You are not going to attract any heat wonging in. People standing around a blackjack table is a pretty common site and nobody is going think anything other than that you are an interested spectator. At table minimum bets you are simply not going to attract any attention at all pretty much no matter what you do. The real argument against wonging in is that you can only do this when other people are at the table and heads up play is radically superior to playing with other players, since you can easily get 3x as many hands in when you are playing alone, especially if you are a seasoned blackjack player who can instantly make betting and playing decisions. And waiting for idiots finish coffeehousing and to decide if they are going to hit their 15 is enough to drive a person homicidal.
New player
- Thread starter Morphy
- Start date
Kewlj is an influence on how I play but wonging in and flat betting at minimum is not going to cause anyone problems. Yes, they may watch you but if you wong in and play the minimum with no bet spreading, then I don't believe anyone will care.
It's when you wong in with 5-10 times the mindmum in positive counts, increase it further if the count goes further up that you draw attention. Other factors including how much you cash in or how many chips you carry also can matter.
It's when you wong in with 5-10 times the mindmum in positive counts, increase it further if the count goes further up that you draw attention. Other factors including how much you cash in or how many chips you carry also can matter.
I remember one time I split tens at Century casino in Edmonton. They had a pretty nice game there. H17, DAS, DA2, ES10, RSA w/ 1 deck cut off out of 6. At the time it was $5-$100 on the main floor (now the games are $5-$200 and $10-$400 on the main floor) and the high limit had worse penetration and no ES10. The high limit there now does have ES10. Anyway, one nice thing about Alberta is you can generally spread to as many hands as you want on these low limit games. So I would circumvent the table max a bit by spreading horizontally. So anyway, we're most of the way through a shoe and the count is sky high. I open up 5 spots in total, and end up splitting and re-splitting tens against a five. By the end of it I'm playing like 9 or 10 hands. The pit boss comes over during the middle and makes some clueless comment about how he just walked over there and saw all these hands and then walks away, and the dealer broke. Good times.
KewlJ
Well-Known Member
While, I appreciate the kind thought to start your post, it isn't necessary to "butter me up" before disagreeing with me, Zee. Feel free to disagree (and be wrong) all you want. :laugh:ZeeBabar said:
I think my point was missed by some. I am not suggesting that wonging into a $5 game is going to get you barred (unless you play South Point or similar ridiculously paranoid place), and placed in the data bases and end your playing days. BUT, what you do at the low red chip level can have an effect later. Your red chip play can identify you as a counter and while the store may not take any action right then, later when you move up in stakes, you may find you have lost that store.
Zee, there are active players on a site that you participate on that talk about no longer being able to play their local stores. Why burn a store like that, especially a local store that you want to play regularly. Why out yourself at the red chip level making plays like obvious wong-ins and 10 splitting that easily identify you as a counter.
I myself made that mistake. I started my career playing $5 and $10 tables in Atlantic City, as many know. For 3 full years, I played those low stakes. At that time there were only 3-4 playable games in AC at red chip level. The best was Borgata's 6 deck game, which I hit 4-5 days a week for a couple years. Never a hint of an issue. During my fourth year, my bankroll finally grew to the point that I could move up in stakes. First the $15 minimum tables and then the $25 minimum tables.
As soon as I started playing $25 tables....Boom....countermeasures! AC couldn't bar or ban players, but they began cutting the shoe in half 50% penetration and then bet restricting me by pulling out a special $5 minimum, $50 maximum card that only applied to me (this despite that it was a $25 table). The very same pit people that had allowed me to play red chip for several years basically would no longer allow me to play (as close as they were allowed to come to stating that). I had burned my best store playing $5 limits!!
That, BTW is when I decided I needed a bigger home base and rotation and headed for the desert. There are some top players that feel that in today's world, with technology playing such an important role in player tracking, that new players should not even waste their time playing red chip level. They should hold off playing (and burning out any stores) until they have the BR to play green and above. I don't go that far because I think there is value in learning at low stakes. I think there is a natural progression, from red chip play to green and beyond. That was my journey and that was the path I laid out for my brother just 2 years ago when he started. I had him play a full year at red chip, making peanuts.
So while I don't want to recommend skipping the low limit level play learning experience, the last thing a player should do is burnout stores, especially local stores, while playing red chip! THAT just doesn't make sense. So, I say even at the low limit levels that you might "get away with it for now", don't engage in these things that easily identify you as a card counter, like obvious wonging In and splitting 10's to name a couple. Don't burn out a store and just as important...your name and face, for a few bucks in EV, when that store (and your name and face) can be worth so much more down the road. Think Long-term!
