Local count

[dumbWinner]

Hi guys

I am new to counting and relatively new to BJ. Is there any counting system that looks at the card patterns on a local level ? Assuming all the cards have equal probability to come out of the shoe ..... on a table with 3 players , if i see a string of small cards , say 6 or 7, i guess that the next hand will start with a ten or 9 or Ace and bump my bet. I thought of this method like a 6 months or so ago and am using it at the local casino. It seems to work so far. I have played about 100 shoes. Built a good bankroll.:grin: Anyone have any ideas about this ?

 

[dumbWinner]

Ok , i am gonna write a small simulation this weekend to see if this really works. I want to prove it wrong as you all might want to see too. So last night i was just playing on my computer with the qfit software. And played like 4 shoes. It might be just a coincidence but it has a good betting correlation with red seven. I will post some numbers soon.

 

[sagefr0g]

your on to something

Hi guys

I am new to counting and relatively new to BJ. Is there any counting system that looks at the card patterns on a local level ? Assuming all the cards have equal probability to come out of the shoe ..... on a table with 3 players , if i see a string of small cards , say 6 or 7, i guess that the next hand will start with a ten or 9 or Ace and bump my bet. I thought of this method like a 6 months or so ago and am using it at the local casino. It seems to work so far. I have played about 100 shoes. Built a good bankroll.:grin: Anyone have any ideas about this ?

that sort of stuff is called EOR (effects of removal).
using k_c's tdca blackjack game and probability computer you can do stuff like that and see how it effects the expected value of a game or game state.

example the images below show the ev of a game where no cards are removed and where seven low cards are removed, similar to your situation described.
first case the house has a 0.3401 edge over the player.
second case the player has a 0.3592 edge over the house.

 

[Lonesome Gambler]

If you're saying what I think you are, this is the basic premise behind card counting. The effect of low-card removal: the deck is now richer in high cards, which are, in general, favorable to the player. Raise your bet when you're the favorite, bet lower when you're not. Sorry if I misunderstood the question!

 

[sabre]

What you are describing is equivalent to a game where you are counting, but only see 2 rounds before a shuffle (since you are basing your betting decisions for the next round based ONLY on the previous round).

In a 6 deck shoe, depending on rules, you are going to have to see 4-8 more small cards than big ones before you have an expected player edge on the next round. You can find some profitable situations here, but they will be few and far between (rounds where the running count jumps by 6+ are not frequent).

You would have to be betting huge in those situations, to offset all the losses you are taking during normal play. I suspect you could be playing a +EV game if you jumped your bet by 50x each time you saw an imbalance of 6 small cards in the previous round.

For kicks, I ran a sim on a 2D H17, DAS game, shuffling after 2 rounds, where you bet 10 on the first round, and 10 on the second round unless you saw an imbalance of 2 low cards, in which case you bet 200. Your expected win was $7/hr with a score of .5. So you'll need a $140,000 bankroll to have a 13.5% ROR in order to take home minimum wage.

Your results will be significantly worse in a shoe game ...

 

[airborneinf82]

This sort of sounds like the Easy-OPP count system. Start RC at 0, then immediately subtract the # of hands being played (including the dealer) then add +1 to the RC for every card 2-6 that is seen. At the end of the round, subtract the number of players again and do it again. Pivots at +6 I believe.

 

[tfg]

I use this frequently, since I'm still trying to perfect my counting. I sit at first base and I watch the last couple rounds. If i see that there's been a ton of low cards then I'll increase my bet the next round. Since I'm the first one to get the card at first base, I'm trying to pull a 10. It works quite often. Sometimes I get bored waiting to extremely positive counts, so I'll just change it up by doing this.

I'd love to see the stats on how much, if at all, you're advantage of winning the hand increases if you knew you were going to get at least one 10 on your first card.

It might not be an extremely powerful system, but you're still only increasing bets in positive situations, which is what you want to be doing.

 

[dumbWinner]

I use this frequently, since I'm still trying to perfect my counting. I sit at first base and I watch the last couple rounds. If i see that there's been a ton of low cards then I'll increase my bet the next round. Since I'm the first one to get the card at first base, I'm trying to pull a 10. It works quite often. Sometimes I get bored waiting to extremely positive counts, so I'll just change it up by doing this.

I'd love to see the stats on how much, if at all, you're advantage of winning the hand increases if you knew you were going to get at least one 10 on your first card.

It might not be an extremely powerful system, but you're still only increasing bets in positive situations, which is what you want to be doing.

This is exactly what i do. Sit at the first base in a 3 people table always. If i cannot find that , i have a couple of drinks and go home. :grin::laugh:

 

[dumbWinner]

For kicks, I ran a sim on a 2D H17, DAS game, shuffling after 2 rounds, where you bet 10 on the first round, and 10 on the second round unless you saw an imbalance of 2 low cards, in which case you bet 200. Your expected win was $7/hr with a score of .5. So you'll need a $140,000 bankroll to have a 13.5% ROR in order to take home minimum wage.

Your results will be significantly worse in a shoe game ...

awesome!!!! It makes me feel good i have come so far without knowing this. Ignorance is bliss

 

[dumbWinner]

What you are describing is equivalent to a game where you are counting, but only see 2 rounds before a shuffle (since you are basing your betting decisions for the next round based ONLY on the previous round).
Your results will be significantly worse in a shoe game ...

Ok , Idea -----

Follow the general counting rule for Hi-Lo or something else. Keep a second count of the last round or two rounds (depending on the number of players sitting at the table). Now , we can get some info about the cards spread in addition to the running count. say the last dealt hand left the count at -10. And this hand we see 10 cards like this 3-2-10-4-9-3-6-3-5-4. I am saying the probability of next card being hi is good and this will bias us a little bit to bet more even the running count is still -ve.

 

[dumbWinner]

This sort of sounds like the Easy-OPP count system. Start RC at 0, then immediately subtract the # of hands being played (including the dealer) then add +1 to the RC for every card 2-6 that is seen. At the end of the round, subtract the number of players again and do it again. Pivots at +6 I believe.

Exactly. I just read up on the Easy Opp. http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/Advanced_OPP_Card_Counting_System.htm. It works , unknowingly i have been using it for a long time.

 

[tfg]

This is exactly what i do. Sit at the first base in a 3 people table always. If i cannot find that , i have a couple of drinks and go home. :grin::laugh:

Me too. I've just got accustomed to only playing the first or second spot at worst. Sometimes it takes a while to find a table, but I want to be the first one to get cards so I'll wait. Sometimes I've had to just take off.