Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 19

Thread: Eeephour: 2 deck camouflage

  1. #1
    Eeephour
    Guest

    Eeephour: 2 deck camouflage

    Currently, I play 6 deck and 8 deck shoe games. I am going to a place where I can play 2 deck games. While practicing with norm?s casino vertie, I noticed the count fluctuates quickly moving from a high plus count to a low minus count quickly. I have been able to get away with a 1 ? 60 spread in the shoe game by parlaying my bets and chasing losses. However, with the fluctuations in the count of the 2-deck game, I don?t think I can pull that off effectively. It seems by the time you get you big bets out you have missed the opportunity. Any suggestions on how to play this game with out looking like a counter while not giving up much advantage?

    Eephour

  2. #2
    Don Schlesinger
    Guest

    Don Schlesinger: Re: 2 deck camouflage

    > Any suggestions on how to play
    > this game with out looking like a counter
    > while not giving up much advantage?

    Best advice I can give was in BJA2, starting on p. 129.

    Don

  3. #3
    Hollywood
    Guest

    Hollywood: Re: 2 deck camouflage

    > Currently, I play 6 deck and 8 deck shoe
    > games. I am going to a place where I can
    > play 2 deck games. While practicing with
    > norm?s casino vertie, I noticed the count
    > fluctuates quickly moving from a high plus
    > count to a low minus count quickly. I have
    > been able to get away with a 1 ? 60 spread
    > in the shoe game by parlaying my bets and
    > chasing losses. However, with the
    > fluctuations in the count of the 2-deck
    > game, I don?t think I can pull that off
    > effectively. It seems by the time you get
    > you big bets out you have missed the
    > opportunity. Any suggestions on how to play
    > this game with out looking like a counter
    > while not giving up much advantage?

    > Eephour

    I only play at 2 decks when i'm in the islands.

    I can tell you that it's very fustrating at times, because you get a good count and it's over before you know it.

    And it's also very hard to get good pen on those games.

    I found the camo was not a problem, as long as you make sure that you only increase your bet wtih money that's in front of you and not take anything out of your chips.

    Also be extra careful in betting off the top of the shoe if you had a nice size won bet at the end of the previous one.

    If you follow counters quide 101, just make certain you don't get fustrated. I found in a 2 deck game it's easy to have that happen.

    I also found that in a 2 deck game much more frequently your indices come into play based on whats happened within that actual hand.

    For instance doubling on a nine against a dealer 2. When you are dealt the 9 it may not be the right count to double, but by the time he gets to you for a decision the other cards players took is an issue.

    Now this is common knowledge amounst counters, but I found in a 2 deck game it comes up much more frequently. So you decision making is more of an issue from moment to moment.

    I hope this helped a little,

    Hollywood

  4. #4
    Johnny Bravo
    Guest

    Johnny Bravo: Re: 2 deck camouflage

    Sometimes you can infer what the other players have. If you've been watching and can determine that a few players know BS (fairly well) and don't do anything too stupid, you can infer what cards they might have. If several players tuck their hands you know they probably have at least one ten valued card, given they dealer has a 7-A. If the dealer has a small card and the player takes a hit, you can infer that the player has a couple of small cards. You then adjust the real count after the round when you actually see the cards. But, in order to do this, you must be able to determine how close to basic strategy the ploppy plays.

    > I only play at 2 decks when i'm in the
    > islands.

    > I can tell you that it's very fustrating at
    > times, because you get a good count and it's
    > over before you know it.

    > And it's also very hard to get good pen on
    > those games.

    > I found the camo was not a problem, as long
    > as you make sure that you only increase your
    > bet wtih money that's in front of you and
    > not take anything out of your chips.

    > Also be extra careful in betting off the top
    > of the shoe if you had a nice size won bet
    > at the end of the previous one.

    > If you follow counters quide 101, just make
    > certain you don't get fustrated. I found in
    > a 2 deck game it's easy to have that happen.

    > I also found that in a 2 deck game much more
    > frequently your indices come into play based
    > on whats happened within that actual hand.

    > For instance doubling on a nine against a
    > dealer 2. When you are dealt the 9 it may
    > not be the right count to double, but by the
    > time he gets to you for a decision the other
    > cards players took is an issue.

    > Now this is common knowledge amounst
    > counters, but I found in a 2 deck game it
    > comes up much more frequently. So you
    > decision making is more of an issue from
    > moment to moment.

