Mikey Vegas: May '03: First Trip to Vegas as counter

[Mikey Vegas]

Alright, I posted here about six months ago asking for advise on learning how to count and this is what has transpired since then. I have read the following books(burning the tables, BJ attack), learned hilo through software and counting down decks, and read every post on this forum for any information that would help in my endeavor. I feel like I am well prepared using hi-low and a have a large enough bankroll for what I am prepared to bet. I am going to get Trackjack and the Las Vegas Advisore POV coupon book next week, and plan on purchasing BJRM200 in two weeks. My question is this, does anyone here have any advice for me before I make this trip.

Thanks in advance for you comments!

[Sentry]

Mikey, I didn't see your first post, so I'm making some assumptions based on the current one. If you have played in Las Vegas before you were a counter, then at least you won't be overwhelmed by the first time experience of it all. It sounds like you have done a good job in your preparation and planning, but you will need to do more.

When you get Trackjack, make a list of all the casinos that offer the games you have practiced to play that are offered at the limits you are preparing to play. Map out their location from one stop to the next and plan your sessions with a minimum of travel time from one place to the next. When you arrive to find the game you have your heart set on, either it will have a higher minimum bet, or be overcrowded (or both. Head for your next stop. Always have a backup plan, never play a bad game, and if a good game turns bad, get out.

If you have read and understood the books you mentioned, then you know the importance of keeping records. To prepare for your trip, keep a record of your practice sessions. Ian Andersen's book has a useful model for this, but adapt it to your own needs. Also, take his advice on session lengths, breaks and rest, but forget what he says about cover for now, unless you are betting black or higher. Be observant, but not overly paranoid- that wastes too much energy.

Pace yourself- they have three shifts to take you on. Get your rest. Don't multiply your problems by playing to get even. There are several problems with this-
It makes losing sessions last longer than winning sessions.
You can overextend your play, exposing your game and getting 86ed while losing.
You can become fatigued and make mistakes, or worse, become emotional.

Don't invest too much in this trip. If you win, it does not prove that you are the Jedi master of Blackjack. If you lose this trip, you should not jump off a bridge. Remember your edge is tiny. You have a long-term advantage, but you will not win every session or even at every trip. You can play perfectly and still get your ass kicked in the short run. Accept your session losses and move on. Save your strength and bankroll for another session.

Define your strategy.
Choose the best games.
Play at your best.
Stick to the plan.

Best to you,

Sentry

[Mikey Vegas]

Sentry,

I can't tell you enough how much I appreciate the advice you have offered in your post. I am going into this with the long term in mind and only hope that this will provide some supplemental support to my current income. Again thanks for you thoughtful words, and I will check in again after my trip.

M.V.

[ZOD]

Sounds like you are going to Vegas with the proper frame of mind. Keep Sentry's good advice with you and let us in on your results. Trust the math...

ZOD

[chem nerd]

[cadillac]

> Alright, I posted here about six months ago
> asking for advise on learning how to count
> and this is what has transpired since then.
> I have read the following books(burning the
> tables, BJ attack), learned hilo through
> software and counting down decks, and read
> every post on this forum for any information
> that would help in my endeavor. I feel like
> I am well prepared using hi-low and a have a
> large enough bankroll for what I am prepared
> to bet. I am going to get Trackjack and the
> Las Vegas Advisore POV coupon book next
> week, and plan on purchasing BJRM200 in two
> weeks. My question is this, does anyone here
> have any advice for me before I make this
> trip.

> Thanks in advance for you comments!

Along w/ making yourself break for rest, break to eat! (seriously)

[FLAPlayer]

Mikey- I am like you, a new counter- all of the advice offered is very true- you might want to subscribe to blackjack forum for where to go (in addition to trackjack)and practicing CVBJ on your computer- I was in Vegas in Febuary, I would recommend MGM, Palms,Mandalay Bay, and The Mirage (6 deck shoes)- I focused on hitting and running, I bought in for $500 each time and if lost $200 or TC was -2 I got up and left or went to the bathroom- don't play for more then an hour and spread time between some of the casinos mentioned. Your comments about bad play are right on, I didn't see anyone who had a clue when I played. Also, remember that they don't know what your thinking- if you are spreading big bets you might get some heat, but the only time I drew attention was when I took surrender (which I didn't see anyone else do in 3 1/2 days) or made a correct insurance play.

