count is high you bet verticaly (raising your bet) and when your count is low you spread bet to more hands (eat cards).
So in example one we have edge of 1% so we bet 5 units (our limit) on one hand. That means you will gain 10 units every 100 hands playing with 1% edge. Thats what we all do right? =)
But if house has the edge, you play max games possible with 1 unit. Assuming you have disadvantage of 0.5%, you might hit enough cards to come back to 0% edge what would most definetly benefit you since you would cut all your losses.
What if you dont eat enough cards to make it to 0% edge or more? No worries guys, you would lose anyway :grin: But if you drop below your count limit, like TC -3 then simply wong out. Actually I find this stuff very exciting :>

Comments guys?

 

[QFIT]

Today I was reading that book "Play Blackjack Like the Pros" by Kevin Blackwood. I find it quite interesting On page 80 I noticed vertical and horizontal spread betting known as card eating. I find it quite useful. So when your count is high you bet verticaly (raising your bet) and when your count is low you spread bet to more hands (eat cards).
So in example one we have edge of 1% so we bet 5 units (our limit) on one hand. That means you will gain 10 units every 100 hands playing with 1% edge. Thats what we all do right? =)
But if house has the edge, you play max games possible with 1 unit. Assuming you have disadvantage of 0.5%, you might hit enough cards to come back to 0% edge what would most definetly benefit you since you would cut all your losses.
What if you dont eat enough cards to make it to 0% edge or more? No worries guys, you would lose anyway :grin: But if you drop below your count limit, like TC -3 then simply wong out. Actually I find this stuff very exciting :>

Comments guys?

Not quite. You don't bring the edge back to zero in the current round. The True Count Theorem states that the TC, on average, stays the same whether it is high or low. Spreading to multiple hands does not affect the True Count for those hands. It merely gets to the shuffle to restart the count more quickly.

 

[EasyRhino]

On a practical basis, be careful if you're affected by table minimums, and also be aware if other people are playing.

If you're at the table minimum (1 unit), and playing multiple hands would mean playing 3x1 units, that would be bad news, you'd effectively be increasing your bet in negative counts. But if you can play 1/3 units, then that would be fine.

Likewise, if there are others at the table in a negative count, if you only play one hand, they will "eat" a larger proportion of the negative cards, meaning you spend less in that negative count.

 

[NoNeedForLuck]

Actually you affect next card dealer will get dont you? Doesnt this give you an edge? By eating cars (hitting) you can change probability of dealers next card, which may determinate whether you lose or win.

Example: You spread to 5 hands and see dealers 6. Your TC before betting was -2. Now its -1? After hitting you could get TC up to 0 so dealer willl have more chance of busting then before.

Can you tell me more about that theorem. It might got quite handy instead of asking "silly" quiestions here If I understand what you've written, when you see next 5*2+1+hit cards doesnt make any difference? 11 cards in 4 deck game is roughly 5% of the cards. And if only hit cards count, you will have to hit all hands, unless you get nice hands which are already winning hands.

 

[blackjack avenger]

Theorem

True Count Theorem
The running count changes while the true count tends to remain the same.

In most situations spreading to more then 2 hands is probably counter productive.

 

[QFIT]

The True Count Theorem was developed by Abdul Jalib M'hall (Michael Hall). If you're interested in the derivation: http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/counting/tcproof.htm (Archive copy)

 

[jack.jackson]

Today I was reading that book "Play Blackjack Like the Pros" by Kevin Blackwood. I find it quite interesting On page 80 I noticed vertical and horizontal spread betting known as card eating. I find it quite useful. So when your count is high you bet verticaly (raising your bet) and when your count is low you spread bet to more hands (eat cards).
So in example one we have edge of 1% so we bet 5 units (our limit) on one hand. That means you will gain 10 units every 100 hands playing with 1% edge. Thats what we all do right? =)
But if house has the edge, you play max games possible with 1 unit. Assuming you have disadvantage of 0.5%, you might hit enough cards to come back to 0% edge what would most definetly benefit you since you would cut all your losses.
What if you dont eat enough cards to make it to 0% edge or more? No worries guys, you would lose anyway :grin: But if you drop below your count limit, like TC -3 then simply wong out. Actually I find this stuff very exciting :>

Comments guys?

For further analysis you might find this Interesting

"Grifter Gambit" for 6D Shoes

 

[moo321]

I don't like doing it. I take potty breaks in low counts.

 

[EasyRhino]

The running count changes while the true count tends to remain the same.

Note that this is on a weighted basis, so the count is more likely to revert towards zero, but if it instead shifts the other direction, it will be of a larger magnitude.

But the rule is still the same, betting in a low count: bad, betting in a high count: good.

 

[callipygian]

I take potty breaks in low counts.

I check on my wife at the roulette table. Or any appropriately-aged female if my wife isn't at the roulette table. Which is always because my wife doesn't play roulette.

 

[moo321]

I check on my wife at the roulette table. Or any appropriately-aged female if my wife isn't at the roulette table. Which is always because my wife doesn't play roulette.

I take lots of smoke breaks. Even though I quit smoking when I was 14. People call me a lot while I'm playing blackjack, and I need to check in on my mother-in-law from time to time. Sometimes I need to check the score on the basketball game: I've got money on Boston.

 

[blackjack avenger]

Easy Rhino, Steady Boy

Note that this is on a weighted basis, so the count is more likely to revert towards zero, but if it instead shifts the other direction, it will be of a larger magnitude.

But the rule is still the same, betting in a low count: bad, betting in a high count: good.

I don't quite follow the first paragraph.

If you have 5 decks remaining and a RC5 (hi low) then you have a TC1. If one deck goes by on average you will have a rc4 and a tc1. This on average will hold till the end of the shoe.

Just like at the start of the shoe you have rc0 and at the end of the shoe you have rc0