    > I hope this helped a little,

    > Hollywood


  5. #5
    Norm Wattenberger
    Guest

    Norm Wattenberger: Counting by Inference Table

    Well put. The below table shows the count that can be inferred fro good BS players for different upcards and cards drawn:

    Counting by Inference by Hand Length

    Counting by Inference refers to the method of estimating the count of cards in face down hands. This table contains the average count of unseen hands to your right for the count and rules specified by hand length. Also provided are the distribution of such hands and the distribution of units bet.
    Cards in Unbusted HandCards in Unbusted HandCards in Unbusted HandCards in Unbusted Hand
    UpcardPat HandThreeFourMore
    CountCountCountCount
    Ace-1.30.71.11.2
    2-0.51.01.41.4
    3-0.50.81.41.4
    4-0.41.01.41.1
    5-0.41.11.41.1
    6-0.41.11.41.1
    7-1.30.61.01.1
    8-1.30.61.11.2
    9-1.30.51.01.1
    10-1.30.61.01.1
    Hand DistributionHand DistributionHand DistributionHand Distribution
    Ace2.30%2.21%0.74%0.14%
    26.90%2.25%0.45%0.03%
    36.83%1.89%0.41%0.04%
    47.80%1.27%0.31%0.01%
    57.76%1.27%0.32%0.02%
    67.77%1.28%0.33%0.02%
    73.39%2.49%0.84%0.16%
    83.31%2.53%0.91%0.18%
    93.16%2.54%0.97%0.20%
    1011.83%10.51%3.86%0.80%
    Bet DistributionBet DistributionBet DistributionBet Distribution
    Ace2.64%2.17%0.67%0.12%
    26.72%1.96%0.36%0.03%
    36.66%1.66%0.33%0.03%
    47.54%1.11%0.25%0.01%
    57.51%1.11%0.26%0.01%
    67.52%1.12%0.26%0.01%
    73.77%2.35%0.75%0.14%
    83.69%2.39%0.81%0.15%
    93.51%2.42%0.86%0.17%
    1013.92%10.63%3.65%0.72%

  6. #6
    Norm Wattenberger
    Guest

    Norm Wattenberger: Hard Core Counting by Inference


    You can also look more closely at the most common event - the player draws one card. This table shows counts that can be inferred from a player drawing one card witout busting:

    CIF Sim

    Monday, March 15, 2004, 07:53 AM

    Player #1: Counting by Inference by Drawn Card

    Counting by Inference refers to the method of estimating the count of cards in face down hands. This table contains the average count of unseen hands to your right for the count and rules specified when exactly one card is drawn. Also provided are the distribution of such hands and the distribution of units bet.
    Drawn CardDrawn CardDrawn CardDrawn CardDrawn CardDrawn CardDrawn CardDrawn CardDrawn CardDrawn Card
    Ace2345678910
    CountCountCountCountCountCountCountCountCountCount
    Ace1.00.00.10.20.30.40.60.81.11.4
    21.20.50.40.60.80.91.01.11.11.3
    30.90.30.30.30.60.70.90.90.91.2
    41.70.00.00.80.91.01.11.11.11.1
    51.70.00.00.70.91.01.11.11.11.1
    61.70.00.00.70.91.01.11.11.11.1
    71.10.10.20.20.30.30.40.61.11.7
    81.00.10.10.20.30.30.40.61.11.6
    90.80.00.10.20.30.30.40.60.91.4
    101.00.00.10.20.30.30.50.81.01.4
    Hand DistributionHand DistributionHand DistributionHand DistributionHand DistributionHand DistributionHand DistributionHand DistributionHand DistributionHand Distribution
    Ace.4%.4%.6%.7%.9%.9%.8%.7%.6%1.9%
    2.6%.3%.4%.5%.6%.7%.8%.8%.8%2.4%
    3.5%.3%.3%.4%.5%.6%.7%.7%.7%1.9%
    4.2%.1%.1%.2%.4%.4%.4%.4%.4%1.8%
    5.2%.1%.1%.2%.3%.4%.4%.5%.4%1.8%
    6.2%.1%.1%.2%.4%.4%.5%.5%.5%1.8%
    7.5%.5%.8%1.1%1.4%1.2%.8%.7%.5%1.3%
    8.5%.5%.8%1.1%1.4%1.2%.9%.6%.5%1.4%
    9.5%.5%.8%1.1%1.3%1.2%.9%.7%.5%1.5%
    102.2%1.9%3.0%3.9%5.0%4.3%3.8%3.2%2.5%7.4%
    Bet DistributionBet DistributionBet DistributionBet DistributionBet DistributionBet DistributionBet DistributionBet DistributionBet DistributionBet Distribution
    Ace.4%.4%.6%.7%.9%.9%.9%.7%.6%2.0%
    2.6%.3%.4%.5%.5%.6%.7%.7%.8%2.3%
    3.5%.3%.3%.4%.4%.5%.6%.6%.7%1.8%
    4.2%.1%.1%.2%.3%.3%.4%.4%.4%1.7%
    5.2%.1%.1%.2%.3%.3%.4%.4%.4%1.7%
    6.2%.1%.1%.2%.3%.3%.4%.4%.4%1.8%
    7.6%.5%.8%1.1%1.3%1.1%.8%.7%.5%1.4%
    8.6%.5%.8%1.1%1.3%1.1%.9%.6%.5%1.4%
    9.5%.5%.8%1.0%1.3%1.1%.9%.7%.5%1.6%
    102.5%2.0%3.1%4.0%5.1%4.4%4.1%3.4%2.7%8.1%




  7. #7
    Eeephour
    Guest

    Eeephour: Re: 2 deck camouflage

    Thanks everyone. This is exactly the kind of info I was looking for!!!

    Eeephour

  8. #8
    Fuzzy Math
    Guest

    Fuzzy Math: Re: 2 deck camouflage

    > Thanks everyone. This is exactly the kind of
    > info I was looking for!!!

    > Eeephour

    I have a different question along similar lines... occasionally I get distracted for a second and in that brief time someone busts and has their cards swept off of the table before I've seen any of them. If I know they only took one hit and busted, I usually just assume the count for their hand to be -1. I'd like to know how (in)accurate that is...?

  9. #9
    Ouchez
    Guest

    Ouchez: That is the tact I use,

    > I have a different question along similar
    > lines... occasionally I get distracted for a
    > second and in that brief time someone busts
    > and has their cards swept off of the table
    > before I've seen any of them. If I know they
    > only took one hit and busted, I usually just
    > assume the count for their hand to be -1.
    > I'd like to know how (in)accurate that
    > is...?

    However it may not have been a ten value that busted them. I just try to pay attention, get in that zone. Drink alot of coffee, be like the Hawk on his perch, let nothing escape you're vision, be ready to pounce.

    Regards,
    Ouchez.

  10. #10
    Hollywood
    Guest

    Hollywood: Re: 2 deck camouflage

    > I have a different question along similar
    > lines... occasionally I get distracted for a
    > second and in that brief time someone busts
    > and has their cards swept off of the table
    > before I've seen any of them. If I know they
    > only took one hit and busted, I usually just
    > assume the count for their hand to be -1.
    > I'd like to know how (in)accurate that
    > is...?

    I don't think there is ever a time where one of us does not lose the count for a moment, be it a distraction or a pit boss coming over to have a conversation etc.

    I just cross that shoe off to BS and wait for the next one.

    There is nothing wrong with playing a shoe with solid BS.

    I had a guy die at my table once. They had him on the floor doing that electrical stuff. CLEAR they were yelling, and I never forgot it, you could smell the burning.

    But keeping the count was difficult.

    Many things can happen at a table to lose counts.

    Just play out the shoe and move on.

    Hollywood

  11. #11
    Fuzzy Math
    Guest

    Fuzzy Math: Re: 2 deck camouflage

    > I don't think there is ever a time where one
    > of us does not lose the count for a moment,
    > be it a distraction or a pit boss coming
    > over to have a conversation etc.

    > I just cross that shoe off to BS and wait
    > for the next one.

    > There is nothing wrong with playing a shoe
    > with solid BS.

    > I had a guy die at my table once. They had
    > him on the floor doing that electrical
    > stuff. CLEAR they were yelling, and I never
    > forgot it, you could smell the burning.

    > But keeping the count was difficult.

    > Many things can happen at a table to lose
    > counts.

    > Just play out the shoe and move on.

    > Hollywood

    I don't mean I lose the running count, I'm just talking about when cards are played that I don't see. There's no reason to stop using the information I've already obtained just because I missed something.

  12. #12
    suicyco maniac
    Guest

    suicyco maniac: losing count

    > I don't think there is ever a time where one
    > of us does not lose the count for a moment,
    > be it a distraction or a pit boss coming
    > over to have a conversation etc.

    A few weeks back while playing the power went out midshoe and after about 30 minutes of waiting all the players were instructed to cash out and leave...about 6 hours later while eating dinner with a friend who had been playing at the same casino on a different table we both looked at each other and said "what was the count?" -5 and +13 respectively....I have dropped the count on occasion and just revert to BS or go for a walk. What I have noticed more often then losing the count is when the new deck starts I often am still holding the count from the previous deck and have to remember to revert to zero. SM

  13. #13
    John Lewis
    Guest

    John Lewis: amazing tables, thanks *NM*


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

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.