Christian: Counting speed

[gorilla player]

> Er, excuse me, but I think about 8 of us
> worked six months or so to produce Chapter
> 13, Part I. You might want to have a look!
> :-)

I did. I was really asking a rhetorical question of a sort, because I didn't think it had a real answer. For example, at an indian casino a month ago, I found perfect conditions to back-count 2 tables. One jumped up, one saw a bunch of 10's come off and went south. Before I could sit down at the remaining position on the climbing count, someone beat me to it. I kept back-counting both as I had nothing better to do. The good count quickly dropped back to slightly negative (TC). But the other cycled up and went right on up to +2 before I could sit down. I sat down, played about 2.5 decks and did pretty well.

The thing that caught my eye was that the table I played at was pretty bad after one deck. Something like TC -3 (I truncate for the record, rounding might have been closer to -4).

The point of the above was if I could have, I would have jumped into the first + table which was already heading back south again, and missed the second table that started off ugly but turned good.

I guess there is really no way to predict any of that, based on what I have seen over the past four years with counts going every-which-way...

> Sounds like you're probably watching
> negative shoes too long, hoping for them to
> "come back." Reread Chapter 13.

> Don

I don't often watch them if they go south, except that on occasion I sort of get forced into it as above, where the empty position on the good table gets jumped on before I can get to it, leaving me with nothing to do but keep back-counting..

But thanks for the reminder. I'll go back and re-read it. A assume you haven't changed this much from previous versions? Or should I hint to my wife that another book order might be a good Christmas idea?

[Don Schlesinger]

> I don't often watch them if they go south,
> except that on occasion I sort of get forced
> into it as above, where the empty position
> on the good table gets jumped on before I
> can get to it, leaving me with nothing to do
> but keep back-counting..

Are you implying that they were the only two tables in the casino? If not, then the right thing to do would have been to walk away from both of them. Citing an example of a bad count that gets good doesn't mean very much. More often than not, the bad count will stay bad, and you will have been better off starting over again at another table. At least, that's what months of research showed us.

> But thanks for the reminder. I'll go back
> and re-read it. A assume you haven't changed
> this much from previous versions? Or should
> I hint to my wife that another book order
> might be a good Christmas idea?

Well, you do have BJA3, right? If not, it's nothing like previous versions. Trust me.

Don

[Sun Runner]

> Do you "quit" when the RC hits some magic number? -GP

>> Er, excuse me, but I think about 8 of us
>> worked six months or so to produce Chapter
>> 13, Part I. You might want to have a look! -DS

>>> I did. I was really asking a rhetorical question of a sort, -GP

You did? You were? If you had read Chapter 13, you would have known the ?magic number? and also known it was neither magic nor rhetorical. It?s just the answer.

Accept it and go on; there is no need to write two more paragraphs in an effort to mask your ignorance/lack of understanding/forgetfulness/?not having read the text recently?/whatever.

It?s OK. Just because you have been a professor since birth does not make it incumbent on you to be well versed in everything! Lay that burden down dude. Give it a rest. It is so much easier when you do.

Trust me on that.

[Gorilla Player]

> Are you implying that they were the only two
> tables in the casino?

Depends on your definition of table. IE I was specifically back-counting $5 tables as my son wanted to play and that was his "entry fee" of choice. It was OK to me as the difference between a $5 and $10 6d shoe table seems minimal. Ploppies everywhere. There were not many $5 tables at the time we were looking. There were two side-by-side, the other 2 or 3 were widely scattered..

> If not, then the right
> thing to do would have been to walk away
> from both of them. Citing an example of a
> bad count that gets good doesn't mean very
> much. More often than not, the bad count
> will stay bad, and you will have been better
> off starting over again at another table. At
> least, that's what months of research showed
> us.

> Well, you do have BJA3, right? If not, it's
> nothing like previous versions. Trust me.

> Don

OK, no I don't. But it is now "on my list". Thanks...

One note of interest. The two tables I was back-counting had two very fast dealers. I was afraid that the duct-tape wrapped around my head (to keep my head from exploding with the rapid-fire dealing/counting) would be a dead giveaway to the pit crew.

On another night at this same store, one of the dealers dealt so slowly I had to give up and go somewhere else to back-count. One of those deal the first card to everybody, then ever so slowly, reach, slide the card out of the shoe, flip it over, place it methodically in front of the player, repeat. It was excruciating...

[Gorilla Player]

> You did? You were? If you had read Chapter
> 13, you would have known the ?magic number?
> and also known it was neither magic nor
> rhetorical. It?s just the answer.

Here's a question for you. When you read something, and even if the source is highly trusted, do you ever ask "why is that _THE_ right answer/number/equation/formual/etc."???

I make it a practice to, in order to make sure that I understand the reasoning. I have BJA 2, not 3, which was why I asked if 3 was significantly different. According to Don, it is. However, for me, when I read something that seems interesting, I try to (a) understand it; (b) verify it; and only then (c) use it. I have absolutely no doubt that what Don wrote is correct. He's never seemed to me to be one of those "over the top_ type writers more intent on telling me how it is going to be, rather than showing me how good it really is.

But that aside, my nature is to ask questions. I can't count the number of times someone has said or written "X", and experimentation has shown that "X" was wrong.

That is what "science" is all about. If we took everything at face value without investigating it carefully ourselves, science would be one giant shipwreck of misinformation and failed experiments.

Someone tells me "you need a spread of X to beat a game with N decks" I hardly think they are lying to me, but you can bet I'll go run a sim or three to verify the data for myself...

