Additionally, here's the analysis of the advantages of playing 3 spots instead of 2 when you're playing with one other player. Also, near the end of this post, you'll find the 3 spot analysis of heads-up play.

Playing 2 spots vs one other player (3 players total + dealer = 4):

sec/hand 27.00
hands/min 2.22
hands/hr 133.33

cards/hand 2.70
players/round 4.00 (you, you, the other player, and the dealer)
cards/round 10.80
cards/shoe 240.00
rounds/shoe 22.22

shuffle time (sec) 100.00

Total shoe time
sec/shoe= 600.00
sec/shuffle 100.00
sec/tot shoe 700.00
min/tot shoe 11.67
shoes/min 0.09
shoes/hr 5.14
hands/hr 114.29

This number times 2 spots equals 228.58 hands/hr.

If we play 3 spots, you get.....

sec/hand 35.00
hands/min 1.71
hands/hr 102.86

cards/hand 2.70
players/round 5.00
cards/round 13.50
cards/shoe 240.00
rounds/shoe 17.78

shuffle time (sec) 100.00

Total shoe time
sec/shoe= 622.22
sec/shuffle 100.00
sec/tot shoe 722.22
min/tot shoe 12.04
shoes/min 0.08
shoes/hr 4.98
hands/hr 88.62

88.62 times 3 equals 265.86. This is a 16.3% increase in win rate vs playing just 2 spots. This is using the standard table set that was created by Stanford as he was watching a few card counters, a few very slow people, but mostly just average-speed ploppies, I assume. So let's run everything again assuming any subsequent hands you have take you only half the time. So we subtract 3.5 seconds/round from the first data set above, and we subtract 7 seconds/round from the second data set. Then we have the following:

sec/hand 23.50
hands/min 2.55
hands/hr 153.19

cards/hand 2.70
players/round 4.00
cards/round 10.80
cards/shoe 240.00
rounds/shoe 22.22

shuffle time (sec) 100.00

Total shoe time
sec/shoe= 522.22
sec/shuffle 100.00
sec/tot shoe 622.22
min/tot shoe 10.37
shoes/min 0.10
shoes/hr 5.79
hands/hr 128.57

128.57 x 2 = 257.14, which is actually slightly more profitable than a single-spot heads up play (252 hands/hr).

and......

sec/hand 27.00
hands/min 2.22
hands/hr 133.33

cards/hand 2.70
players/round 5.00
cards/round 13.50
cards/shoe 240.00
rounds/shoe 17.78

shuffle time (sec) 100.00

Total shoe time
sec/shoe= 480.00
sec/shuffle 100.00
sec/tot shoe 580.00
min/tot shoe 9.67
shoes/min 0.10
shoes/hr 6.21
hands/hr 110.34

This means that playing 3 spots quickly (110.34 x 3 = 331.02 hands/hr) will earn 28.7% more money (331.02 / 257.14 = 1.287) than just playing 2 spots quickly.

Just for kicks:
3 spot analysis of a heads-up game, slow and fast:

sec/hand 27.00
hands/min 2.22
hands/hr 133.33

cards/hand 2.70
players/round 4.00 (you, yourself, you, and the dealer)
cards/round 10.80
cards/shoe 240.00
rounds/shoe 22.22

shuffle time (sec) 100.00

Total shoe time
sec/shoe= 600.00
sec/shuffle 100.00
sec/tot shoe 700.00
min/tot shoe 11.67
shoes/min 0.09
shoes/hr 5.14
hands/hr 114.29

This times 3 equals 342.87 hands/hr, which is 36% more profitable than 1-spot heads-up play, and 11.3% more profitable than playing 2 spots heads-up.

Given the increased heat from playing 3 spots, I think I'll start playing just 2 spots at all positive counts from now on, unless anyone has found any errors with these calculations.

Also, here are some ideas floating around in my head:

1. In a single-deck where the count can skyrocket or plummet on consecutive hands (or even the same hand), you want to play fewer spots, so you can have more time to gradually raise your bet. In a shoe game, this probably doesn't matter nearly as much. This goes against my previous post, but I'm not sure to what extent.

2. In a single deck game you want to play fewer spots becuase more hands means more variance. Playing 1 spot, you get cards #1 and #3. But playing 3 spots, you get cards #1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7. By that time, who knows how bad the count got! SW himself said pretty much the same thing in PBJ. This also goes against what I said earlier, but I doubt the change in variance is so huge as to change the RoR to such an extent to lower your bets enough to negate the advantage of playing more spots. But alas, I've not done that math, and by golly I'm not going to! (gotta watch a movie with my wife).

Cheers,

Prize Car