Thanks Freightman. For me, there is a lot of money at risk so I'm doing my best to do things right the first go around. I've been trying to help with the simpler of questions as a means to give back, and not require the big shots here to regurgitate the same answers time and time again lol. But please, call me on my bullshit if I incorrectly state something.
You're forgetting about the fact that I have been playing in some of these places for almost 4 years now. So the fact that I was only on my first shoe on a visit is meaningless in my mind since I am rated and am a regular. It IS all one big session, no? I would prefer to take $4000 over four sessions than $4000 in one session. Is that really unreasonable? They have my cumulative wins after all. I already lost one joint, I do not want to lose another.Originally Posted by Stevie Wonder
Let's put ourselves in their place. What do they really fear? Big bets or big wins? Surely it must be the wins, but we are typically afraid of spreading too much regardless if we are winning or losing.
I think I'm just not convinced. BELIEVE me, I want to keep playing those shoes and it takes all of my self-control to stop myself from winning too much in any one session. I am hoping that my message to them is that I am not going to rape them on any one visit. This may allow me to keep coming back for a while, or so I hope.
Believe me, I'm all for team no greed. That was an honest question about how fast people have received heat, followed by my reasoning on why I believe playing that one shoe out or leaving wouldn't have any effect. If you've successfully played the joint for four years, you know their personnel and tolerance better than anyone here. I'd also guess (assuming no unconventional count or other AP plays) that they are on to you, and you must have at least some degree of heat walking through the doors to monitor you playing nicely. It may be that they see this stop-win discipline of yours and that is the very reason you do get to return.
Its just my assumption that they would not have been able to pick up on anything so quickly. Especially since this seems like a shoe where the count consistently and steadily climbed, so even less time for them to see you downsizing your bet and climbing back through negative counts. To me it would look like a ploppy who was hitting a hot streak and riding it out sometimes pushing his bet.
Of course not.
DEFINITELY not.
Agreed.
So how much is too much or too little? That surely needs to be well-defined first. The only way to know that is to play at a place for a while and get a feel for what makes them uncomfortable. I feel as though I have zeroed in over the years on the amount that causes them to start smiling less and observing more. My tactic, therefore, is to lose more in a session than I win in a session, but to win more often. Frequent small wins that are ½-1/3 less than my less frequent big losses are the best that I feel that I can do since I am playing rated. The trick, is to hopefully get them to notice the amounts won or lost in my sessions rather than the cumulative win. Small session wins and big session losses are what I am hoping will keep me welcome the longest.
I won more than $40,000 in 2016 playing an average of 1.5 times per week (“times” is defined as a complete day committed to spreading my action around to different casinos). Given where I play, I think this is a considerable amount of money.
Absolutely! This is why I bail when I hit a certain amount.
Agreed.
Yep. Been there done that.
How is that different from leaving a positive shoe once you have achieved your pre-defined gain for the day? You are limiting your gains either way.
So how would you create this illusion? I feel that my way is doing just that. Believe me, I am looking for any excuse to max bet my way through an entire shoe that is favorable. But I still cannot find an excuse to take $1000s from one place in a single day.
Luckily I do not have that issue.
And the amount that you win is of no consequence? I still find that difficult to believe.
I do want to blast away. But when you put the facts together that I am playing rated, want to keep playing locally, and had a big overall win last year (VERY good variance), it makes me hesitate just a tad.
If I were a first time visitor or even somebody that has only just begun to establish themselves as a regular, then I would be inclined to agree with you. These places are small though. I'm pretty much one of the whales in my betting. I am mainly talking about two places here. One is extremely tolerant, the other not as much. I know there have been players backed off at the less tolerant place for spreads smaller than mine. And it didn't take long either. CBJN says that one of those places is "quick to back off." Doesn't that qualify as a sweat shop? So why am I still able to play here? I think that it has to do with a combination of things. For one, I have all kinds of camouflage techniques and betting styles. I don't usually play the same way twice. I want them to think, "my God, wtf is he doing now?" Another is the stop-win that I am talking about. I want them to feel all warm and fuzzy inside knowing that I respect them enough to not go over a certain amount (and by respect, I do not mean "admiration." I mean the type of respect a small and weaker animal has when yielding to a much bigger and stronger animal).