Last edited:
Ok so the general rule of thumb is,
Yes get the red chip xp, be extremely cautious in the methods you choose.
and to sum up the 2 methods in a nutshell
Wonging in and out is the best until you have the BR, but the had the most risk
starting at the begining of the shoe and leaving at a TC of -1 is the most natural looking, but less of a chance to earn?
I have 2 places within a 20-25 min drive that alternating between may help.
Right now my bankroll is $0 which i can build up, as I do have a steady career with extra funds, but at the moment there is no hurry because the longer it takes me to reach optimum BR the more practice at home I get.
Is there a general rule in regards to min BR?
like;
$5 betting unit = $xxx min bank roll
$10 betting unit = $xxx min bank roll
$15 betting unit = $xxx min bank roll
$20 betting unit = $xxx min bank roll
Yes get the red chip xp, be extremely cautious in the methods you choose.
and to sum up the 2 methods in a nutshell
Wonging in and out is the best until you have the BR, but the had the most risk
starting at the begining of the shoe and leaving at a TC of -1 is the most natural looking, but less of a chance to earn?
I have 2 places within a 20-25 min drive that alternating between may help.
Right now my bankroll is $0 which i can build up, as I do have a steady career with extra funds, but at the moment there is no hurry because the longer it takes me to reach optimum BR the more practice at home I get.
Is there a general rule in regards to min BR?
like;
$5 betting unit = $xxx min bank roll
$10 betting unit = $xxx min bank roll
$15 betting unit = $xxx min bank roll
$20 betting unit = $xxx min bank roll
As for bankroll requirements there are a few things in play here. What is your minimum hourly rate? What is an acceptable ROR for you? Probably the minimum bankroll you can work with is $5,000 and $10,000 to $20,000 is significantly better. Anything less and it's just not worth your time as a serious endeavour to make money (although it may be worth your time as a professional development exercise to acquire skills).
People will probably bring up the concept of a replenishable bankroll soon, but that is really more of a rationalization for degenerate behaviour than a serious approach for winning blackjack.
Basically your bankroll determines your bets, not the table minimum or anything else. What you do is bet relative to your advantage. The exact % how much of your advantage you bet depends on how much risk you are willing to embrace. You should never bet more than 70% of your advantage. You can determine your advantage through simulation (that is to say the use of CVCX). I mean, you could play any of these table minimums if you are willing to wong aggressively enough with 5k.
People will probably bring up the concept of a replenishable bankroll soon, but that is really more of a rationalization for degenerate behaviour than a serious approach for winning blackjack.
Basically your bankroll determines your bets, not the table minimum or anything else. What you do is bet relative to your advantage. The exact % how much of your advantage you bet depends on how much risk you are willing to embrace. You should never bet more than 70% of your advantage. You can determine your advantage through simulation (that is to say the use of CVCX). I mean, you could play any of these table minimums if you are willing to wong aggressively enough with 5k.
Last edited:
Let's say your max bet is $300 and you have TT v 6 in a very high count. Your additional edge for splitting instead of standing is 20%. So you are looking at $60 in EV. Now assuming your general edge is 1% on all action, you would have to wager $6000 in future bets, probably about about 40 total raised bets (assuming $150 average raised bet) and potentially several hours of play, just to generate the same EV. In pretty good conditions you could probably average this actually in 1 hour. But either way you are going to expose yourself. In the first case you are exposing yourself for 1 minute, and the second you are exposing yourself for an hour to a few hours. There is no question that splitting TT v 6 can be a heat magnet, and I do not dispute this fact, but the alternative is not exactly heat proof either. Everything a card counter does draws heat to one degree or another and if someone is hawking your game and knows what to look for there is really nothing you can do aside from not play at an advantage.
Last edited:
It's based on the Kelly Criterion, which basically says that the fastest way to double your bankroll on a series of even money bets where you have your advantage is to bet your advantage. So if you have a 1% advantage you bet 1% of your bankroll. If your edge is 5%, then you bet 5% of your bankroll.
Example :
Bankroll is $10,000. Advantage is 1%. Your bet is $100.
Bankroll is $10,000. Advantage is 5%. Your bet is $500.
You can determine how high your advantage is at various true count levels (TC1, TC2, TC3) through the use of a simulator such as CVCX which basically simulates card counting over a billion played hands and tells you how much, on average, is your edge at various true counts.
But blackjack is NOT a game of even money bets. Not exactly. Because you bet say $100, but then might split and/or double. Or you might get a blackjack. So because of the not exactly even money nature of the wagers you use a safety mechanism of betting 70% of your advantage.
Example :
Bankroll is $10,000. Advantage is 1%. Your bet is 10,000 * 1% ($100) * 70% ($70). Your bet is $70.
So you bet only 70% of your advantage to account for the fact that you have to double and split.
Please note that the Kelly Criterion is the MAXIMUM you should ever bet. Anything more is counter productive for the purpose of bankroll growth. You may wish to bet less than kelly and sacrifice bankroll growth in order to lessen your swings or risk of ruin.
Example :
Bankroll is $10,000. Advantage is 1%. Your bet is $100.
Bankroll is $10,000. Advantage is 5%. Your bet is $500.
You can determine how high your advantage is at various true count levels (TC1, TC2, TC3) through the use of a simulator such as CVCX which basically simulates card counting over a billion played hands and tells you how much, on average, is your edge at various true counts.
But blackjack is NOT a game of even money bets. Not exactly. Because you bet say $100, but then might split and/or double. Or you might get a blackjack. So because of the not exactly even money nature of the wagers you use a safety mechanism of betting 70% of your advantage.
Example :
Bankroll is $10,000. Advantage is 1%. Your bet is 10,000 * 1% ($100) * 70% ($70). Your bet is $70.
So you bet only 70% of your advantage to account for the fact that you have to double and split.
Please note that the Kelly Criterion is the MAXIMUM you should ever bet. Anything more is counter productive for the purpose of bankroll growth. You may wish to bet less than kelly and sacrifice bankroll growth in order to lessen your swings or risk of ruin.
Right, how much on average can you expect to win in the long term per hour based on your strategy.
Typically ROR refers to the chance of losing your bankroll vs the chance of doubling it with a fixed betting scheme. It's a bit of a simplification because it doesn't account for expenses or the possibility of decreasing your bets but it's a nice estimation of how much risk you are taking. Hourly STD deviation is also another number to keep an eye on. Generally the goal is to keep ROR as low as possible, but some times you might want to increase ROR in order to get to certain hourly rate goals, especially if your ROR is already extremely low.
gronbog
Well-Known Member
RoR is the chance of losing your bankroll if you never resize your betting ramp - period - or as Don Schlesinger likes to put it, "before you win all the money in the world". The part about "vs doubling it" is a common misconception even among experienced players.Meistro said:
ROR is also going to be inaccurate because it would be rather unusual to stick with a fixed betting scheme your entire blackjack career. Presumably if your bankroll shrinks you are going to adjust your bets downwards and if it grows you will increase your bets. The probability of busting before doubling is an important one in the case of a team bankroll or a bankroll which has an investor or multiple investors. In this case you probably would stick with fixed betting scheme (or, potentially resize downwards but not upwards) and then break once the bankroll was doubled and this would be important information for the investors with regards to their risk / reward potential. It also doesn't take into account expenses.
I just don't see the point in quibbling over the definition of a word GIVEN that I have already defined the term and the way I am using it in the context of this discussion. Do we really need to bog down this discussion, which is intended to guide a beginner, in minutiae? But yes, if you must be pedantic, it is possible to define ROR in different manner and if you define it in a manner other than the one I was previously talking about you will get a different (higher probability of busting) result.
Last edited:
gronbog
Well-Known Member
The reason I thought it was important to make the distinction was that you mentioned CVCX which displays the calculated RoR for the chosen betting ramp. If/when the OP uses this software, he should be aware of which meaning of RoR it refers to.
While we're on the topic of optimal betting and CVCX, the full Kelly optimal bet is calculated as
(Advantage / variance) x bankroll
And not
Advantage x bankroll
as you have suggested earlier in this thread.
While we're on the topic of optimal betting and CVCX, the full Kelly optimal bet is calculated as
(Advantage / variance) x bankroll
And not
Advantage x bankroll
as you have suggested earlier in this thread.
Is it not wise to build my bankroll based on local table minimums?Meistro said:
for instance my 2 stores are $15 minimums which would be my betting unit. Obviously I cannot play untill my bankroll is large enough to bet those units.
so doing the math backwards would give me a goal Min bankroll to reach yes?