Delayed Count betting

[MangoJ]

From the recent discussion about TC theorem, I may like to present an application.

The setting:
You have a game available which offers very deep penetration (say 85%). The game is protected by a dealer who is very sharp in counting, and will report every correlation of smalish betting spreads to counts to his supervisors. Actually this game is set as a honeytrap to catch counters and get them barred.

How to profit from this game ?

My proposal:
Count the game as normal (i.e keep a running count and make true count conversions based on the number of unseen cards). Train hard to remember those TCs in sequence. Make bet and maybe strategy decisions based on the TC you had 3 hands ago.

The counting dealer will have a hard time putting you down as a counter, as your play will not be strongly correlated to the current count.
Of course you won't perform as well as an straight-counting player. However you play on a performance equivalent to a less-penetrated game of 3 rounds. Your efficiency is equal to 75% penetration game, which is still profitable.

Hence you exchange penetration with camo. In a game you could otherwise not play at all, is it worthwhile ?

 

[blackjack avenger]

Easier Options?

In essence you are trying to apply 2 counts, a lot of extra work. Probably no need to remember the TC of previous hands, just don't jump bets on the next hand if a sudden big move in TC, just delay the bet move. This is the essence of your proposal?

If a hand held game delaying 3 rounds is a lot, as you mention it cuts penetration. So probably catastrophic for SD, very damaging for DD.

So if considering shoes:

Probably the number one way to avoid using a large spread is some form of wonging.

There generally is not a lot of large TC movements. One can do partial parlays up or down and probably stay safe. Look at half TC or even quarter TC bet adjusments as examples. Just don't use them exactly with the count.

Of course wonging you can have a very small spread. I am assuming a play or near play all. So if you allow 1 delayed big bet jump you can ride out a shoe.

Based on civilian logic there are many opportunities to raise or lower bets, bjs and multi bet hand winnings allowing to ride, drastic bet cutting after a dealer crushing hand etc.

If one has a large bank and bets conservatively overall they can let bet's ride if positive expectation, raise in the face of a dropping positive count etc.

A bit more work and throwing SCORE out the window for every shoe use different bet ramps that look nothing like an optimal bet ramp. This would probably requrie large bet movement, but not necessarily with the count.

Another option, crazy betting style in low TC situations and/or in very high TC situations.

One can just analyze every bet decision considering in general what would a counter do and what would a civilian do and act appropriately, start learning how the civilians determine their bets in the casinos you play in.

Do a combo of all the above and/or every form of camo you have ever heard of, just rotate through them all.

Of course one can also avoid the savy dealer!

 

[tthree]

Trap!!!!!!!!!!!

I think the key to this is logic. You identified the problem as being not caught in the trap. This trap will catch anyone who looks like prey counter or not. Any bet variation is going to draw attention and may get you identified as prey (blackbooked). Only option... backcounting.

Enter the game with a large advantage buy in for a small number of hands at a largish bet like you are a ploppy who is going to play a few hands. Leave if you loss this stake or buy a couple more bets and leave. How many times have we seen this happen. Leave if you win before you lose your advantage if it was possible to do so.

After never varying your bet and looking like your typical ploppy and leaving like a ploppy who lost or someone walking away from a player advantage they may suspect something but you wont be "trapped"(blackbooked).

 

[MangoJ]

Thank you for your input three, but my scenario was for a counting dealer who is very well informed about the conditions he is serving. Say you play on those electronic tables where card and betsize is tracked by the software. Think about why the betsize is tracked: it is a perfect test against betting correlation of ANY counting system (the software can easily calculate exact EV).

You are right that backcounting eliminates a betting spread completely (i.e. your effective spread is infinite). Don't you think that this is quite obvious ? Still your bets are perfectly correlated to the count, and will rise a flag to the dealer quite early after a few bets. Unless you plan a quick hit&run.

On the other hand there is a full zoo of betting systems, justifying the use of betting spreads. With delayed betting you could at least obscure your betting correlation. Of course you are still correlated with the conditions (otherwise you wouldn't win in the long run), but correlation degree is much much smaller.


A third option: Play in a well coordinated team of several players on the same table. Each player constantly varies his individual bet size somehow randomly with each bet. But the total bet size of all team members must be well coordinated with the count. This would need a lot of practice to pull off without signal among the team, but should not be that much difficult to communicate. (i.e. the suit combination of the dealers last upcard and holecard could determine how the next team-bet is distributed among the players, while the team-bet size is given to the TC every player knows).