Also, I flat bet until the True count is +2, then 2 units, +3 is 4 units, +4 is 5 units- I played at 6 deck shoes and never got a TC over +5. This was 3 1/2 days of straight playing. I had a bankroll of $1500. Using this strategy I won almost 4K. I had 3 losing sessions. I realize that I was also lucky, but knowing when to walk away and not chase a losing streak by betting will keep you in the game for the long run. Good luck- FLA Player

[Dancer]

> but the only time I drew
> attention was when I took surrender (which I
> didn't see anyone else do in 3 1/2 days) or
> made a correct insurance play.

I, too, have noticed that surrendering seems to draw heat. The vast majority of players don't even know what it is, so they tend to make (unwanted) comments that draw even more attention. At the very least, the pit realizes you know more than the average player and scrutinizes your play more closely to find out how much more.

A few times I've been able to diffuse the heat by knowing LOTS of surrender indexes. By seemingly taking the option too often, sometimes the pit just thinks you're an overly conservative chump.

Overall, though, I've considered toning down my surrender play -- that is, until I'm sitting on a 16 vs. 10 with a big bet on the line...

[Dancer]

> the only time I drew
> attention was when I took surrender (which I
> didn't see anyone else do in 3 1/2 days) or
> made a correct insurance play.

Insurance play is a dead giveaway for the average counter. Even Ian Anderson (who's certainly not an average player), admits in his latest book that he feels exposed when he takes it. Any half-smart pit can see you only take insurance when the big bets come out. Of course, you can try to throw them off by insuring a "good" hand at a lower count or come up with some other smoke-screen, but overall, it's a tough play to hide.

Insurance cover (in fact, cover in general, but that's another post), IMO, is the greatest benefit to using an ace-neutral count. I play Hi-Opt II, but I go one step further for insurance purposes. I add the aces seen to the running count and take insurance at a running count of ((4 X Decks) + 1). Several months ago, I published a comparison of this method against the most popular systems, and it wasn't even close. The IC of this count is 93%, and it's accurate to the exact card.

What does this mean in actual play? Lots.

Ace-neutral counts allow you to calculate your betting count separate from your insurance count. Ace-reckoned systems can't do this. It's not uncommon in a double-deck game to find betting true counts and playing or insurance true counts differing by plus or minus 10!!

Card denominations certainly don't come out in an orderly fashion -- that's why counting works. So let's take two fairly realistic scenarios.

1. True count is 0 or slightly positive but lots of aces remain to be played. Your betting count is high therefore, so you put out a large bet. The insurance count, however, is low, so insurance is not a good bet. To the pit, you're not a counter since you're not insuring a big bet.

2. True count is +5 (about 2 1/2 in Hi-Lo terms), but lots of aces have been played. Your betting count is low therefore, so you place a small bet. In this case, however, insurance is the correct play. To the pit, you're not a counter since you're insuring a small bet.

In both cases, you're making the correct play (and therefore giving up no EV for "cover" purposes), but you certainly don't look like a counter.

I might add another little twist. In scenario 2, let's say you were dealt 12 vs. 2. In this case, you'd (correctly) stand. The pit knows anyone who's a "threat" to the casino would only stand on this play with a high true count and a correspondingly high bet out. Again, you're making the correct move with great cover and no loss of EV. It's a win-win deal.

[Magician]

> Insurance play is a dead giveaway for the
> average counter. Even Ian Anderson (who's
> certainly not an average player), admits in
> his latest book that he feels exposed when
> he takes it. Any half-smart pit can see you
> only take insurance when the big bets come
> out. Of course, you can try to throw them
> off by insuring a "good" hand at a
> lower count or come up with some other
> smoke-screen, but overall, it's a tough play
> to hide.