They all definitely know that I either count, or am a bad counter. I hope they think the latter. But if they think the former, they must be picking up on my discipline to stop. Why have they let me consistently take money and backed off others? Wish I could ask, but I think this is why.
Problem is, they know I'm a counter and not a ploppy.
This is key. When I made my comment, I didn't know this. It was based on looking like a gambler because that's what I assumed they thought you were. If they know you're a counter, then you need to convince them that you're not a threat or, at the very least, not going to be a problem. Your strategy may help with the latter, but it would be even better if you could maintain your entire advantage without them knowing it.
I'm interested in this topic, because I am somewhat in the same boat.
How you win it is a factor as well. I am like you trying to win reasonable amounts at any sitting but I don't walk away from an advantage. Most of my wins and loses are well within tolerances but you can win or lose $3K to $8K in one shoe with the lower magnitude ends being much more common due to splitting and doubling a lot in a round or the shoe and having them all decided the same way. Every place is different but the places I play seem to understand that and as long as it is obvious your goal is not to win much they are fine with aberrations in a shoe. I won't tell you how to be because each store is different and you know your stores. Just be aware that regularly walking away from an advantage means you aren't playing with the advantage you think you are and all your sim stats are incorrect for that play.
I don't think the amount you win is as much a consequence as the mindset they believe you have.
Same boat here. I slowed my play toward the end of last year because I had won so much. I know my regular haunts know what I am doing but are comfortable with what I do at their specific stores. I do worry because I don't want to lose any stores as well.
Since they know you are successful counter, you know their tolerance, and you were at that point, then I think you made the right call. No sense in poking the bear if you can slip in and steal its honey without waking it.
If you are certain they know you are a counter, but play nice and remain within their tolerance, why bother with camo and changing styles? Or are you referring to the stores that you aren't sure if they know you are an AP?
I once had to walk away from a positive count for this reason. Any wins/losses above a certain amount cause paperwork for the pit which, at this one store, ends up on this one guy's desk who hates counters with a passion. I stopped playing just under the threshold. Normally you never want to walk away from a positive shoe, but I knew if I continued to play that shoe I would get backed off in short order. I've since tried to not put myself in a situation where I might reach that threshold.
The fastest heat, have to Vegas sweat joints. MGM, no heat till there is - I'm talking the Plaza, politely playing with Max bets of 100, of course, don't discount the brain dead critters at the Fremont, and believe it or not, the Stratosphere, all of here joints bouncing your truly with min max of 10-100. Oh, pardon me - lousy shit dd game at Fremont min 25 - the vultures pounced at 175 or 200. Critters had been there a while. Pus oozed from their eye sockets like loose shaving cream.
I don't know the answer, but I wonder if you utilized a play all in the local place the negative EV would be offset greatly by missing out on the positive shoe. Locally, I use play all to an extent, leaving only when it's absolute garbage. That's what the locals do, and I try to blend in.
The locals never leave mid shoe. It's rude, and "messes up the cards".
I utilize a play all style with well timed whiz breaks. On 1 such occasion, the ploppy sitting next to me threw me 1 or 2 greens when I returned to the table. Of course, I asked what this was for. He said that as soon as I left the table, he scored 200-1 on suited 7's side bet with $25 down. Thats one thing ploppies really don't care about.
Well, my ploppies care about it, and I suspect Marriedputter has heard the same comments. Sometimes it can be utilized to an advantage. People are loosing, but the count is climbing, so you go to two hands to "mess up the cards". You Wong out in a neg shoe and they loose, it's BECAUSE you messed up the cards. In one local place, there's a group of Asian women who avoid me because I table hop and mess up the cards...lol
Posting Permissions
-*-
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks