Double on 12 v. 2/3

[EasyRhino]

Ian Anderson's Ultimate Gambit uses a lot of doubling mistakes to stand out as a ploppy. 9v2, 9v7, 10v10, 10vA. The handy thing being that all of these are moves are at least correct in high counts, so he's only "wrong" when the small money is out. However, since the Ultimate Gambit requieres ploppy commitment, he makes those bonehead plays every time, for the full amount. Combined with other limitations on play, it still costs about .2 percent of house edge.

I recently doubled with a 12 (for less), right after another player made a joke about it. It was quite entertaining.

 

[zengrifter]

About the cheapest stiff-doubles-for-less as a cover play are 12 vs. 2, 3 and 4. Doubling for say one tenth of the bet costs from 2.1% to 2.5% of the initial bet. A $20 bet followed up with a $2 double costs about fifty cents total for any of them.

Doubling with 16 vs. 7 for an extra $2 costs about 80 cents.

Doubling down with 12 is such a notorious earmark of a bad player that I think it's very cheap and useful cover -- particularly since its often announced to the floor, often without the fact that it's for way less. However, it also probably requires other ploppy looking moves to fit in.

I agree on all points. zg

 

[ChefJJ]

Ian Anderson's Ultimate Gambit uses a lot of doubling mistakes to stand out as a ploppy. 9v2, 9v7, 10v10, 10vA. The handy thing being that all of these are moves are at least correct in high counts, so he's only "wrong" when the small money is out. However, since the Ultimate Gambit requieres ploppy commitment, he makes those bonehead plays every time, for the full amount. Combined with other limitations on play, it still costs about .2 percent of house edge.

I recently doubled with a 12 (for less), right after another player made a joke about it. It was quite entertaining.

Great point. I think that sometimes the whole counting-index play combination can be a help to portraying a novice. Those plays like you said are borderline "odd", but take something like Insurance...using language like "I'm feelin' it this time" or whatever I think helps.

Doubling on 8 v 5/6 is absolutely one of those too.

Good luck

 

[EasyRhino]

Great point. I think that sometimes the whole counting-index play combination can be a help to portraying a novice. Those plays like you said are borderline "odd", but take something like Insurance...using language like "I'm feelin' it this time" or whatever I think helps.

Problem is, since I attribute my only backoff (so far) to surveillance, not pit crew, what I say isn't really going to matter much, because surveillance can't hear me, they're just evaluating betting patterns. And if they're correlating playing strategy to the count, then making a good index play in a plus count will just confirm it. Playing stupid all the time can then be useful.

Then again, if you're playing in low stakes, and not in Reno, then surveillance probably doesn't give a damn about your play, and they'll only start watching when directed by a floorman. In this case, sounding like an idiot will probably get you a lot farther.

All of this is really conjecture on my part.

 

[ScottH]

Although I agree it can be an okay cover move to double a 12 vs 2 or 3, I'm not a big fan of it. Doubling for much less than your original bet is something that draws attention to you. You will be hard pressed to find a ploppy play this way. They will double for less sometimes, but never for 1 or 2 percent of their bet. Ploppy mentality is usually one of trying to make money even when the proper play isn't there. So they try to force a double where it just doesn't belong, sometimes for less, but almost never for less than 1/2 of their bet, and usually its even closer. What a ploppy is more likely to do is double on a A,8 vs 5 or 6, and most times for the full amount. Now that is a better cover play to use when the when the count calls for it. All dealers and pit personnel know its wrong to double a soft 19, but its not an uncommon occurence with ploppys, more so than doubling for a dollar with a $20 or even a $200 bet out there. And given even a true count of 1 to 1.5 using hi lo its the right move. So its a strong play and natural cover, that to me is more like it.

I agree. When someone double for 1 dollar with a 200 dollar bet out, something seems out of place. That might get them thinking about you. They may think you're a moron, but they may come to a different conclusion, because like you mentioned, how often does a ploppy do that? NEVER!

 

[shadroch]

Problem is, since I attribute my only backoff (so far) to surveillance, not pit crew, what I say isn't really going to matter much, because surveillance can't hear me, they're just evaluating betting patterns. And if they're correlating playing strategy to the count, then making a good index play in a plus count will just confirm it. Playing stupid all the time can then be useful.

Then again, if you're playing in low stakes, and not in Reno, then surveillance probably doesn't give a damn about your play, and they'll only start watching when directed by a floorman. In this case, sounding like an idiot will probably get you a lot farther.

All of this is really conjecture on my part.

But it was the pit crew who became suspicious and notified the EITS,no?
From what I've read,once the crew notifies the skymonsters,they usually avoid the player so as to instill a false sense of confidence in him.

 

[NDN21]

Double

What a ploppy is more likely to do is double on a A,8 vs 5 or 6, and most times for the full amount. Now that is a better cover play to use when the when the count calls for it.

But isn't doubling A,8 vs. 5/6 when the count calls for it something that a counter also does? Of course it is. It is the right play and many systems direct a counter to do this at the proper count.

By doubling with these cards in a high count I think you are letting the surveillance personnel know that you ARE a counter. You are doing something that a counter would do.

What if the surveillance is upstairs (trying to figure out if you are a counter and entering your cards into their computer as they are dealt which gives them the right true count and the proper plays for a counter and they know that a counter would double A,8 vs. 5/6 when the count calls for it) then you go and double A,8 vs. 5/6 when the count calls for it? You would have done exactly what they expected a counter to do. That would tip them off that you are a counter right away, right?

Every good counter in the world would double an A,8 vs. 5/6 at the proper count, right?

I don't understand where you are getting your cover from? How are you giving the impression that you are NOT a counter? Do I have this concept of cover wrong? Where are you throwing off the surveillance team?

The only thing that I can think of that might be throwing off the surveillance team would be the doubling for less portion.

By doubling for much less when the count says it is wrong I believe I am less likely to be labeled a counter. By doubling when the table conditions are wrong I am letting them know I am not following a pre-determined system and am just betting at random.

Ploppy mentality is usually one of trying to make money even when the proper play isn't there. So they try to force a double where it just doesn't belong,

That is the illusion I am trying to give, that I am trying to force a play in order to give the impression that I am a ploppy who has no idea what I am doing. Isn't that the idea of cover? To give the casino the impression that you are not a counter but a ploppy who bets and hits using their hunches?

All dealers and pit personnel know its wrong to double a soft 19

But isn't it the correct strategy for a counter to double a soft 19 at the proper count? Doubling with these cards at the proper count would let the casino know you are a counter, right?

Will someone please explain cover to me. I want to make sure I understand the concept. I thought I did but now am no longer 100% sure.

 

[Renzey]

12 vs. 2 or 16 vs. 7?

Chef -- When you take one card to 12 vs. 2, you go 37/63 out of 100 and lose 26% of any extra money you opt to put up there for cover purposes. With 16 vs. 7, you go 30/70 and lose 40% of the extra dough.

The "stopper" of doing any of these plays can be that a few houses allow you to double for no less than the table min.

 

[Bojack1]

But isn't doubling A,8 vs. 5/6 when the count calls for it something that a counter also does? Of course it is. It is the right play and many systems direct a counter to do this at the proper count.

By doubling with these cards in a high count I think you are letting the surveillance personnel know that you ARE a counter. You are doing something that a counter would do.

What if the surveillance is upstairs (trying to figure out if you are a counter and entering your cards into their computer as they are dealt which gives them the right true count and the proper plays for a counter and they know that a counter would double A,8 vs. 5/6 when the count calls for it) then you go and double A,8 vs. 5/6 when the count calls for it? You would have done exactly what they expected a counter to do. That would tip them off that you are a counter right away, right?

Every good counter in the world would double an A,8 vs. 5/6 at the proper count, right?

I don't understand where you are getting your cover from? How are you giving the impression that you are NOT a counter? Do I have this concept of cover wrong? Where are you throwing off the surveillance team?

The only thing that I can think of that might be throwing off the surveillance team would be the doubling for less portion.

By doubling for much less when the count says it is wrong I believe I am less likely to be labeled a counter. By doubling when the table conditions are wrong I am letting them know I am not following a pre-determined system and am just betting at random.



That is the illusion I am trying to give, that I am trying to force a play in order to give the impression that I am a ploppy who has no idea what I am doing. Isn't that the idea of cover? To give the casino the impression that you are not a counter but a ploppy who bets and hits using their hunches?



But isn't it the correct strategy for a counter to double a soft 19 at the proper count? Doubling with these cards at the proper count would let the casino know you are a counter, right?

Will someone please explain cover to me. I want to make sure I understand the concept. I thought I did but now am no longer 100% sure.

