The Prince: Dear Don: How fast really?

[The Prince]

How fast does one really have to be when counting down decks before one is ready for the casino. Another member on this forum told me 20 seconds, ten times in a row, no mistakes. Most other sources have told me twenty five to thirty seconds, without any reference to number of times in a row or mistakes. To be sure, it's a good rule of thumb to consistently try to get faster and more accurate, regardless of your current speed. I just need to know when I can be ready to hit the casinos. Right now I'm at 22-23 seconds with the occasional 21 or 20.

[Sun Runner]

> Another member on this forum told me 20 seconds, ten times in a row, no mistakes.

What? You don't believe me and are asking DS for a second opinion?!



My advice was based on a statement by Arnold Snyder in one of his books and my personal experience. I can do 20 seconds and I can keep up.

[Don Schlesinger]

> How fast does one really have to be when
> counting down decks before one is ready for
> the casino. Another member on this forum
> told me 20 seconds, ten times in a row, no
> mistakes. Most other sources have told me
> twenty five to thirty seconds, without any
> reference to number of times in a row or
> mistakes. To be sure, it's a good rule of
> thumb to consistently try to get faster and
> more accurate, regardless of your current
> speed. I just need to know when I can be
> ready to hit the casinos. Right now I'm at
> 22-23 seconds with the occasional 21 or 20.

On p. 290 of BJA3, I mention that the "bogey" for our team qualifying was 25 seconds for a single deck, which amounts to one second per pair of cards, with two pulled out. I believe that this is adequate for real-world play, but I further mention that greater speed is always desirable, so that you can spend more time averting your eyes from the table and appearing to look as natural as possible.

That said, accuracy is more important than speed, so once you're fast enough to keep up in a casino, the important thing is to be as accurate as possible with your count, betting, and playing decisions.

Practice, practice, practice!

Don

[Radar]

> On p. 290 of BJA3, I mention that the
> "bogey" for our team qualifying
> was 25 seconds for a single deck, which

That's about what I do, even now, 25 seconds. But I think what is more important is the ability to glance at a bunch of cards at once, cancel, etc., and come to the count quickly. Sometimes in casino play, you don't have the luxury of counting down. Distractions, etc., make it necessary to learn this technique as much, if not MORE, than just counting down a deck of cards.

My two cents worth...

[Don Schlesinger]

> That's about what I do, even now, 25
> seconds. But I think what is more important
> is the ability to glance at a bunch of cards
> at once, cancel, etc., and come to the count
> quickly. Sometimes in casino play, you don't
> have the luxury of counting down.
> Distractions, etc., make it necessary to
> learn this technique as much, if not MORE,
> than just counting down a deck of cards.

I think that what you're describing makes counting ata table much quicker and much easier than counting down a deck by pairs. When you do the latter, you have to take the pairs as they come; you can't rearrange them in your head. When you scan a table, you can mentally rearrange the pairs to cancel out, and you can count them in any order that facilitates the process.

Don

[The Prince]

> What? You don't believe me and are asking DS
> for a second opinion?!

>

> My advice was based on a statement by Arnold
> Snyder in one of his books and my personal
> experience. I can do 20 seconds and I can
> keep up.

No offense intended! No, the thing is I always do my homework when it comes to numbers. Kind of like the basic strategy when there's always a few indexes that differ from one another, and you go through all kinds of books looking for the right answer, but they still disagree (either that or they agree but I just haven't figured out how!). Sorry about that, I wasn't calling your ability into question or anything, just curious.

P.S. I think in BJ Attack 3 there might be something on the above basic strategy dilemma, I just haven't got to it yet.

[Sun Runner]

> No offense intended!

None taken.

> P.S. I think in BJ Attack 3 there might be
> something on the above basic strategy
> dilemma, I just haven't got to it yet.

Agreed. Depending on how dated the material is you are reading, who wrote it, what conditions it was simmed for, etc all can lead to what you describe.

But no dilemna for me. If for nothing else BJA3 is worth the having just for the charts and tables. Unless you are simming your own for some specific/unique situation, I'd accept and use the BJA3 tables and start directing my efforts to exploring other areas of play that will make you a better player.

Good luck.