Heat in 6/5 SD

**Joss** · 11-11-2014, 08:47 PM

I was looking around and saw a SD game with a mildly beatable side bet. The problem of course is that the base game is terrible and would still require a decent sized spread to make the game worthwhile. I'm sure the answer is "it depends", but in general what kind of heat do people get in these games? I'm not real experienced and could see it going either way, the game gets ignored because the house "knows" it's not worth counting, or a PC could flip out over someone spreading 1-8 in a SD game. Any thoughts and/or experiences on approaching a game like this would be much appreciated. Thanks.

**moo321** · 11-12-2014, 06:57 AM

This may be too much info.

You can definitely get heated up at 6 to 5. And, it's much harder to beat than you think.

**Joss** · 11-12-2014, 11:19 AM

Ok, thanks for the response. Would a better question have been simply asking about 6/5 heat or is it frowned upon to post about games outside of typical counting plays?

**tiny** · 11-12-2014, 11:33 AM

You can get sizable heat depending on the casino and whether you have received heat there in the past or are in databases. I had a team mate kicked off a 6/5 single deck (that only dealt one round) because he was listed as a counter in the database that they used.

There was no way you could beat that game counting however, when you're already labeled as an advantage player, some casinos will back you off regardless of the game because they consider you "intelligent" and therefore capable of beating them in other ways (even if they have no idea how you're doing it). Some casinos simply don't want to take the risk of allowing an "undesirable" player on their floor, regardless of the game they are playing.

**moo321** · 11-12-2014, 12:58 PM

I wasn't concerned about the game itself as the sidebet discussion.

**Three** · 11-21-2014, 06:24 AM

If there are really juicy games to be hawked you probably won't see much heat on a 6:5 game. They used to tolerate spreading min to max at 6:5 but those days are over in most places. 6:5 also has a better counting system designed for that game. It is a level 3 count humorously named after the patron saint of lost causes. The ace is almost a useless card in 6:5. There are only 4 of 12 counted cards that have a tag of magnitude 1 and the ace is one of them. The count is an unbalanced count.

http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=23369

Mildly beatable side bet doesn't sound very encouraging.

**Joss** · 11-22-2014, 07:57 PM

I love the St.Jude name, lol. I doubt anyone is getting rich off this game but it's the first I have found and started to look at on my own so it's an interesting project, at least for me. Thanks for the info.

**Nikky_Flash** · 11-23-2014, 08:09 PM

cool link three , how come me and moo are the only people with avatars on this thread ?
everyone on bjinfo had avatars... monkeys , gorrillas , dogs , its like a barnyard explosion zoo over there , bjforum , its like 50 /50 ,

**moo321** · 11-24-2014, 09:27 AM

Originally Posted by Tthree

If there are really juicy games to be hawked you probably won't see much heat on a 6:5 game. They used to tolerate spreading min to max at 6:5 but those days are over in most places. 6:5 also has a better counting system designed for that game. It is a level 3 count humorously named after the patron saint of lost causes. The ace is almost a useless card in 6:5. There are only 4 of 12 counted cards that have a tag of magnitude 1 and the ace is one of them. The count is an unbalanced count.

http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=23369

Mildly beatable side bet doesn't sound very encouraging.

Zen and unbalanced Zen are both improvements over Hi-Lo.

**LVBJ** · 12-10-2014, 05:08 PM

You'd be surprise at the heat in some unbeatable games. You know that they are unbeatable, but some pit are unaware and treat it like a vulnerable game. Unless you are hole card playing I would leave 6/5 alone. When I first got started a few years ago I knew that 6/5 was a losing game but I knew that with the right spread that it was beatable. I figured a 1 to 6 spread should do it since 3:2 SD demands a 1 to 4 so 1 to 6 sounded good to me (based on nothing). After losing $5,000 of playing it in a few days I decided to actually look up the correct winnable spread. It was something like 1 to 12 or 1 to 16 (I forget), something that was completely impractical. That was a $5,000 lesson I could have got for free if I wasn't lazy and just looked it up to begin with.