The Prince: Game choice

[The Prince]

In BJA, Don,you advise against playing the one-deck game. Somewhat disappointing to me, as I had planned on playing a lot at the one-deck tables. You then go on to describe the mechanics of playing the 2-Deck game, but don?t mention anything on it?s favorability (at least not that I?ve read so far). I was kind of hoping that 2-Deck could be my game of preference, but wanted to know whether it was profitable or not. It seems that there is no reason it shouldn?t be, except that many Double Deckers suffer from poor penetration. What are your thoughts on the two deck game, and how it stacks up against other forms of play (4-Deck play all, 6 deck back-count most specifically)?
By the way, what is the cheating ?problem?, you refer to in single deck? Just casino cheating in general?

Thanks

The Prince

[Don Schlesinger]

> In BJA, Don,you advise against playing the
> one-deck game. Somewhat disappointing to me,
> as I had planned on playing a lot at the
> one-deck tables.

Some of my remarks are slanted towards higher-stakes play. SD has almost never been the best choice for, say, highly bankrolled teams. Nowadays, Sd games are all but useless to the traditional counter, because of 6:5, d10, poor pen, h17, or all of the above.

> You then go on to describe
> the mechanics of playing the 2-Deck game,
> but don?t mention anything on it?s [its]
> favorability (at least not that I?ve read so
> far).

What about all of the Chapter 10 DD charts and the SCORE analyses of DD games, in Chapter 9??

> I was kind of hoping that 2-Deck could
> be my game of preference, but wanted to know
> whether it was profitable or not.

Hand-dealt games, in general, have deteriorated very badly in recent years. When you do find a rare, good one, it is usually the most closely watched game in the casino -- witness Bellagio. There are still a couple of decent two-deckers on the Strip, but, you'll have to keep your sessions short there, and you will undoubtedly wear out your welcome if you play them on a regular basis.

You don't mention what stakes you play for.

> It seems
> that there is no reason it shouldn?t be,
> except that many Double Deckers suffer from
> poor penetration.

See above.

> What are your thoughts on
> the two deck game, and how it stacks up
> against other forms of play (4-Deck play
> all, 6 deck back-count most specifically)?

The 4-deck game is virtually nonexistent. Because of all the comments made above, were I playing in Las Vegas right now, I'd gravitate towards the dozen or more 6-deck, s17, das, ls, rsa games, with 0.26% house edge off the top. there was once a time when, in LV, I'd play DD exclusively. That time, alas, has passed.

> By the way, what is the cheating ?problem?,
> you refer to in single deck? Just casino
> cheating in general?

To my knowledge, the only discussion of "cheating" in the whole book is on pp. 208-209, where I discuss preferential shuffling and describe it as cheating.

Don

[The Prince]

> Some of my remarks are slanted towards
> higher-stakes play. SD has almost never been
> the best choice for, say, highly bankrolled
> teams. Nowadays, Sd games are all but
> useless to the traditional counter, because
> of 6:5, d10, poor pen, h17, or all of the
> above.

Thank you for your reply! Unfortunately, high stakes play is something that I can only dream about as of now =). Whatever my winnings would be, they probably wouldn't overly concern the casino. How would this change my favorability for the SD game? How much more can you get away with if you aren't laying down the big bucks?

I guess I'm confused, also, because a quick look through trackjack yields a decent number of games with good returns. By looking at the charts, in SD games, even good rules with bad penetration or bad rules with good penetration yield decent returns with a 1-3 or 1-4 spread. For example, a 1-4 spread in a H17, D10 game with 39 cards dealt surpasses all SCORE's backcounting the six deck s17 DAS LS with 5/6 pen. Or even a 1-3 spread in the SD tops all of the same six deck game with 4.5/6 pen. And there are a good number of SD games with better rules than the just mentioned, though some might be spread far apart. All of this combined with the added comfort of playing the SD game would seem to make it desirable.

> What about all of the Chapter 10 DD charts
> and the SCORE analyses of DD games, in
> Chapter 9??

Hope I wasn't taken as accusing your book of neglect! Sorry if my remark was offensive. It wasn't meant that way. If it meant anything, it was merely a transition into inquiring about the DD game.
I did indeed look at the Chapter 9 charts, (I plead guilty to not taking a very close look at Chapter 10 Charts as of yet. Forgiveness please!) But, I guess whenever a game is specifically commended in words by someone who knows what they're talking about, it is even more reassuring than just relying on my own perusal of charts. Even more so because I might neglect factors beyond just the mathematical edge, (casino heat, ability to get away with spreads mentioned in the charts).

> Hand-dealt games, in general, have
> deteriorated very badly in recent years.
> When you do find a rare, good one, it is
> usually the most closely watched game in the
> casino -- witness Bellagio. There are still
> a couple of decent two-deckers on the Strip,
> but, you'll have to keep your sessions short
> there, and you will undoubtedly wear out
> your welcome if you play them on a regular
> basis.

> You don't mention what stakes you play for.

Pretty low right now!

> See above.

> The 4-deck game is virtually nonexistent.
> Because of all the comments made above, were
> I playing in Las Vegas right now, I'd
> gravitate towards the dozen or more 6-deck,
> s17, das, ls, rsa games, with 0.26% house
> edge off the top. there was once a time
> when, in LV, I'd play DD exclusively. That
> time, alas, has passed.

> To my knowledge, the only discussion of
> "cheating" in the whole book is on
> pp. 208-209, where I discuss preferential
> shuffling and describe it as cheating.

> Don

Thanks again!

The Prince