Was This a Suspicious Move?

[Casino Kid]

After a break I was looking to play again. There was no action at the bj tables aside from the CSM's, and I walked by one table where there were over 4 decks in the discard tray. At that point I felt my best option was to play heads up on a fresh shoe and wong out if necessary as there were no players at shoe games and therefore no tables to backcount. I said to the dealer "you're pretty close to finishing that shoe, huh?" She said yes, just a couple hands away. I said "I'll play if you shuffle" figuring that they'd rather have people playing than not. It had been at least 10 minutes since any of the shoe dealers had dealt a hand. She seemed hesitant and then checked with a supervisor (not the PB - person in question was wearing a football jersey as opposed to the gentleman with the suit) who then gave her the OK to shuffle.

Was it unwise for me to do this? I feel like recreational players are superstitious about fresh shoes and I know you can request a shuffle, so it didn't seem like my request was out of the ordinary or would end up involving staff above the dealer. No one watched me closely or anything, I feel like the heat is pretty minimal at this location - I saw other people jumping bets pretty heavily, switching between 1 and 2 spots - but even so I didn't want or expect to attract any attention from the pit.

What would you have done in my situation or how have you approached it in the past? Continue taking a break and wait for other people to finish out the mostly dealt out shoes even if it would've been awhile?

[Aslan]

After a break I was looking to play again. There was no action at the bj tables aside from the CSM's, and I walked by one table where there were over 4 decks in the discard tray. At that point I felt my best option was to play heads up on a fresh shoe and wong out if necessary as there were no players at shoe games and therefore no tables to backcount. I said to the dealer "you're pretty close to finishing that shoe, huh?" She said yes, just a couple hands away. I said "I'll play if you shuffle" figuring that they'd rather have people playing than not. It had been at least 10 minutes since any of the shoe dealers had dealt a hand. She seemed hesitant and then checked with a supervisor (not the PB - person in question was wearing a football jersey as opposed to the gentleman with the suit) who then gave her the OK to shuffle.

Was it unwise for me to do this? I feel like recreational players are superstitious about fresh shoes and I know you can request a shuffle, so it didn't seem like my request was out of the ordinary or would end up involving staff above the dealer. No one watched me closely or anything, I feel like the heat is pretty minimal at this location - I saw other people jumping bets pretty heavily, switching between 1 and 2 spots - but even so I didn't want or expect to attract any attention from the pit.

What would you have done in my situation or how have you approached it in the past? Continue taking a break and wait for other people to finish out the mostly dealt out shoes even if it would've been awhile?

I don't think it matters one way or the other. But I have a related question? When you walk up to a table featuring a 6-deck game and 4 decks have already been played, assuming 80% pen, what are the odds that you are walking into a neutral or positive count?

[ZeeBabar]

I always ask for a new deck(s) and most of the time, they have no objection.

[Casino Kid]

I don't think it matters one way or the other. But I have a related question? When you walk up to a table featuring a 6-deck game and 4 decks have already been played, assuming 80% pen, what are the odds that you are walking into a neutral or positive count?

Wouldn't the probability of a positive count be the same as a negative? Either way I'd have no information to inform any decision other than flat betting/BS. I don't have my books here with the charts that show the percentage of time the count is between whatever levels but I'd guess there's an over 50% chance of it being between -1 and +1. I'm obviously missing your point...

[Casino Kid]

most of the time, they have no objection.

what happens the other times?

[muckz]

I don't think it matters one way or the other. But I have a related question? When you walk up to a table featuring a 6-deck game and 4 decks have already been played, assuming 80% pen, what are the odds that you are walking into a neutral or positive count?

>50%, unless you believe that normal players tend to leave after seeing an abnormal amount of X's and A's. In my experience though, when there are a lot of X's and A's they tend to believe the shoe is hot and only getting hotter.

[Three]

>50%, unless you believe that normal players tend to leave after seeing an abnormal amount of X's and A's. In my experience though, when there are a lot of X's and A's they tend to believe the shoe is hot and only getting hotter.

Ploppies believe the table is empty near the end of the shoe because the shoe was such a bad shoe it busted out everyone at the table. They would never play the dregs of such an unlucky shoe. It happens all the time.

[Casino Kid]

>50%, unless you believe that normal players tend to leave after seeing an abnormal amount of X's and A's. In my experience though, when there are a lot of X's and A's they tend to believe the shoe is hot and only getting hotter.

What's your reasoning for your saying over 50%? In this case it was the 2nd half of a football game and maybe everybody felt like drifting over to the bar (no drinks on the floor in this establishment). There weren't many players period. I read a book encouraging a BS only strategy which told the readers to leave after losing 3 or 4 hands in a row, that wouldn't matter if the hands were lost by busting on six low cards or one low and two high.

PS - big fan of L'Etranger by Camus, I like your signature.

[muckz]

Interesting, I tend to think just the opposite....that the dealer drew lots of little cards to his/her stiff hands, wiping out the table and the players either lost all their money or just got frustrated and left. But, it's all just speculation. I would never act on such an assumption.

Yes, I was just commenting on my opinion that it is less likely for a player to leave a shoe that has already seen the high cards compared to one that has yet to see them.

[muckz]

What's your reasoning for your saying over 50%? In this case it was the 2nd half of a football game and maybe everybody felt like drifting over to the bar (no drinks on the floor in this establishment). There weren't many players period. I read a book encouraging a BS only strategy which told the readers to leave after losing 3 or 4 hands in a row, that wouldn't matter if the hands were lost by busting on six low cards or one low and two high.

PS - big fan of L'Etranger by Camus, I like your signature.

I took a sim of card 208/312.
TC 0 frequency 16%, 42% for +/-.
If normal players do not have any patterns of wonging out of strictly high or low counts then the results should hold that 58% the shoe is at least neutral.

This pattern would follow at any depth, the frequencies would change due to a larger denominator.

Only thing that would change it is if normal players consistently wonged out of strictly negative or positive shoes only.


On another note, everyone could use a dose of Modernist lit. once in awhile.

[stopgambling]

Why bother asking for a shuffle with only about 1 deck left .
We are not the same as ploppies ,they can jump bets and switch to 2 hands whenever cause they dont do it with the count. Counter/A.P. must use more caution and think and plan ahead all of their action in order to profit. yes ,knowing the store's tolerance also helps but i would very likely not do it but have done it a few times . I did regret it for how little advantage it got me .The risk of getting id was not worth it. That is just me , I am not giving you advice but sharing with you with what others counters think.

[Aslan]

Interesting, I tend to think just the opposite....that the dealer drew lots of little cards to his/her stiff hands, wiping out the table and the players either lost all their money or just got frustrated and left. But, it's all just speculation. I would never act on such an assumption.

Oftentimes I see others at my table leave just as we are getting to a plus count, and I think to myself how this is made to order.

[Aslan]

Wouldn't the probability of a positive count be the same as a negative? Either way I'd have no information to inform any decision other than flat betting/BS. I don't have my books here with the charts that show the percentage of time the count is between whatever levels but I'd guess there's an over 50% chance of it being between -1 and +1. I'm obviously missing your point...

I don't know the answer, but if the odds are what you say, with only about 8 hands left to even fewer with less than 80% pen, it does not seem too risky to min bet to the next shuffle. But like I said, I don't see much of a downside to asking for a reshuffle either.