Back to playing conditions........rules. Just what do YOU consider a playable game?

[mickeymouse]

I'm referring to Koz84's post.
6D S17 D9-11 DAS no surrender SPL3 nRSA
Pen ranges from 80% to 93% depending on individual dealer.

[BoSox]

What I have learned is that getting the action that I am willing to risk INTO play is the top question.

Since the casinos sets the minimum, and max bets, this represents their discipline and risk. They could care less if the player is way over or extremely under funded they establish the limits.

And Bigg makes a similar observation that makes sense to me, too. I'm really trying to get a handle on our environment for playing with good rules.........but lack of options.......v. traveling to find better rules and conditions IF they readily exist. I'm not sure they are but that is SO dependent upon each person's actual BETTING level.

The only time a player can play to there own actual betting levels is finding casinos who will accept your action, preferably without much concern. Otherwise another way if you do not care play until barred.

[ZenMaster_Flash]

" ... tablehopping with Pontoon ..."

Are you in Australia or New Zealand ?

[Three]

Tthree, In your above example you refer to tolerant casinos and attacking better games

It is a list of various different things not one thing. Everything in your post that follows assumes it is all related which it is not. Generally the better games are less tolerant of spreading and the crappier games don't care. In case you didn't know SCORE uses standards set by DonS for the comparison and c-SCORE uses anything you want. You can't change a games SCORE by spreading more but you do change what a games c-SCORE is. Anyway the point you seem to be missing is a great game will quite often 86 you if you spread much. That is why they can offer a great game. If you want to play there without being 86'ed it really helps to play a system that can beat them with a spread that they are comfortable with.

Of course spreads play a factor, but since your example is also based on good games why does anyone need an outrageous spread?

What you call my example was a laundry list of different things that can make a game playable. It was not one example but a long list of different things that are important to people with different approaches to the game, different BR's and comfort levels, and different systems. This thread is about what is playable. You have such a complex about simpler counts you can't see that there was no criticism of any approach just different approaches look for different things when they call something playable. I tried to answer his question about what is playable with the most thorough answer I could. Perhaps I was too brief. You can't win. You go into detail to make sure people understand and you are called too wordy. You keep it brief and people quick to jump to conclusions miss the point and get confused about your meaning.

[Three]

SCORE assumes a $10,000 bankroll and "Full Kelly Betting"
So ... with the bankroll hovering around $10,000 and Hi-Lo,
with (common rules) an player advantage would be seen at
TC +2 (of approx. 0.5%) so the bet would be $50.
Continual altering of the size of one's bet is required.
If, e.g. $4,000 was lost, the TC +2 bet cited above would be $30

SCORE assumes Kelly Betting without resizing. That gives a RoR of 13.5%. With resizing RoR is practically 0. DonS just stated this in another thread.

[Three]

If the max bet is only a $100 then what use is that? Put an hour and half time limit ,then it is useless to most but the small stake players.(score 50 ,counting only)

SCORE is based on a $10K BR. If you have more it doesn't change the SCORE but you would bet more and it would change c-SCORE.

[Three]

Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
I could care less about surrender.. I care about casinos taking action.. you want to cut off 2 decks and s17 fine,, shuffle and deal ill play.. as long as they take bets that's what matters.. the splitting to 2 hands only scores the game kind of crappy but watrv.. I rather play a big max game then a 300 max early surrender game.. what casinos do you think is going to let you win more actually real dollars?

Ask Flash about some of his friends and their experiences down under. They pull shit on AP's, once they are found out, that would make me think twice about such a far away destination.

[mickeymouse]

Australia. But this post I was referring to standard blackjack.
To date, I have not split tens in blackjack down here. I gather it is likely to get me thrown out on the double.
And you would never split tens in Pontoon anyway.

[Three]

And you would never split tens in Pontoon anyway.

I don't know about never. The index is much higher but you do get there sometimes. For my count it is a TC of +12 to +18 (upcard 6-3). I have seen playing true counts that were in the 20's before. I doubt splitting TT in SP21/Pontoon would generate much heat especially if you used an ace adjustment. An ace rich deck would make this much more accessible play.

[BoSox]

Originally Posted by BoSox
Tthree, In your above example you refer to tolerant casinos and attacking better games

Anyway the point you seem to be missing is a great game will quite often 86 you if you spread much. That is why they can offer a great game. If you want to play there without being 86'ed it really helps to play a system that can beat them with a spread that they are comfortable with.

Tthree, you are the one who referenced tolerant casinos into your first post, now it is gone. First lets clear up something, were you referring to single, and double deck games in the example? I am talking strictly shoe games as it has been years since I have played the other choices, although double deck would still apply. A great game to you might not be considered a great game to me. First I love tolerant casinos that accept the action, I accept and play by their tolerances NOT what I would think I can get away with by testing them further than I already have. I want to go back, just as long as the game is worthwhile to me. My game is based on blending in, at whatever level pits I am currently playing. If I was thrown out I consider it just part of the game. House rules, are also important to me.

[Three]

Tthree, you are the one who referenced tolerant casinos into your first post, now it is gone.

I didn't delete any posts or content. After I posted this I figured out you were talking about the immediately previous post and not the one you quoted which the "above" comment lead me to believe. I think you are blending my post with post #2 by Romes. My posts were all on topic for the OP on what makes a game playable. I never made any SD or DD references.

First I love tolerant casinos that accept the action, I accept and play by their tolerances NOT what I would think I can get away with by testing them further than I already have. I want to go back, just as long as the game is worthwhile to me. My game is based on blending in, at whatever level pits I am currently playing. If I was thrown out I consider it just part of the game. House rules, are also important to me.

And that was the point of my posts. What makes games playable differs from one person to the next. I like to keep my overall n0 down so I try to play the same at all the casinos in my rotation (having different max bets for different casinos plays havoc with n0). If a place is not tolerant I simply leave or take a break after my first max bet opportunity has the player advantage end. My BR is quite large but I still want a more predictable short run.

[BoSox]

Originally Posted by BoSox
Tthree, you are the one who referenced tolerant casinos into your first post, now it is gone.

I didn't delete any posts or content. After I posted this I figured out you were talking about the immediately previous post and not the one you quoted which the "above" comment lead me to believe. I think you are blending my post with post #2 by Romes. My posts were all on topic for the OP on what makes a game playable. I never made any SD or DD references.

Excuse me, just to clear it up, what is gone is not post #4 that I was talking about but the references you made in that post regarding good games, and tolerant casinos that have suddenly disappeared from your side of the debate.

[Three]

Excuse me, just to clear it up, what is gone is not post #4 that I was talking about but the references you made in that post regarding good games, and tolerant casinos that have suddenly disappeared from your side of the debate.

IF it is gone, I didn't do it. Personally I think you got who posted what confused.

PS: Notice none of my posts prior to your post was edited.