Illusion: Camouflage vs TC

[Illusion]

How many time has this happened, you Wong into a shoe and you win one lose one, push, lose, lose, push etc? The count steady climbs during this losing/pushing streak and the count has gotten high enough to put two big bets out on the felt but your still some where around one ore two units.

At times it?s saved me money by not betting bigger but it?s also cost me when I could have had bigger bets out.

My question is, in these situations when or how high would the TC need to be to justify raising after a loss/push or raising more then a parlay?

I am considering letting myself do this under the following conditions. I am about to leave, there is no heat at all, or I will leave after the shoe.

Are there any studies on this or rule of thumb? Comments? Suggestions?

Thanks Illusion

[Don Schlesinger]

> My question is, in these situations when or
> how high would the TC need to be to justify
> raising after a loss/push or raising more
> than a parlay?

In the gran scheme of things that will get you thrown out faster than just about anything, rasing more than a parlay (bet jumping) is at the top of the list. In my book, the right time to do it is never.

Raising after a loss can be made to look like steaming, if you do it just once and don't expect to be staying very long.

> I am considering letting myself do this
> under the following conditions. I am about
> to leave, there is no heat at all, or I will
> leave after the shoe.

You may say there is no heat at all, but that doesn't mean you aren't be watched from above They watch the tape, and next time back, you get nailed. ALWAYS assume you are being watched, even as the pit boss has his back to you.

> Are there any studies on this or rule of
> thumb? Comments? Suggestions?

You will get different answers from different people. I play cautiously. That's why I've lasted 30 years. Others burn out places and games and get thrown out all over the world. They wear their barrings as a badge of honor, and figure there are enough places in the world to always be able to play somewhere. To me, the world is getting smaller. But, to each his own.

Don

[Norm Wattenberger]

I'd increase my bet. Even, no particularly, if a PB was standing at the table. Just don't sneak it up. Snap the extra chips up with an expression of futility, exasperation or a laugh - whatever fits your act. It is not an unusual act for a gambler to shake things up after a string of pushes and losses. One thing. I'd not raise if an obvious pile of small cards came out in the previous hand. The pit may not be able to count. But they aren't so blind as to miss a six card dealer hand.

[Illusion]

I thought about this a bit and I am going to agree with you on this, I'll my two big bets or how ever many big bets this time, but there won?t be a next time.

Where if I stay at the small bet, I'll make 24 small bets the next time I am back witch will equal what I missed out on this trip.

Here's another question, maybe better for McDuff to answer. If I lose at one unit count goes up raise to two units, lose count goes up raise to four units etc... Would this look like a reverse martingale, or would it be too much of a risky play.

I would use this some where I've never been before play the shoe/45 min then leave for the next casino.

[Don Schlesinger]

> Here's another question, maybe better for
> McDuff to answer. If I lose at one unit
> count goes up raise to two units, lose count
> goes up raise to four units etc... Would
> this look like a reverse martingale, or
> would it be too much of a risky play.

The first time, it would look like you were steaming (chasing your losses). And, it's not a reverse Martingale, it IS a Martingale, where you keep doubling your bet after a loss, until you finally win or go broke.

The problem is, what happens the next time that you lose three or four hands in a row, but, because the count is negative, you don't double up at all? That's what eventually gets you into trouble.

> I would use this somewhere I've never been
> before, play the shoe/45 min, then leave for
> the next casino.

You can try, but pay attention to what I've written above.

Don

[bfbagain]

that I use, among others, that I don't believe has ever been written of. I've been using it a long time, with success, if you measure success through longevity, i.e., the toleration factor, even though it is pretty blatant.

A caveat or two: I know Don has taken a great deal of heat, scorn, criticism etc., on this very specific issue, and yes, believe it or not, his recommendations certainly has merit, and in many cases should be followed. In fact, if you want to keep the welcome mat out in a place where comps are important to you, along with a decent game, then it should only be a rare occasion (which is why you could, if you chose to) where you would deviate from Don's advice, e.g., how to handle bet increases.

But there is also, and which should be many, times where your primary objective is to get the money FIRST, and hopefully, you'll be able to do it AND keep longevity alive. It is with this in mind that I now offer some real world techniques.

My explanation initially will appear a little convoluted, so bear with me. I'm a blackchip player, but let me tell you a little secret, blackchip players must be flexible if they're to remain blackchip[+] players, which means that "when in Rome"......., you have to know where your at. So, for starters, let's assume you're in a place (for me, that allows good high action) where you're not staying, has a good game, and you're there for the money, which usually means (for me) it's a hit and run scenario. I buy in for the minimum, so that means I'll buy in for 10 black. Sometimes, it will only be for 5 black. Now here is where I'm going to get convoluted because I know not everyone plays black, and my technique works at all betting levels. In fact, it works even better at lower levels.. :-) But you have to handle the buy-ins differently. For example, let's say you're going to play at a $10 minimum table; What should you buy in for? If you know you normally play green, but want to keep the option of betting the $10 min. open, in a neg. count, then I might buy-in for $200, depending on where I'm at, the game played, the toleration level etc., but for sake of argument, let's say everything is ok (for good conditions). I'd buy in for $200, and specifically ask for half and half. If you play two hands (which in most cases you should be...I'm not going to get into that now), you can see that you may have to buy in relatively soon. That's ok! Especially if you normally play green. Now you're losing some hands, and your chip pile is nearly gone, but the count is going up and up, and if you HAD the chips in front of you, and didn't care about cover, you'd be jumping the bets, right.

Here's what you do. MONEY PLAYS!. That's right. Take the cash out and throw it on the table. Even if their policy is to change it up,. have them change it up in black. I'm assuming that the count would justify at least 4 green here or more. What this does is allows you to jump your bets. Under (the pit, surveillance..) everyone's belief (if you're a gambler...and that's what you are, aren't you. :-) ) that you're merely steaming.

Now let's assume you win these bets. They pay off in chips, and they're now BLACK chips. If the count still justifies large bets, keep them out there. You're golden, at this point, because it still is too soon for anyone, including surveillance to start to track you as you weren't betting black to start with, so you can still play. You can even drop down to green.

Another variation on the same theme, is the diminishing chip pile of DIFFERENT COLORS.

An example: This time you buy in for $500, with 2 black, 2 green, and 1 in red. You start out, like above, with say, 2 hands of $20 (4 red). The play is back and forth, you win, count goes up, you parlay, etc.. But now you run into a little neg. variance, and the red chips have been replaced by green (but you still have some red). You know you want to be able to throw the black out given the right opportunity. What you want to be aware of, is the breakdown of the chip colors in front of you. Especially if the count is starting to rise. Now the barber pole bet is ok here, but that's not the real reason you're putting it out there, you're getting rid of those chips, so the only chips left are black. Now, (and it's not important if you win the previous barber pole bet or not) the count zooms up. It's better if you didn't win the previous bet for this to work, but it still is ok. Now you throw the black chips out there (and/or all of them) and now you have 2 very large bets from very small bets (providing the count justified them). AND it will LOOK like you're a gambler!

Let me explain something here. There's a lot discussion on the merits of being backed off, whether 1) it's a badge of honor, 2) shows that you're a threat to the casino's bottom line, i.e., you must be playing a winning game, and a myriad of other rationales that people provide to claim that they're a professional player, a winning player, a knowledge player, what have you.

I won't get into these motivations as they're not really important. Why? Because if you're tossed out from every store in town it doesn't matter if you're a superstar BJ player. You can't play, period. At the same time, if you NEVER get heat, you're probably NOT playing a winning game. So there is some MERIT to this backoff/barring concept. But it is a little overblown, in that you NEED to know WHERE you're PLAYING, and learn the TOLERANCE levels of WHERE you're at.

I play a winning game. I'm pretty good. I don't consider backoffs a badge of honor. Yet, to this date, I'm still welcome (at this one particular store), and have been for a long time, even after (stupidly I might add) having a session (a dig out...the worse kind, prime for backoffs, and this place thinks its pretty sharp) once that lasted longer than 10 hrs where I was the only one on camera. I couldn't have ever gotten away with that if I was a red/green player. There's another example where the game of blackjack (high stakes)is like being in a different world from the world of playing red/green.