The problem is you are giving the surveillence more credit than they are due. The fact is using an indice play is good cover. Most casino personnel do not realize them. Especially when the count does not have to be so high to do them. Catching a counter with surveillence usually starts with the direction from one of the floor personnel. The eye in the sky is just creating a history of play unless directed otherwise. Most counters get caught by either rolling their bets up and down blatantly with the count, or standing out like a sore thumb trying to be too covert. Doubling for $1 is a move that is unheard of unless you are betting $5 or less. With a bet of any more out there its not typical of ploppy play, so then who might be doing it? Doubling on so called wrong hands such as soft 19's or 8's vs 6's is so common among ploppies it wont usually garner a second glance from the pit, but if they do see it, it just comes off as poor play more times than not thus giving you a bit of cover. If a borderline indice play gets you a look from surveillence than trust me they have been looking at you for a lot more than just that play. Remember cover plays should come off as natural mistakes not as a means to make a mistake without actually paying for it. Doubling a 12 vs 2 or 3 is, doubling for somewhat less is, doubling for $1 is not. That screams, ignore that man behind the curtain, and just as in the Wizard Of Oz they will not. There are many things in this game that are good plays, the problem is they fall into 2 categories of theoretical, and practical. You just need to figure out what best fits your situation, but mind you its best for you to figure it out and not have the casino do it for you.

 

[Renzey]

Cover Plays

Another thing about cover plays is that you can't make them if the hand doesn't come up. I think we all need to have an entire array of cover plays in our repertoire, so that we can make a few at the time when we feel they're needed.

You'll get a chance to double for less with 12 vs. 2, 3 or 4 once every 45 hands combined. You can take Insurance for less once every 13 hands. You can hit 13 vs. 2 and 12 vs. 6 once every 67 hands combined.

But Ace/8 vs. 5 or 6 comes up once every 550 hands combined. It's good to have them in that repertoire, but you'll probably have to wait five hours for one of those two particular hands when you want to show your floorperson a "bastard" play right now.

If I'm really hard pressed to show something stupid, I'll even double for a tenth with 15 or 16 vs. 10, even though I lose 52% of the extra money I put up. They come up once every 27 hands combined.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

The problem is you are giving the surveillence more credit than they are due. The fact is using an indice play is good cover. Most casino personnel do not realize them. Especially when the count does not have to be so high to do them. Catching a counter with surveillence usually starts with the direction from one of the floor personnel. The eye in the sky is just creating a history of play unless directed otherwise. Most counters get caught by either rolling their bets up and down blatantly with the count, or standing out like a sore thumb trying to be too covert. Doubling for $1 is a move that is unheard of unless you are betting $5 or less. With a bet of any more out there its not typical of ploppy play, so then who might be doing it? Doubling on so called wrong hands such as soft 19's or 8's vs 6's is so common among ploppies it wont usually garner a second glance from the pit, but if they do see it, it just comes off as poor play more times than not thus giving you a bit of cover. If a borderline indice play gets you a look from surveillence than trust me they have been looking at you for a lot more than just that play. Remember cover plays should come off as natural mistakes not as a means to make a mistake without actually paying for it. Doubling a 12 vs 2 or 3 is, doubling for somewhat less is, doubling for $1 is not. That screams, ignore that man behind the curtain, and just as in the Wizard Of Oz they will not. There are many things in this game that are good plays, the problem is they fall into 2 categories of theoretical, and practical. You just need to figure out what best fits your situation, but mind you its best for you to figure it out and not have the casino do it for you.

Regarding these kinds of cover plays, I think the best approach is to observe what the ploppies in that store are doing and take it from there. Where I play there are a lot of Asian players who double for less so if someone sees me do it they will think I am just imitating them. One thing I will sometimes do is a non-BS soft double for less in a negative count.

I've been playing a bit of Spanish 21 recently using my "San Juan Hill" count, and it is amazing how totally absent knowledge of the correct strategy is. I'd say maybe a quarter to a third of dealers know Basic Strategy for regular blackjack, but I have never seen a dealer or a player who even comes close in Spanish 21. The hold on those tables must be enormous! But playing correctly must make me look like an absolute fool to them. This is the kind of cover that isn't a loss at all, but profit.

 

[shadroch]

If I'm really hard pressed to show something stupid, I'll even double for a tenth with 15 or 16 vs. 10, even though I lose 52% of the extra money I put up. They come up once every 27 hands combined.[/QUOTE]



There are days when I seem to get nothing BUT 15 or 16 vs 10.

 

[Bojack1]

Another thing about cover plays is that you can't make them if the hand doesn't come up. I think we all need to have an entire array of cover plays in our repertoire, so that we can make a few at the time when we feel they're needed.

You'll get a chance to double for less with 12 vs. 2, 3 or 4 once every 45 hands combined. You can take Insurance for less once every 13 hands. You can hit 13 vs. 2 and 12 vs. 6 once every 67 hands combined.