 

[blackjack avenger]

Man VS Dumb Machine

Say you play on those electronic tables where card and betsize is tracked by the software. Think about why the betsize is tracked: it is a perfect test against betting correlation of ANY counting system (the software can easily calculate exact EV).

I highlighted in blue in my above post what would probably be effective against dumb machine.

A parlay type betting ramp would probably also work.

 

[MangoJ]

Thank you BA for your comment, it seems I need to spend more time studying efficiency of betting ramps and game conditions, especially dynamics of TC movements (or at least TC distributions). Hell I'm way to naive yet... :laugh:

 

[tthree]

I thought I made it clear that what your camo pattern was a quick in and out ploppy. By trying to leave a winning hit with an advantageous situation still existing to seal this cover.

If you are looking for a way to spend alot of time in the trap and the hunters are that clever I dont see were you could have a good cover thats also profitable.

Back in my betting progression days I counted for perfect decision making. This may not be true but anecdotally my observations were that the best win(and lose) runs were on a fairly large negative count. MY huge wins were almost always on a very negative count. Real high counts I would win more often than lose but it was almost never a long winning streak. Check this observation out for validity as Im not sure it is actually true.

If it proves to be valid, minimum bets at near a zero count and more aggressive strategies used somewhat randomly as you see very positive or negative situations. The aggression in negative situations should throw them off track. But the play modifications based on the count might put you back on their radar screen.

I use the counting system that I think is easiest and correlates best to the proper play in any given situation(I think its called HIOPT). Its a level one system(value of 0 or plusorminus 1 for any card). I would would play with someone who used a level 3 system which also included aces along with ten value cards as negative cards(mine only had 10 value cards) in the count. It was one of the best for indicating player advantage(when to make and how big to make your big bets). He was always tapping my leg when his system showed a big advantage(what it was tailored for).

MY point in this is alot of the time he tapped my leg my systems count was near zero maybe even negative so dont assume since its a counter trap they are really narrow on what a counter might think is a good situation. As you strive for perfect play you give up bet correlation and vice versa. Perfect play with an ace side count is a great compromise.


I think planning any kind of lengthy stay in a known trap is a fools errand. I hope I gave you something new to consider. Good luck.

 

[tthree]

Another thought if you choose to employ a positive progression in a very negative situation and the shoe swings positive without breaking your progression, your bets may be larger than a counter could feel comfortable betting(ie max bet spread 1-10 progression has your bet at 15). What a wonderful situation that would be.

 

[zengrifter]

"Delayed count betting" is a camo technique used for decades. zg

 

[jack.jackson]

Bryce Carlson has a unique betting strategy in BJFB, where the strategy even changes at the halfway point through the pack. Generally speaking, he puts less emphasis on camo during the first half of the pack, while laying it on the thick in the last half. During the last half of the pack is when he recommends, to no more than x2 your bet on a WIN and to no more reduce your bet x2 following a LOSS. In the first half of the pack, the x2 your bet is applied, but the effect of if you win or lose, isnt applied.

Using this method is a sure fire way, to short circuit any electronic tracking device or pitboss.

 

[Sonny]

My proposal:
Count the game as normal (i.e keep a running count and make true count conversions based on the number of unseen cards). Train hard to remember those TCs in sequence. Make bet and maybe strategy decisions based on the TC you had 3 hands ago.

That is going to be a lot more work for a much smaller advantage. The EV from card counting is already so small to begin with. I think you're moving in the wrong direction.

The counting dealer will have a hard time putting you down as a counter, as your play will not be strongly correlated to the current count.

If you had a partner (or several) then your individual bets wouldn't have to correlate to the count as long as your cumulative bets did.

But even that is still not a good answer. To the question "How do you profit from a honeypot game set up to catch counters?" I would reply "Don't count!" :grin:

-Sonny-

 

[zengrifter]

Bryce Carlson has a unique betting strategy in BJFB, where the strategy even changes at the halfway point through the pack. Generally speaking, he puts less emphasis on camo during the first half of the pack, while laying it on the thick in the last half. During the last half of the pack is when he recommends, to no more than x2 your bet on a WIN and to no more reduce your bet x2 following a LOSS. In the first half of the pack, the x2 your bet is applied, but the effect of if you win or lose, isnt applied.

Using this method is a sure fire way, to short circuit any electronic tracking device or pitboss.

Disagree.
Also, he took that stratagem from Revere.
Also, like ALL of Carlson's betting strategy for AO2, its obsolete and ineffective for present time. zg