My cover story, if anyone ever asks, would be that I know that insurance is a bad bet, so I usually don't take it. But when I have a big bet out I don't want a big negative swing, so I take insurance even though I "know" I shouldn't. Another ploy is to try placing insurance when the dealer has a ten showing. :-)

On the subject of insurance, I've heard a lot of talk about ploppies only insuring their "good" hands. In no hole card games, I've never heard this ploppy wisdom. Is it because the insurance decision occurs before the play of the hands in hole card games that they think this?

[methodman]

Crazy, tons of players take insurance-means nothing either way.

>

[Masquerace]

> ...I've heard a
> lot of talk about ploppies only insuring
> their "good" hands. In no hole
> card games, I've never heard this ploppy
> wisdom. Is it because the insurance decision
> occurs before the play of the hands in hole
> card games that they think this?

I'm not sure what you mean.
I hope I can contribute by telling that where I play (see profile), with No Hole Card, insurance must be placed as well before the play of the hands (the dealer even calls a "rien ne va plus" specifically for it before drawing any card, or even before just *asking* the first player his play)
___
Personally, as I've not learnt to count yet, if I play on a full table and I thus can see 15 cards on the table (actually, 14 + the dealer's Ace) when deciding, if I see less than 5 T cards I consider taking insurance.
I try to remember if I got the "impression" from previous hands that generally the remaining shoe is ten-rich or not, but without counting I realise that's pretty unreliable.

BTW, I usually insure just 1/4th instead of 1/2 my bet.
I read somewhere that when you hedge you bets that's a clear psychological sign that you're doing something wrong, e.g. you're uncomfortable with your betting levels.
Do you think that rationale applies to insurance too? That is, if you really want to take it, you sohuld go for the full insurance, halfways meaning nothing?

[Magician]

> I'm not sure what you mean.
> I hope I can contribute by telling that
> where I play (see profile), with No Hole
> Card, insurance must be placed as well
> before the play of the hands (the dealer
> even calls a "rien ne va plus"
> specifically for it before drawing any card,
> or even before just *asking* the first
> player his play)

Yes, this is normal. My Italian is limited to musical terms and restaurant menus, but I assume "rien ne va plus" means "no more bets"? In English-speaking countries the dealer often announces something like "insurance closed" at this point.

It's the point at which insurance bets are settled that differs between normal and NHC blackjack. In a hole card game the dealer will "peak" at the hole card (often these days with a special card-reading device) as soon as insurance is closed and before the play of any hand. It's my theory that due to this difference, ploppys are inclined to insure only their good hands in hole card games, whereas in NHC games they generally insure based on whether or not the dealer will get a blackjack. What's your experience?

> Personally, as I've not learnt to count yet,
> if I play on a full table and I thus can see
> 15 cards on the table (actually, 14 + the
> dealer's Ace) when deciding, if I see less
> than 5 T cards I consider taking insurance.

Your strategy is unsound. You should only take insurance if the ratio of tens remaining to non-tens remaining is more than 1:2. Even in a single deck game, if you have seen 4 tens and 11 non-tens then the ratio of tens remaining to non-tens remaining is 12:25 < 1:2. In shoe games, even if you cannot see a single ten, insurance is never favourable based on the cards on the table. In general basic strategy players should never take insurance.

> I read somewhere that when you hedge you
> bets that's a clear psychological sign that
> you're doing something wrong, e.g. you're
> uncomfortable with your betting levels.
> Do you think that rationale applies to
> insurance too? That is, if you really want
> to take it, you sohuld go for the full
> insurance, halfways meaning nothing?

I don't think that piece of psychological wisdom applies to advantage players. There are circumstances where it is mathematically sound to insure for less. (I believe this was discussed on Don's Domain recently.) In general though, card-counters will insure for the full amount when the count is above a certain index and not insure otherwise.