Note that none of that is meant as any disrespect to either Don, yourself, or anyone else. It is just the "cautious scientist" in me. This has stood me in good stead over the years, and saved me a lot of time and trouble.

> Accept it and go on; there is no need to
> write two more paragraphs in an effort to
> mask your ignorance/lack of
> understanding/forgetfulness/?not having read
> the text recently?/whatever.

> It?s OK. Just because you have been a
> professor since birth does not make it
> incumbent on you to be well versed in
> everything! Lay that burden down dude. Give
> it a rest. It is so much easier when you do.

> Trust me on that.

I hope what I wrote did not appear to be a cover-up. I read BJA2 _several_ years ago. I don't have it in front of me so I am not sure when it was published, but that could serve to indicate how far back it was. No doubt I forgot a lot. No doubt that (at 56 years of age) I will forget more in the future either.

But one thing's for sure, every decision I make is really based on personal experience and experimentation. Been led down the wrong path too many times by both intentional and unintentional disinformation (and no, I am not talking about BJ here although there is certainly plenty of disinformation floating around, just visit Patrick's web site.)

[pm]

Sorry to butt in; I know this is none of my business, but real quick. I totally concur that you should try and never accept anything as the truth unless you fully understand it, but I think I see what Sun Runner was saying.

Instead of your response being along the lines of "I see; it's been several years since I read BJA2, and I forgot that there was actually an entire section devoted to optimal departure points," your reponse read like this: "I've already read the section on optimal departure points; that's why I was asking if there are optimal departure points, because I really didn't there were any."

I'm guessing that wasn't what you were saying, but I initially read it like that as well.

Again, sorry to butt in, and I hope this doesn't come off as offensive.

[Gorilla Player]

> Sorry to butt in; I know this is none of my
> business, but real quick. I totally concur
> that you should try and never accept
> anything as the truth unless you fully
> understand it, but I think I see what Sun
> Runner was saying.

> Instead of your response being along the
> lines of "I see; it's been several
> years since I read BJA2, and I forgot that
> there was actually an entire section devoted
> to optimal departure points," your
> reponse read like this: "I've already
> read the section on optimal departure
> points; that's why I was asking if there are
> optimal departure points, because I really
> didn't there were any."

> I'm guessing that wasn't what you were
> saying, but I initially read it like that as
> well.

> Again, sorry to butt in, and I hope this
> doesn't come off as offensive.

Wasn't taken as offensive. As I probably mentioned somewhere, although maybe not at the right point (I think in a post to Don on a different topic maybe) I have BJA2, and I asked if 3 was significantly different (he responded "yes it is").

I was probably remiss in not going back and re-reading since it has been a _long_ time since I went through it from cover-to-cover. I refer to it from time to time as even ed=2 has a wealth of info that comes in handy.

So, leave this one as "my fault." And I have his new edition on my "list" I gave to my wife, which will hopefully help even further...

[Sun Runner]

> Here's a question for you. When you read
> something, and even if the source is highly
> trusted, do you ever ask "why is that
> _THE_ right
> answer/number/equation/formual/etc."???

Sure. Everyday.

But that is not my point here; you know it, I know it, and anyone using this forum that has the ability to read and comprehend knows it.

This is a perfect example. You post as if you know, then when shown you don't you make a small side step and spend eight or ten paragraphs talking about something kinda, but mostly, unrelated. When this happens I always hope to God that your second effort is accurate, because again, if not, it'll take ten more paragraphs to do the same two step once again all the while glossing over the whole affair with remembrances of all you have acomplished in the ivy towers of your life.

It just tires me out.

But the forum seems to be meeting your need, so I trust you won't let me stand in your way of bettering yourself at BJ while I work on not finding fault everytime you post.

Good luck.

[Gorilla Player]

> Sure. Everyday.

> But that is not my point here; you know it,
> I know it, and anyone using this forum that
> has the ability to read and comprehend knows
> it.

> This is a perfect example. You post as if
> you know, then when shown you don't you make
> a small side step and spend eight or ten
> paragraphs talking about something kinda,
> but mostly, unrelated. When this happens I
> always hope to God that your second effort
> is accurate, because again, if not, it'll
> take ten more paragraphs to do the same two
> step once again all the while glossing over
> the whole affair with remembrances of all
> you have acomplished in the ivy towers of
> your life.

> It just tires me out.

> But the forum seems to be meeting your need,
> so I trust you won't let me stand in your
> way of bettering yourself at BJ while I work
> on not finding fault everytime you post.

> Good luck.

I suspect that if that is one of your main goals, "top find fault every time I post" you won't have any trouble doing so.

I try to ask questions that I don't have the answer to. Whether the answer is available somewhere and I didn't notice or not is certainly fair game to point out. However, I don't expect everyone to have read everything published on a particular subject, and neither have I done that. If that's a mistake, then "guilty as charged, sir, do your worst to me."

the advice that seems most appropriate is "lighten up". this is not life or death.

[Sun Runner]

> If that's a mistake, then "guilty as
> charged, sir, do your worst to me."

Oh please.

> the advice that seems most appropriate is
> "lighten up". This is not life or death.

You are not the first to suggest that to me in this forum, and thankfully for you and me, I've mellowed quite a bit since first logging in.

We should stop now or yet another long winded posting string you got involved in is in jeopardy of getting busted and my apology quota to Parker does not renew for another 18 days.

Happy New Year.