But Ace/8 vs. 5 or 6 comes up once every 550 hands combined. It's good to have them in that repertoire, but you'll probably have to wait five hours for one of those two particular hands when you want to show your floorperson a "bastard" play right now.

If I'm really hard pressed to show something stupid, I'll even double for a tenth with 15 or 16 vs. 10, even though I lose 52% of the extra money I put up. They come up once every 27 hands combined.

I agree you can't make your cover plays if you don't get them, but there are so many good indice plays that when combined will give you a sufficient amount of cover, and not weaken or make obvious your game. A,8 was just one example, I also gave doubling 8 vs 6 as another. What about standing on a 3 card 16 in a positive count, than of course there is doubling 9 vs 2, surrendering 8,8 vs 10 instead of splitting, even surrendering 7,7 vs 10. If the count is high enough for insurance that also means surrendering your 14 against a 10. Even doubling an A vs A is correct with just a slight edge in TC. And as far as 12 vs 2 or 3 once the TC goes positve you won't be hitting that 12 vs 3 anymore, and if it gets to +3 you won't be hitting that 12 vs 2 anymore either. What about the commonly misplayed A,7, when the TC gets slightly positve you won't be hitting that against an ace anymore. The fact that all these plays are sometimes yes sometimes no leads you to look like a hunch, or erratic gambler. Voice as much when you're making these plays and your cover should be fine. I'm quite sure you will get more than one speech from a ploppy or a dealer that you need to be consistent, thats when you know your cover is working. I believe its hard enough for the average advantage player to play this game as it is, I have never been a believer in finding ways to make it even weaker for the sake of cover when there are much more efficient ways of accomplishing that. And I didn't even get into the negative indice plays that really make you look like a ploppy while still doing the right thing. Just imagine how foolish you will look as you hit you 12 vs anything in a negative TC situation. That doesn't scream here hides the counter, its more like here sits a moron. Just like you want.

 

[ScottH]

Just imagine how foolish you will look as you hit you 12 vs anything in a negative TC situation.

I've gotten some bad responses from the table doing this. Hitting my 12 vs 6 and everyone freaks out and says how bad of a player I am under their breath. I try not to laugh, especially when I win the hand and I "cost" them theirs! :laugh:

 

[NDN21]

Double

The problem is you are giving the surveillence more credit than they are due. The fact is using an indice play is good cover. Most casino personnel do not realize them. Especially when the count does not have to be so high to do them. Catching a counter with surveillence usually starts with the direction from one of the floor personnel. The eye in the sky is just creating a history of play unless directed otherwise. Most counters get caught by either rolling their bets up and down blatantly with the count, or standing out like a sore thumb trying to be too covert. Doubling for $1 is a move that is unheard of unless you are betting $5 or less. With a bet of any more out there its not typical of ploppy play, so then who might be doing it? Doubling on so called wrong hands such as soft 19's or 8's vs 6's is so common among ploppies it wont usually garner a second glance from the pit, but if they do see it, it just comes off as poor play more times than not thus giving you a bit of cover. If a borderline indice play gets you a look from surveillence than trust me they have been looking at you for a lot more than just that play. Remember cover plays should come off as natural mistakes not as a means to make a mistake without actually paying for it. Doubling a 12 vs 2 or 3 is, doubling for somewhat less is, doubling for $1 is not. That screams, ignore that man behind the curtain, and just as in the Wizard Of Oz they will not. There are many things in this game that are good plays, the problem is they fall into 2 categories of theoretical, and practical. You just need to figure out what best fits your situation, but mind you its best for you to figure it out and not have the casino do it for you.

Most casino personnel do not realize them.

What about the ones that do?

unless directed otherwise

What if the surveillance is directed to do otherwise? Aren't you letting them know you are a counter?

You seem to be saying that on the most basic level of casino surveillane indice play is enough because indice plays are a deviation from basic strategy and to not worry about the surveillance personnel too much. I get that part of cover play.

But what about more advanced surveillance techniques? The ones where they put the cards into their computer and can extract the running/true count and proper indice plays for a counter? Is there anything a player can do to combat that? By following indices play to the letter, even though indice play is cover against basic surveillance, against more advanced surveillance techniques is indice play going to let the casino know you are a counter?

 

[Bojack1]

What about the ones that do?


What if the surveillance is directed to do otherwise? Aren't you letting them know you are a counter?

You seem to be saying that on the most basic level of casino surveillane indice play is enough because indice plays are a deviation from basic strategy and to not worry about the surveillance personnel too much. I get that part of cover play.

But what about more advanced surveillance techniques? The ones where they put the cards into their computer and can extract the running/true count and proper indice plays for a counter? Is there anything a player can do to combat that? By following indices play to the letter, even though indice play is cover against basic surveillance, against more advanced surveillance techniques is indice play going to let the casino know you are a counter?

Put it this way if the the surveillance is that advanced that borderline indice plays are detected, than doubling for a dollar will not hide your play either. They will have caught on to your betting pattern way before you had a chance for your so called cover play. The level of paranoia that counters have of casino intelligence sometimes boggles my mind. These people are not a well oiled machine consisting of a crack staff of high paid intelligence people whose main objective is to foil the counter and his advantage. And you would be hard pressed to find a competent counter on any floor of most casinos, and if you did find someone somewhat knowledgable, most simply do not know the indice plays. There are places that might use some type of mindplay or other advanced systems. Its simple, if you don't know how to beat it, don't play it. Whats even better about this is there are very few casinos using this type of surveillance so its not any major concern. I don't know where you play but in every section of the U.S. there are far more casinos that are safe to play than those that you would consider too risky to play. What I'm trying to tell you is all you have to do is play a smart game, be aware of your surroundings, and don't worry so much on how to cover your play, as making sure you are playing correctly. As long as you are paying attention and dont camp out for marathon sessions, there are very few casinos that will bother you. I have been 86'd only 1 time in 13 years and that didn't even have anything to do with my play, and I play somewhat high stakes which can make it even harder sometimes as it is usually scrutinized closer.

 

[ScottH]

Put it this way if the the surveillance is that advanced that borderline indice plays are detected, than doubling for a dollar will not hide your play either. They will have caught on to your betting pattern way before you had a chance for your so called cover play. The level of paranoia that counters have of casino intelligence sometimes boggles my mind. These people are not a well oiled machine consisting of a crack staff of high paid intelligence people whose main objective is to foil the counter and his advantage. And you would be hard pressed to find a competent counter on any floor of most casinos, and if you did find someone somewhat knowledgable, most simply do not know the indice plays. There are places that might use some type of mindplay or other advanced systems. Its simple, if you don't know how to beat it, don't play it. Whats even better about this is there are very few casinos using this type of surveillance so its not any major concern. I don't know where you play but in every section of the U.S. there are far more casinos that are safe to play than those that you would consider too risky to play. What I'm trying to tell you is all you have to do is play a smart game, be aware of your surroundings, and don't worry so much on how to cover your play, as making sure you are playing correctly. As long as you are paying attention and dont camp out for marathon sessions, there are very few casinos that will bother you. I have been 86'd only 1 time in 13 years and that didn't even have anything to do with my play, and I play somewhat high stakes which can make it even harder sometimes as it is usually scrutinized closer.

That's funny that the pit doesnt have at least one guy that is a good card counter that knows indices, cover plays, etc. It would not take that much training to be able to do that. Although they have other things to do besides constantly be on the lookout for card counters...

 

[eps6724]

That's funny that the pit doesnt have at least one guy that is a good card counter that knows indices, cover plays, etc. It would not take that much training to be able to do that. Although they have other things to do besides constantly be on the lookout for card counters...

I'm just trying to understand something...Taking into consideration that there is proably a LOT more theft than Advantage BJ players, who DOES "watch" for counters-the Pit (with all of his other duties) the Surveillance (if it's anything like private security one of the most boring jobs on earth) or the dealer (who would seem to have a whole LOT of numbers running through his head, and unless he's "rainman"...)

So, who DOES keep a stern, strong eye out? And is it really as easy to get caught as so many people say? Or just hype? Good grief! whom should I befriend and whom should I run screaming from?????

 

[ChefJJ]

I'm just trying to understand something...Taking into consideration that there is proably a LOT more theft than Advantage BJ players, who DOES "watch" for counters-the Pit (with all of his other duties) the Surveillance (if it's anything like private security one of the most boring jobs on earth) or the dealer (who would seem to have a whole LOT of numbers running through his head, and unless he's "rainman"...)

So, who DOES keep a stern, strong eye out? And is it really as easy to get caught as so many people say? Or just hype? Good grief! whom should I befriend and whom should I run screaming from?????

It seems to me, and there are more professional-types here than me, but it would seem that the amount you are betting, especially your spread would bring a "counting" goon over to inspect the table. Weird plays combined with odd behavior would too, I'd think.

 

[shadroch]

It varies from casino to casino.In some casinos,simply winning sets off alarm bells,while others seem to dare you to count,knowing that 99% of "counters" can't play a successful game.