Rated or Unrated

[LoneWoLF]

For a vegas attack wonging in ONLY for 45 min - 1 hour sessions? Im leaning towards unrated as there seems to be more pros than cons. But playing unrated at a wong in of 2x100 and increasing it to 2x400 might attract attention as to why im not using a card. If I play rated that takes away that skepticism but then all my wins and lifetime win gets recorded and i get the boot. I guess I could play rated and just rathole and make me seem like a loser? Not sure.

Opinions? It's a 1 hour session multiple shifts 12 different stores type of attack

[Sonny]

I assume you mean Wonging in, not Wonging in and out. I imagine it would piss off the pit critter if you asked him to rate you while you were scurrying around from table to table the whole time. How can he rate someone he can never find? How do you rate someone who is just standing around watching 2 tables most of the time?

It's a 1 hour session multiple shifts 12 different stores type of attack

Playing rated kinda defeats the purpose of playing short sessions, doesn’t it? You’re giving them the ability to review your entire playing history as though it were one long session. You can always manufacture losses on the card, but they may start compiling video of your sessions. In that case, watching ten 1-hour sessions looks the same as one 10-hour session to them. And as soon as they get suspicious they will flag your account to be monitored. You will get heat before you even start playing. Spreading your play over different shifts also becomes pointless because you’re telling them exactly when you’re there. You're giving up the benefit of anonymity and keeping the drawback of having to travel all day long. It cuts your profit and makes it way too easy for them to track you.

But playing unrated…might attract attention as to why im not using a card.

I’ve always heard this excuse but I never understood it.

You know what else attracts attention? Counting cards in Vegas. The telltale signs are so obvious and it’s such an easy thing to spot. They’re going to get suspicious as soon as they notice your play. And if you ask to be rated, you’re asking to be noticed. You’re ASKING them to keep a close record of all the buy-ins and cash-outs. You can’t just slide up to a table, play from your pocket and then disappear when the count drops. You have to wait for their permission to leave, and only after they get a written count of your results.

You’re going to get attention either way. Would you rather have your name get heated up, or your baseball cap?

-Sonny-

[LoneWoLF]

Excellent responses Sonny. It's much appreciated. I have always played unrated my whole career and I was going to do that in Vegas as well, initially. Others have put some thoughts in my head that playing unrated for high stakes might not be that smart, but I think you're right, unrated is the way to go, especially if I'm playing short sessions, switching shifts and jumping all over the place.

[ZenMaster_Flash]

Playing unrated attracts heat, as ploppies want to "earn" their free buffet, etc.

BUT, playing as a "moving target" anonymity is good, as long as you keep moving.

[LoneWoLF]

Playing unrated attracts heat, as ploppies want to "earn" their free buffet, etc.

BUT, playing as a "moving target" anonymity is good, as long as you keep moving.

Yea I think the key is, unrated only attracts heat if you stay in each store a long time. If you're always moving, unrated is the way to go or then there wouldn't be a point in moving around if you're just going to give them a card.

[ZenMaster_Flash]

" ... unrated only attracts heat if you stay in each store a long time."

Heat will be furious even if playing for one shoe ~ if you are betting substantial sums.

Generally, Surveillance wants to skill-check you and see you "moving your money with the count"

on 2 of 3 shoes; but for high stakes they may forego that rule of thumb.

[Ryemo]

Heat will be furious even if playing for one shoe ~ if you are betting substantial sums.

Generally, Surveillance wants to skill-check you and see you "moving your money with the count"

on 2 of 3 shoes; but for high stakes they may forego that rule of thumb.

Which is why only playing out one max bet cycle (win or lose) is important in a place like Vegas. Don't give them any patterns to follow. Once you show that max bet once, it's time to start moving.

[Ryemo]

This is why i dont understand the value of Wonging. You lose $20k one night. How are you going to be allowed to make it back then next? Who wants to go through all that stuff to be even after 2 nights?

I don't understand... What does losing $20K one night have to do with Wonging?

[Stealth]

So if a guy looses 20k in one night. How will he make it back? Let alone 100k annually.

Wonging in by either back counting or a spotter and then flat betting shows them nothing. Your risk is then being made as a team or they observe you back counting, which is highly likely. Spotters are MUCH harder to detect and then flat bet.

You can avoid "moving money with the count" by flat betting (need bank to support) after being called in. Flat betting at purple of higher will get you some attention but it offers zero evidence of counting. You will need an effective protocol for leaving the shoe if the count reverts to negative, otherwise play out the shoe flat betting and leave. Or open the next shoe with a smaller flat bet and play one round unless you win or the count goes into positive territory, otherwise leave.

This type of strategy blows up in you face if you are playing alone.

[Stealth]

For a vegas attack wonging in ONLY for 45 min - 1 hour sessions? Im leaning towards unrated as there seems to be more pros than cons.

If you are playing 6d shoes then you will play about 3 shoes per hour. Do you mean that you will wong in the first shoe and then play all the next 2 or 3? Or do you mean you will wong out at all negative count below TC-1? Then you are going to bet a ramp that starts at 2X100 and goes to 2X400 (big bank or high RoR?).

The heat will come down on you very soon. Can you say flyere'd? Then what? As I have indicated before, you need a better plan with more consideration of longevity if you are doing this to make a living. If not, blow them up.

BTW, just because you change stores and shifts and then recycle weeks or months later, do not under estimate the ability of the floor people to remember you and your act for months back. It WILL happen!

[Ryemo]

Isn't that what a person does to bounce in and out of positive decks? Just sayin, if I'm the EITS, I'm not standing for that shit for very long if they are extracting black chips from the trays. When the boss asks me what the hell was I looking at. Do I respond with. .boobs? Cause that's what he must be viewing to miss it.

So if a guy looses 20k in one night. How will he make it back? Let alone 100k annually.

First of all, I don't think Wonging in and out of shoes are as obvious as you think. At least not anymore obvious than sitting down and going from 0 to 60 randomly after you've been been barely cruising for the last hour. You know what I mean?

Second... I'm assuming you're referencing KJ when you mention losing $20K in one night and making $100K annually? I don't understand why this sounds unbelievable? My stakes aren't too far off from what KJ utilizes in Vegas, and I can tell you that I've lost $5K in 1 shoe playing 2x$400 (Wonged in btw!). Have a few bad shoes like that and it isn't too hard to lose $20K. The next day after my big loss on that one shoe, I played a different store and lost $6K in the course of a few shoes playing 2x$500. So in 2 hours of play (or so), I was down $11K. BUT... You understand that it can go both ways too, right? If you rotate enough stores (which there's a TON in Vegas of course), then you could easily get away with just pure Wonging for quite some time.

One more thing. Based on KJs posts that I read on BJ21, he grinded out A LOT of hours. Prob 800hrs or more per year. So making $100K annually wouldn't be hard at all if you could play that many hours, even as a mid-roller.

Not sure why you would think any of these things seem to be out of the realm of possibility?

[Stealth]

So what about counting two tables? Sitting at one and reading the other in a mirror. The concept sounds difficult to say the least. Excessive movement would be necessary for extreme success. Two bad combinations, I would think.

If you can do that, then I would not find that as big a problem. Gamblers change tables a lot due to LUCK, bad dealer, shitty ploppy, etc. If this is in a busy store they will likely never notice. If it is Tuesday at 2PM and there are 15 people in the casino, then be very careful.

It is not that you show them your big bet, it is that you show them movement with the count. Concentrate on how to minimize the number of bet changes, in either direction, you can use and maintain EV. I will tell you that it will increase variance and you will need a larger bank but it will also reduce your exposure to the EITS to determine what you are doing. For example, I am playing 2X25 and the count goes to TC2 and I move to 2X200. Likely you are going to get a "checks play" call and immediate attention from the pit. Then you flat bet out the rest of the shoe (or leave if it goes to TC-1) with no variations in your bet. Now EITS saw one bet change in your play and that is all. Add a helpful dose of bullshit persona cover and tell'em "we are here to gamble" and you have a good shot at doing it some more.

You can not park your ass at a table and fire at them, with or without wonging, 2X100 to 2X400 and expect anything but the door.

Or perhaps you are a drop dead gorgeous Chinese lady with big boobs and lots of diamonds, then you can likely get away with more.

[Ryemo]

800hrs is about 80k hands per year. This doesn't leave a whole of room for downside volatily...and We both know it's going to occur often with HiLo.

I'm confused by this statement. EV is EV and the swings will occur no matter what count you're using (variance is inevitable). So you're saying that once you experience one bad down swing, it'll be too tough to recover from, just because you're using HiLo? You don't think you could just as easily win $20K in a relatively short amount of time? This logic doesn't make sense to me at all.

If one has the courage to bet big, I'm wondering why there aren't taking the easy money out of the sportsbook.

I don't know much about sports betting, but I sure wouldn't call it easy money. From my understanding, sports betting and gaining an advantage is very difficult! Much more difficult than counting cards.

I also don't understand your question, "...courage to bet big, I'm wondering why they aren't taking the easy money out of sports books." I don't know... Have you asked Smallcapgrowth why he isn't taking the "easy money" out of sports books. He bets bigger than almost any other AP counter I know of. Maybe you should ask him the same question...