You can use the above techniques at all levels. Believe me, buying in for $400 black, playing two hands of $200, losing buying in for $400 again (without pissing anyone off) losing again, having the count go up and up (as in a DD game), and throwing $800 in cash on two hands (total of $1600, 1-8 spread, if justified) WORKS. Without getting tossed. It works even better when you win the bets, and now keep betting the purple, or yellow. Although I don't like them paying me in yellow, (or....) sometimes I have to live with. :-)

One final comment on playing, where any strategy that requires (TO WIN) obvious bet JUMPS, is to be employed: This, I can't STRESS ENOUGH!

Always LIMIT the TIME you play to 45 minutes or LESS! PERIOD!

Keeping it to 30 minutes is even better. Granted, you can get away with an hour, and longer at shoe games, but if you're going to play high stakes, you're probably still better off keeping it to 60 minutes or less, even if you're playing where comps exist. Many little sessions still add up in time.

I hope this helps a little.

cheers
bfb

[bfbagain]

My candid camera comment is well beyond the statute of limitions. :-)

cheers
bfb

[Illusion]

[Norm Wattenberger]

Great post. One thing I would add. To keep the right mix of chips in front of you, you might want to pocket chips on occasion. If you
lose the chips in front of you, you can go in your pocket for either a low or high bet. I think this is acceptable as long as you make it very obvious that you are pocketing chips. A player that sneaks chips into his pockets is a counter (and is probably not fooling anybody.) A player that counts some chips and puts them obviously in his pocket is a follower of John Patrick.

[bfbagain]

And yes, I was going to mention a variation of this...

To keep the right mix of chips in front of you, you might want to pocket chips on occasion. If you lose the chips in front of you, you can go in your pocket for either a low or high bet. I think this is acceptable as long as you make it very obvious that you are pocketing chips. A player that sneaks chips into his pockets is a counter (and is probably not fooling anybody.) A player that counts some chips and puts them obviously in his pocket is a follower of John Patrick.

Although I wasn't thinking of the Patrick connection. :-) Nice comments though.

Some more comments (but not directed at Norm :-) )

As in almost all play today, where cover is needed, and really, for the most part, if you're playing red just about all of this advice is moot....but I'm coming back to that in a sec..developing an act, a persona if you will, is a prerequisite to longevity.

Think of it this way, 1) Critters in HL salons know that not everyone is a high stakes counter. 2) You can't be backing everyone off who wins. 3) If you're betting 2-$400 a hand, having wins in the 5K+ range is not all uncommon. What, anyone who wins 10K in HL salons are going to be backed off? I don't think so. 4) So who's going to be the bogeyman today?

The point in all this is that a person has to be, what they EXPECT him to be. And that's different for each and every person. Is it easier for someone who is older to sit down and play a thousand a hand from someone who is 30 years old, no matter how well-off they may appear? Of course! And for the same reason that asians get a pass. They get a pass, because they're CRAZY gamblers, where it's not uncommon to jump their bets all over the place.

So in order to get away with the kind of spreads you need to win, you have to fit what their expectation is. Now, some may say, that's all well and good, but the eye is going to get you sooner or later. I say....maybe, maybe not. There are so many things to consider. Why was I backed off from a two-bit joint, me, a supposedly high stakes (and practiced) counter, playing low green to pass some time, really, losing a grand total of......$300 at a place you would almost have to PAY me to play, and yet, they backed me off and put me in their system in 20 minutes! 20 minutes! Why? And I WAS LEAVING! They didn't do it while I was playing.

Because I didn't fit THEIR profile. What else could it be, when I was able to continue to play, at "real" high stakes, right in the same neighborhood.

No, you have to develop a persona, and act the part, period. These are just some guidelines that effect longevity, but they are important.

As for red/green players, the time to learn this stuff is now. You don't NEED to USE it now, but you need to learn it nonetheless.

cheers
bfb

[Table Max]

get out my "rich old asian" disguise so I can *really* go crazy!

[bfbagain]

everyone knows now that you're not asian. :-)

get out my "rich old asian" disguise so I can *really* go crazy!

although playing dice control craps has probably made you rich. :-)

Ah, disguises. One of my favorite pices of movie dialogue goes like this. She says, "stay in the shadows", he says, "hey, everyone's going to be looking in the shadows", she says, "where's the place to be?" He says, "the place to be is in the sun." [taken from the movie "Heist"]

I take it a little further. My approach is simple.

Hide in the open, as that's where they won't be looking.

It's the best piece of "cover" camouflage advice I can give. Think about it.

cheers
bfb

[Norm Wattenberger]