Question for Mayor, or anyone

[CanKen]

I posted the following Mar 14 in the "LSR strategy Qs" thread. It didn't seem to get tagged as "New", so you may have missed it:

Hi Mayor, glad to see you still have time to participate here.
In your above post you recommend playing two hands in shoe games. I think I understand the benefits of this when you have an advantage, but are you saying that it is good strategy off the top when you are at a disadvantage?
What about the case where the rules say you have to bet twice the minimum on each if you play two spots?

 

[CC-Management]

Question for canken?

Why have you not signed up on CC.COM? Please be our guest and become a member by creating a profile. It's FREE!

 

[The Mayor]

There was a great article by Math Prof on bj21, it won "Post of the Month" which described the optimal strategy for playing the shoe, and argued convincingly that one should play 2 hands (at least) on a shoe game.

Now, to your questions:

>I think I understand the benefits of this when you have an advantage, but are you saying that it is good strategy off the top when you are at a disadvantage?

Yes, but rather than going back and forth between 1 and 2 hands, here is another strategy. Play 2x$10 to 2x$40 on 2 spots, and leave the shoe when the count goes below -1. This is not quite "wonging" where you wait for a table to have a +2 count before sitting down, and I encourage you to "wong" as well. But, the secret, only play with a -1 count or higher, and feel free to table hop. That, combined with LSR and playing 2 hands instead of 1 (which greatly reduces variance) and you will almost have a day job.

>What about the case where the rules say you have to bet twice the minimum on each if you play two spots?

No difference, just do it.

In practice, you want to always play 2 hands or else you will anger your opponents (oops, the ploppies). If your max bet is 1 hand of $50, then with two hands you can play 2x$40 or 2x$35 (this is not quite right, but close), and get more money on the table with roughly the same win rate, but much less variance. Play 2 hands, play that way all the time, but leave bad shoes, don't sit through them. Dropping back to 1x$5 is about a clear a signal to the pit as having a sign that says "counter here" flashing over your head.

I play this way almost all the time (though a different max bet).

--Mayor

 

[CanKen]

Re: Question for canken?

Thanks for the encouragement. I'll do it right away. I guess up till now I've hesitated because I didn't think I had much to offer compared to others who post here.

CK

 

[learning to count]

Re: Question for canken?

Heck CK I was a ploppie when I started. I was the worst kind I used to use basic strategy and a Martingale to bet with. WHEW! Everyone can learn and every one can teach. The main thing, as the illustrious mayor has reaffirmed, is to take the casinos money away. Welcome to tHe site!!!!!! LTC

 

[Hinoon]

Re: Question for canken?

Gotta agree with LTC. I'm the worst kind of neophyte, and have been treated with nothing but gentle guidance and solid advice. I typically don't understand half the math that is discussed here, but I'm learning every day. The whole "gambler's ruin" discussion was a real eye-opener to me.

Just by participating within the community, I've gained a healthy dose of respect for the Advantage Players out there, and a new perspective on this whole "game". But don't fear being new/uninformed. These guys will set you straight.

Explaining things in the simplest terms to new players helps reinforce/clarify the complex and often counterintuitive methodology that everyone here is working on mastering. But ya gotta be in it to win it, as they say.

back to the grind

 

[stevedicey]

dear mr. mayor--hope your doing well. my question. if your
at a three dollar table and want to play all the spots
do you have an advantage or not. regards to you eliot.
stevedicey

 

[The Mayor]

If you are counting, or using some other playing method that gives you the advantage (e.g. shuffle tracking), then yes, you have the advantage. Otherwise not.