2 APs but only 1 table

[Ravn888]

Hi fellow Counters
I face several challenges which I will like to hear your opinion about. First of all the casino only have 1 Blackjack-table. Secondly the table is always occupied meaning that back-counting is no good and the possibility to signal a fellow friend to join the table will happen rarely and almost close to never. Leaving the table at bad counts is also a bad option since the seat will get taken. I have a good bankroll, I’m using Hi-Lo and I have friend who can count as well.
Summarized challenges:
1 table
Not possible to enter a game when I want
No back-counting and signals due to lack of seats
An issue when wanting to leave the table due to lack of seats - and problems entering the game again.
1) Should we both try to grab a seat and then stay through even bad counts?
2) Should we grab one chair and combine our bankroll and stay through bad counts?
3) Should we leave when the table goes bad and then grab a seat again as often as possible - which means fewer hands due to not being sure when we can grab another chair?
4) A fourth option?
I hope you will be able to help me out, and I thank you for your time.

[RS]

If you are playing with a combined bankroll, then you can calculate your spreading & whatnot as if you are one player playing two hands at the same time. This is to keep the same ROR.

It's something like, bet a total of 150% of what you should be betting. So if the count calls to bet $10, you would bet a TOTAL of 150% of $10, (ie: $15), such that each hand is $7.50. Another way to look at it, is to play 75% on each hand. 75% of $10 is $7.50.

I don't know much about playing two hands, so do some research on it or maybe someone else can explain it better.


Some tables have extra boxes behind a player's main bet, so that extra bets can be made on the same hand by more than one player. I'm sure you could figure out some sort of team-player maneuver here.


You also might be able to play 2 hands always, signal your friend over. When he gets there, he asks if he can play one of those hands, as he won't be there too long.


If your bankroll can support it and there is low enough heat so you can spread handsomely, I would play-all and not WIWO. You can generally Wong out though by saying something like, "Im gonna try to change the flow of the cards," or some BS. Of course you can't really Wong out for several hands at a time, but a few is better than none.

I would imagine that a casino with 1 BJ table wouldn't have much heat, but then again I haven't been in that situation, so idk.


May I ask the rules, decks, and pen? A small casino may not have too good of rules, as they have to protect their games more. On the other hand, they may not have much experience with APs, so it could work out well.

[Ravn888]

I appreciate your input very much

The rules are 6 decks, penetration between 75-85 %, 3:2, only double down on 9/10/11. No extra hit on split aces. No resplit aces. Double down on split cards allowed. I'm not sure if I remembered everything. I don't think AP's are that common in Denmark but I'm not sure.

But you think it would be possible to stay at a table even through low counts without leaving the table.

[lurppis]

If they allow back-betting, do they allow the player to split while the back-bettor doesn't split? If so, that helps your edge slightly on defensive splits like 88vT. (What I mean is, the player puts up money to split, and gets two hands of, say, 8, but the back-bettor is allowed to stay in the hand without putting up extra money, and just gets one of the 8s as their hand for the rest of the round.)

[Mr. White]

I feel like I've read 1000 warnings against more than one counter at a table due to the obvious give away of two players jumping/cutting their bets in unison.

If you both want to play together, perhaps this concept might be of use:

http://www.lastresortconsulting.com/...Team_Play.html

Perhaps another more experienced player might comment further on this technique.

[Zach Black]

Nathaniel Tilton's book also goes into this concept of two player's that have a total bet that correlates with the count but individual bets will not.

[ThatLuckyDog]

Nathaniel Tilton's book also goes into this concept of two player's that have a total bet that correlates with the count but individual bets will not.

This is what I was going to say.

They had a system that they signaled who would bet what amount. So if the total bet needed to be 600 for a certain count. One of them would bet 400 and the other would bet 200. If the 200 bet won with a blackjack and the other lost with the 400 bet the guy with the 200 bj win would leave the payout for the blackjack and the other guy would bet 100 for a total of $600 still being wagered. It would require a lot of practice to make it seem fluid, but would also be an amazing cover as you are both jumping your bets all over the place

[Dog Hand]

One more idea...

One player counts using HiLo, and the other player keeps the Insurance count. For Insurance count, use -4*decks as the IRC (so -24 for 6D), count all X's as -2, all other cards as +1, and Insure whenever the running count is positive.

The HiLo player decides his bet, which is mimicked by the Insurance player. Note that the Insurance player then has to infer the TC by the wagers. In other words, if you decide to bet $200 at TC=+4, then on a round where you've both bet $200, the Insurance player should know, for example, to stand on 16 vs. X. The drawback to this "TC Inference" method is that it breaks down at negative TC's (when you're betting the min) and at high TC's (when you're betting the max).

One enhancement is for the HiLo player to signal the TC to the Insurance player, so that the two of you can bet different amounts that together average the "correct" wager, as indicated above by ThatLuckyDog. This also obviates the need for the Insurance player to infer the TC.

Hope this helps!

Dog Hand

[Solo player]

I feel like I've read 1000 warnings against more than one counter at a table due to the obvious give away of two players jumping/cutting their bets in unison.

If your looking for pure entertainment value. Playing at the same table with other APers can be quite fun. Myself and several others from this board, on more than one occasion had some VERY good laughs playing the same table.