OP question was "neg (ture) count"....BIG difference between surmising an advantage at ZERO vs negative...just sayinOriginally Posted by ZenMaster_Flash
ah...on further review...if the true count was -infinity (say, 3 cards left in 6D...and all are, say, 3's)...so you have 18 vs dealer 10...you hit and get 21...so there it is...minus infinity true count with an advantage due to deck comp/adv count...i got it now
GOOD LUCK!
PS: for the rest of the story, the dealer has 16 and needs to reshuffle the shoe (...tune in later for update on whether he won)
I agree.
Playing protocols are not one size fits all. Various individual and team structures may be very different while both may be successful. Even if the multi level complex counts are the whiz, they are not necessarily where a newbie might start. It is much like other professions, learn a little at first and more as you go along.
I can assure you any newcomer caught in a dialog about the "Tarzan method" will choose to play his state lottery instead. Showing them the way in a step wise progression is much more appropriate..
While I am intrigued by the Tarzan stuff, I would never implement in a team concept. Way too many other moving parts. I I choose to go off on a full time lone wolf structure then I would become very interested. If I am only playing on weekends and have a quality day job, then not so much.
Rather than teach team members more complex protocols to eek out a few more advantage points, we might chose to teach them other advantage concepts for other opportunities and make them more valuable when they enter a casino. The caveat is that any of these must have an appropriate bankroll to support the structure.
So, I repeat, one size does not fit all and answering questions for the many should be for their benefit, not to promote our "superiority or ego", after all, everyone started somewhere.
Luck is nothing more than probability taken personally!
What I see today is games deteriorating to the point that gains that were once insignificant are becoming more and more valuable. It is extremely simple math. If you are making 50/100 and extra effort makes you 55 you might not think it is worth it but if you are making 20/100 due to crappier rules and the extra effort gets you 25 it is more valuable even though the amount of increase has stayed the same. If the deterioration continues simple counting may go the way of the dinosaur unless casinos start allowing HUGE spreads. Then simple counting will just be for the huge BR players. We see KJ writing about worse and worse annual results from his BJ play and more and more of is income from other plays. I don't think it is a coincidence that the rules have been deteriorating as this is happening. Now I know even though KJ plays more than most his sampling is insignificant so save the comments.
I agree with you that my results are completely insignificant to draw any conclusions from. But since you did....this highlighted statement is just not accurate.
I am trying to cut down on posting specific numbers, but in general terms, at my level and amount of play, my expected annual win from blackjack is in the 75-80k range. Over the last 6 complete years 2009-2014, my average blackjack win is right in that range.
As averages work, included in those averages are two outlier years, one significantly above expectation (2013) and one significantly below expectation (2014).
While my most recent full year, 2014 was the one outlier year below expectation, suggesting these results are due to something like deteriorating conditions and rules, seems a stretch, especially since the prior year, 2013 was significantly above expectation, as is the first half of this year.
Averages include outliers and it just so happens the negative outlier is the most recent complete year.
Mind you, I am not arguing your point that conditions are deteriorating, but I don't see that reflected in my results yet.
Fair enough KJ but to argue that higher house edges aren't going to cut your EV when you use the same approach is totally wrong and I doubt even you would argue that. I did say your results, while a larger sampling than most get in a year are meaningless so I thought I did include that in my post. But if you want to get into particulars it is the ride to the long run that also changes with deteriorating rules. It is easier to fall prey to RoR and losing streaks will be longer and more severe in general. That was the type of things I was referring to. All the posts about hitting your worst losing day ever, your worst losing streak ever etc. Again a bit meaningless but you would expect those extremes to become even more extreme as games deteriorate. It is simply the math of the game and you can't argue with it.
I almost hate to respond, because I don't want it to seem like I am constantly disagreeing with you. I feel like you are trying to make a point that many players are dealing with declining conditions and that is a valid point. Just not me...I'm special, as proof by my 'special ed' classes back in high school.( I am kidding).
The house edge for games that I play are pretty constant. 6Deck .64% (.56% for games with LS) and DD .46%. I think I have one or two stores that offer RSA, so that brings it down a few hundredth of a percent.
There have been no major rule changes since I moved to Vegas that would effect house edge of games that I play. Maybe had I been here 12-15 years ago when the big switch over from S17 to h17 was occurring I would have had to deal with increasing house edges.
If you are referring to something like a switch to 6:5 blackjack, that doesn't effect me, because I won't play against that game, once it switches. I just lose a game from my rotation, meaning I have to play more rounds from a smaller rotation which cause different issues as far as longevity, but all rounds are still played against the same house edge. Along the smaller rotation status, I currently play 26-27 games where I once played over 30.So that is something that I am dealing with.
That was the benefit of my relocation to Vegas. Many more games in a close vicinity or a larger rotation of games that I play regularly. That means loss of a game, whether due to backoff/barring or whether due to casino greed with something like switching to 6:5, doesn't effect me that much. I have plenty of games to make up the difference, at least so far (fingers crossed). Now if a bunch of local type off-strip casinos suddenly start going 6:5, then I am in trouble, just as many others are.
In recent years I can think of only one change in rules that led to a higher house edge of games that I continued to play and that was when a 6 deck game went to 8 decks. But there have been at least 2 occasions in the last year where house edges declined of games in my regular rotation, one last summer when a store added late surrender and one this year when in a highly publicized move a store on the strip went to 6:5 on all its $25 games, which initially shrunk my rotation by one, but then a couple weeks later they began offering 3-2 S17 games that were previously $100 min at $25 min during weekday slow periods (one pit only). Net result, I now play $25 minimum 6 deck 3-2 S17 games instead of 3-2 H17 that I had been playing. I am not confident this will last very long BTW.
Now don't get my wrong, I have had to deal with worsening conditions in the past few years just like everyone. For me, that have not been higher house edges but crowded and slower tables. Crowded because regular BJ games continue to be squeezed out in favor of new tables games with higher house edges. Slower because almost every blackjack game now comes with at least one type of side bet which slows the game down.
And then of course there is the biggie (for me)....penetration. That changes constantly. But that does not effect house edge.
Last edited by KJ; 06-22-2015 at 04:50 PM.
I too refuse to play the games that have deteriorated but you have read the posts on here. People are playing conditions regularly that you probably wouldn't play and I definitely wouldn't play. No disrespect intended but you now the regional differences between our home territories.
Posting Permissions
-*-
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks