Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Myooligan: eye in the sky cover

  1. #1
    Myooligan
    Guest

    Myooligan: eye in the sky cover

    I've been trying to track down cover plays that neither cost much in ev nor correlate with my counting system. Actually, I'm most interested in departures which aren't used by any traditional counting system. For instance, I've started splitting 22 and 33 vs. 8. I know there are better ways to lay cover when you're getting heat from the pit, but I thought plays like this might throw off computer analysis from the eye in the sky.

    Any thoughts?

  2. #2
    bfbagain
    Guest

    bfbagain: Being too clever by half

    I've started splitting 22 and 33 vs. 8. I know there are better ways to lay cover when you're getting heat from the pit, but I thought plays like this might throw off computer analysis from the eye in the sky.

    Were you aware that those are real index plays? Well, the 3,3 vs 8 isn't, but it's close. And if you have a big count, the 2,2 vs 8 is.

    The problem with cover plays has nothing to do with the play, but everything to do with the stakes you play.

    All in all, most cover plays just hurt you, and at higher stakes, may often trigger backoffs faster.

    There's been a lot of talk over the years about 16 vs 10, for example. Many casino personnel look at this as a tell on counters. Fortunately, there are many, many high stakes ploppies, who come to the same conclusion as a counter would, who's playing strictly to the count, i.e., they'll stand in a strong plus count, because they have a bigger than normal bet out. And they're just as likely to hit that 16 if they have a small bet out. Intuitively, it makes sense. It just happens to be mathematically correct as well.

    IMO, the best cover play of all is the even money bet when the dealer has an ace up. In fact, about the only cover plays I ever make, are as a result of the insurance bet. When playing two hands, you can alter how much insurance you may or may not take; holding a 20 on one hand, and a stiff on another with big bets out.... These are likely to effect your surveillance rating more than any other play, as well as providing some risk adverse cover.

    In the end, be careful in trying to be too smart for people. Sometimes, that pisses smart people off, who otherwise may be willing to give an inconclusive rating to the pit.

    cheers
    bfb


  3. #3
    Myooligan
    Guest

    Myooligan: re:Being too clever by half

    Thanks for the suggestions, bfb. I especially like the insure one of two hands idea. One question though:

    > All in all, most cover plays just hurt you, and at
    > higher stakes, may often trigger backoffs faster.

    Could you elaborate on this? Why would most cover plays trigger a backoff? I can see why 3,3 v. 8 might, because it could draw attention. But most cover plays? I don't follow.

  4. #4
    bfbagain
    Guest

    bfbagain: You're rarely, if ever,

    not under the radar. The camera is on every blackchip player. So, your plays are being watched more closely, and play deviations will raise different questions to different people.

    If you're playing accurately, and if you're being evaluated (now or later), odd plays will be reviewed differently.

    Remember, a lot of these people are more paranoid than we are. They're likely to err on the side of caution, and this means overreactions under the guise of game protection. This is why I mention the being too clever aspect. It's much like hard fouls in basketball, in that, if you're going to put a player on the line, don't let him have a three point play.

    A better, and more effective form of cover is to play shorter sessions, vary your shifts, and put distance between visits.

    It's nice to think that many casino personnel aren't the sharpest blades in the drawer, but many are, in fact, quite sharp. Why insult them.

    Most cover plays won't trigger backoffs per se. But if you're already on the radar, and if surveillance comes back that you play with an advantage, then all the cover plays did was cost you money, as the plays themselves won't stop a backoff.

    cheers
    bfb

  5. #5
    Myooligan
    Guest

    Myooligan: Andersen's method

    > not under the radar. The camera is on every blackchip
    > player. So, your plays are being watched more closely,
    > and play deviations will raise different questions to
    > different people.

    Thanks again bfb. I was just reading a related thread from last April about Counter Basic Strategy, and I'm learning a ton.

    And finding myself with more questions! A lot of what I read leaves me with the impression that Ian Andersen's method -- and by that I only mean his goal of cultivating relationships with the floor personnel -- isn't the best idea. Yet I don't know of any developments in the game that would make it less viable now than it was in the past. I have a knack for making people feel comfortable, and I hope to eventually create an act along those lines. Do you guys still consider the "relationship" approach workable? Does anybody know if Ian is still using it?

    > If you're playing accurately, and if you're being
    > evaluated (now or later), odd plays will be reviewed
    > differently.

    Got it.

    > Remember, a lot of these people are more paranoid than
    > we are.

    Unlikely.

  6. #6
    Parker
    Guest

    Parker: Re: Andersen's method

    > Thanks again bfb. I was just reading a related thread
    > from last April about Counter Basic Strategy, and I'm
    > learning a ton.

    > And finding myself with more questions! A lot of what
    > I read leaves me with the impression that Ian
    > Andersen's method -- and by that I only mean his goal
    > of cultivating relationships with the floor personnel
    > -- isn't the best idea. Yet I don't know of any
    > developments in the game that would make it less
    > viable now than it was in the past. I have a knack for
    > making people feel comfortable, and I hope to
    > eventually create an act along those lines. Do you
    > guys still consider the "relationship"
    > approach workable? Does anybody know if Ian is still
    > using it?

    Actually, there is some skepticism in some circles regarding whether Andersen ever actually used the Ultimate Gambit in real-life casino play.

    It should also be noted that Anderson supposedly played at relatively high stakes. He could afford to give up a substantial amount of EV and still have a respectable hourly earnings figure.

    I think that the AP in today's playing climate has to make a decision as to whether he(she) wants to earn serious money, or simply get a lot of comps while (hopefully) playing with a positive EV. If the latter, then Andersen's approach might still be viable. If the former, then a "hit and run" approach using little or no cover might be preferable.


  7. #7
    bfbagain
    Guest

    bfbagain: Or a combination

    to earn serious money, or simply get a lot of comps while (hopefully) playing with a positive EV. If the latter, then Andersen's approach might still be viable. If the former, then a "hit and run" approach using little or no cover might be preferable.

    I often "let the casino I'm staying at off the hook" if my trip is being comped. Since I use a rotational approach to planning my trips, casino X this trip may be my home base, i.e., providing my suite. Other stores will feed me, and other's, hopefully :-) will make a deposit to my BR. Next trip Casino Y will provide my rooms, and maybe Casino X will make the deposits.

    cheers
    bfb

  8. #8
    Myooligan
    Guest

    Myooligan: Re: Or a combination

    > I often "let the casino I'm staying at off the
    > hook" if my trip is being comped.

    But you don't completely let them off the hook, right bfb? Or am I still being halfway to clever?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.