What to do in this extreme situation?

[BJGenius007]

This has never happened to me before. I appreciate the input from you guys.

I had a shoe that is supposed to be extremely good, turning to a nightmare.

It is a 6D game. Running count turned to +20 after 1.75 decks played, and fluctuated between +18 and +30 through the rest of shoe. It is my favorite setting. Ace side count is slightly rich but not by much. Seven and eight side count are neutral. I had max bet out in the past 9 hands. (Normally if some side counts are off, I will begin to discount my max bet after 5 straight losses.) But I only won one hand of nine. Surrender twice and lost six times. Every time I lost, I took out my wallet and handed the dealer another $400. After doing such thing five times, I saw the floor manager and an unfamiliar face come to watch my play besides the boss. There are about 3 hands left for the shoe and TC is double digits. What would you do if you are in my position? I can pretend running out of the money and leave, play as usual, or pretending super mad and have my super bet from my 2nd wallet. Normally if there is no one watching, I will abandon my usual 16 to 1 spread, and have my super bet out.

[Meistro123]

There's no point keeping an ace side count in a 6 deck shoe. Keeping a seven and eight side count is not a good idea either, there is no real gain and you are probably just going to mess up your main count. Keep it simple.

see 'can side counting make u a super counter'

http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/sdcnt.htm

"What would you do if you are in my position?"

Play out the last three hands. Bet whatever you had previously determined through analysis you would bet in this situation.

[Meistro123]

Never put more than 1% of your bankroll in play at the start of a round.

[ZenMaster_Flash]

"Never put more than 1% of your bankroll in play at the start of a round."

I can only assume that Meistro meant 0.1% and not 1%.

I also assume that he meant to say the first round of a shoe.

[BJGenius007]

I can only assume that Meistro meant 0.1% and not 1%.

I also assume that he meant to say the first round of a shoe.

I think he means he consider it is the start of a shoe after only 1.75 decks played. But I disagree. TC = +29/4.25 = +6.8. I will have my max bet out even it is very early of the shoe.

[Bigdaddy]

I feel your pain - multiple re-buys are awkward and frustrating. I like showing up to a table with a lot of chips to minimize these situations. Maybe start with a buy-in at the craps table and go from there....

[marriedputter]

This has never happened to me before. I appreciate the input from you guys.

I had a shoe that is supposed to be extremely good, turning to a nightmare.

It is a 6D game. Running count turned to +20 after 1.75 decks played, and fluctuated between +18 and +30 through the rest of shoe. It is my favorite setting. Ace side count is slightly rich but not by much. Seven and eight side count are neutral. I had max bet out in the past 9 hands. (Normally if some side counts are off, I will begin to discount my max bet after 5 straight losses.) But I only won one hand of nine. Surrender twice and lost six times. Every time I lost, I took out my wallet and handed the dealer another $400. After doing such thing five times, I saw the floor manager and an unfamiliar face come to watch my play besides the boss. There are about 3 hands left for the shoe and TC is double digits. What would you do if you are in my position? I can pretend running out of the money and leave, play as usual, or pretending super mad and have my super bet from my 2nd wallet. Normally if there is no one watching, I will abandon my usual 16 to 1 spread, and have my super bet out.

The 16 to 1 spread is probably what got the floor to watch.

As far as your playing, I go through it all the time. More often than not, that is exactly how my night starts. In no time at all, I am down $1000 or $2000. Then I make a comeback and get it all back plus some (though this aggregate is normally spread out over different casinos). Sometimes I just go deeper in the red. That's the game. You could be a computer playing, but nothing is going to stop those times that the dealer just gets all the good cards. Many hands are just meant to be lost.
In your case though, I am highly suspicious of the accuracy of your count. Tracking aces, sevens and eights along with the main count? Dang! And I thought ZMF had a busy mind at the table!
I am one of the few people on here that is open to the idea of side counts at a 6D table, but I don't think that I would ever go that far. If you're absolutely positively sure that you are not making errors, then don't worry. If you are really able to track that many cards and apply that information usefully, then you don't need a 16 to 1 spread. If your count is accurate, than sooner or later you are going to have a much bigger problem. You will be winning way too often (which incidentally is what my current issue is). A super strong count + A strong spread = getting a life sentence from the casino. You may be able to buy some time since they may not be able to figure out what you're doing. But if you win too much and too often, they may not even care what you're doing. You may still be judged a threat.
Summarized: Make sure that your count is good, then tone down your spread. After that, sit back and watch the natural laws of mathematics take a seat next to you and work their magic.

[Meistro123]

I can only assume that Meistro meant 0.1% and not 1%.

I also assume that he meant to say the first round of a shoe.

No, I mean never put more than 1% of your bankroll in play at the start of a round. Or, put another way, you want to have at least 100 max bets or 200 max bets if you are playing 2 hands.

[Sharky]

just bad luck, man...if you are sure you are accurate on your count, you should get it back and then some...just assume it's a temp loan (to the casino)

as for the pit watching...it is not unusual for them to watch after multiple hands of hundreds played....unless, of course, you are in the HL pit...which you don't indicate you were....you should have kept firing away at max bet $400 (assuming count dictated so as you mention)...albeit expensive, you actually had them right where you wanted them...you were just "chasing your losses"...of course, win or lose the remaining shoe, you obviously - as i recently learned everyone here is an expert - you don't go back to min bet...just take your win/loss and LEAVE!

btw, 1-16 is child's play in a 6d game....i spread 1-40, but, of course, i eventually get tossed....not to worry, just go to the next place....i have even returned within weeks looking different and playing very short, high spread, sessions

GOOD LUCK!

[ZenMaster_Flash]

"I mean never put more than 1% of your bankroll in play at the start of a round.
Or, put another way, you want to have at least 100 max bets or 200 max bets
if you are playing 2 hands."

So, if your bankroll is $10,000, then clearly 1% is $100.
You are saying that you want to have "100 Max Bets" in your pocket.
So, spreading $100 to $1,200 you need 100 X $1,200 = $120,000.
Please re-read and edit your post.

[Meistro123]

So, if your bankroll is $10,000, then clearly 1% is $100.

Correct.

You are saying that you want to have "100 Max Bets" in your pocket.

No, that is not what I said. I said you want (at least) 100 max bets in your bankroll. I use the term bankroll to represent all your funds which can be tapped for blackjack (potentially your networth, potentially not, depends). I use the term 'trip roll' to refer to the amount of money you bring to the casino. 30 max bets should suffice for most trip roll purposes.

So, spreading $100 to $1,200 you need 100 X $1,200 = $120,000.

Yes $120,000 is a reasonable bankroll requirement to make a single $1200 wager.

[ZenMaster_Flash]

Other than myself, I am very sure that not more than a few
posters here have actual cash bankrolls that are 6 figures.

In keeping with the standard Kelly Criterion -- with a 2% advantage
(where I set MY "max bet") I would be betting Half Kelly for a R.O.R.
[Risk of Ruin] of approx. 5% That is much more aggressive than most
(real) pro players want to be, but reasonable nonetheless, as "Risk",
in the final analysis, is purely subjective !

[Freightman]

Other than myself, I am very sure that not more than a few
posters here have actual cash bankrolls that are 6 figures.

In keeping with the standard Kelly Criterion -- with a 2% advantage
(where I set MY "max bet") I would be betting Half Kelly for a R.O.R.
[Risk of Ruin] of approx. 5% That is much more aggressive than most
(real) pro players want to be, but reasonable nonetheless, as "Risk",
in the final analysis, is purely subjective !

Comfortably over - I prefer to operate at virtually 0 risk.