why can't i win anything?

[sagefr0g]

made a foray to bjmath website and ran across an article see link:
http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/conseq/7934.htm (Archive copy)

in the article Don Schlesinger talks about playing at a full table as a waste of time. the reason that such play is a waste of time is not explained. can anyone expand on this issue? i should imagine that the more players at the table makes it as if the penetration is worse since more cards get eaten up by the 'other' players lessening the counters exposure to a advantageous count.
well from my perspective i would count my self lucky as it turns out i'm often able to play one on one with the dealer or with very few other players but not always. i often find myself faced with either playing at a full table or not playing at all.

best regards,
mr fr0g

 

[zengrifter]

i should imagine that the more players at the table makes it as if the penetration

Yes + fewer hands per hour. zg

 

[Automatic Monkey]

made a foray to bjmath website and ran across an article see link:
http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/conseq/7934.htm (Archive copy)

in the article Don Schlesinger talks about playing at a full table as a waste of time. the reason that such play is a waste of time is not explained. can anyone expand on this issue? i should imagine that the more players at the table makes it as if the penetration is worse since more cards get eaten up by the 'other' players lessening the counters exposure to a advantageous count.
well from my perspective i would count my self lucky as it turns out i'm often able to play one on one with the dealer or with very few other players but not always. i often find myself faced with either playing at a full table or not playing at all.

best regards,
mr fr0g

There's a couple of different issues with this. Playing SD at a full table is definitely a waste of time, as it is very difficult to get a worthwhile advantage with counting when there are more than 3 hands in the game.

Playing shoe at a full table is a different story. There is no significant loss to your advantage in a 8D game with 6 players at the table. In fact, a full table can protect your advantage because it keeps Wongers or random players from entering the shoe after you have eaten up the negative EV hands all by yourself at the beginning of the shoe. The "waste of time" is exactly what ZG said- the dealer wasting time paying all those people and picking up all those cards between hands. It hurts your win rate.

On the bright side, having all those hands in the game cycles through the cards faster, and with 6 players you can decide you want to walk away from a table sometimes after the first hand. And I wonder what takes longer to deal, 3 hands heads-up or 1 hand to 5 players (each situation consuming approximately the same number of cards.)

 

[EasyRhino]

Taken to the other extreme though, it's really hard (some would say impossible) to backcount an empty table. If you're playing a shoe game, you need a civilian or two to burn the bad cards for you.

I actually started to feel sorry for the two people who were doing this for me last week.

... is that a sign of weakness?

 

[shadroch]

If you are not counting,playing SD or DD at a full table can be a huge advantage over playing heads up.Many fewer hands an hour puts less money at risk,greatly reducing you chances of going broke in a short time.It also builds your comps up two or three times faster than playing solo.

 

[TENNBEAR]

I will ( staying at the casino ) turn in early on Saturday night so I can be back in the Casino by 5:00 AM to get optimal playing conditions for the DD pitch game I pursue. Ideal playing conditions for me are with one to two other players at the table. Heads-up is too fast, causing me to make to many mistakes, and lose count. To many players on a face down game, and I cannot see their cards when they check them. The wee hours of the morning is when I find the best conditions for me, crowds are gone and the best games are available.

 

[sagefr0g]

On the bright side, having all those hands in the game cycles through the cards faster, and with 6 players you can decide you want to walk away from a table sometimes after the first hand. And I wonder what takes longer to deal, 3 hands heads-up or 1 hand to 5 players (each situation consuming approximately the same number of cards.)

yes good point i can see where one could use that perspective to one's advantage. at least when the true count hangs in the < +1 range your fellow table mates are eating the cards up.
the thing about playing one on one with the dealer that makes me a bit nervous is i have this fear that the shoe is going to turn out a net disadvantageous one and that would mean i'm there all by my self eating up the crappy cards only to end up with a true count that never gets much above zero or one. where as if there are at least a few other players they would get at least some of the lousy cards too. i'm not sure what kind of a trade off effect is best .

best regards,
mr fr0g

 

[Mikeaber]

I'm not sure I can state this coherently but will give it a try.

Mathematically, there may be little difference other than hands per hour. But emotionally, playing at a full 6-D game drives me crazy! The fact that the table is full indicates that Wonging in and out consistently is not possible. Someone waiting behind you would grab your spot. So, you work on the deck until the count finally gets favorable and you put your larger bet out. Then the count sours before it even gets to be your shot to play the hand!

Personally, I'd rather play at a table with 2 or 3 other players. I can sit out any number of hands under those circumstances knowing that I can get back to the table when it is in my favor to do so. Positive counts hold more consistently through my play. I know that negative counts hold longer as well, but with them, you are just biding time or Wonging out.

Maybe my attitude is Voodoo, but I personally seem to do better with just three or four at a table with 6-D.

 

[avs21]

Playing SD heads up has been the most profitable time for myself. I have found a lot of places that have dealt 70-75% pen heads up. Compared to crowded table with 50-60% pen.

 

[bahoozle]

I prefer either heads up or with 1 other player. Always been more profitable for me. Well, except for that time I went to Bally's in LV. What was I thinking?

 

[ortango]

Taken to the other extreme though, it's really hard (some would say impossible) to backcount an empty table. If you're playing a shoe game, you need a civilian or two to burn the bad cards for you.

I actually started to feel sorry for the two people who were doing this for me last week.

... is that a sign of weakness?

Yes, but we've all been there right? Just the other day, a really nice old Japanese man came in my game and was rolling high. He was just really pleasant, well mannered and a decent BS player. As the count tanked to -3 TC in only 3 decks out of 8, I got up to "get some grub" and stuck around to watch a few hands. A bunch of faces comes out and when I leave its a at -5 TC only halfway throught the cards. I did feel bad cuz he started raising his bets and when I came back from my meal he was gone and the dealer told me busted out. I actually felt bad, and that doesn't happen very often.