Bouncing Between One and Two Hands as Cover, and Opportunity

[JamesonDetroit]

Hi, everyone! New poster to the forums, but have read for quite some time on and off (and am planning on subscribing to the premium ones soon).

I'm not new to AP, though I am new to pursuing it more diligently. And, full disclosure, at this point I am using Red 7, though am planning to move to a better balanced count at some point in the not-too-distant future.

I spent some time in AC these past couple weekends, going between various casinos. My persona at the table is not far from my one in real life (makes it easier to maintain); friendly, funny, and happy to be playing, though quick to start steaming (not really, just in appearance) when runs of bad luck come which allow me to raise bets fast "in frustration" when the count demands it.

I was interested in some input from all of you experienced APs on something I was trying, to see if I'm way off base mathematically, or if this actually is something that I should continue keeping in my quiver (I actually nearly doubled my trip bankroll, though that obviously could have been due to variance, not technique). One of the things I was doing with some success (I think) was trying to keep my options open with two hands (so I can get more money on the table faster if the count wants me to). It also (I think) helped with camouflage in the way I did it. First thing to note, not once did I have any trouble playing two hands at the minimum bet; this was at several different stakes. None of the dealers nor pit bosses seemed at all surprised or bummed that I was doing it at minimum instead of double the minimum bet; this was at all 5 casinos I visited. So, the way I took advantage of that was this:

If a boss seemed interested in my play, and I was minimum betting low counts, if I lost a hand or two in a row I would often switch to two hands "to try and fix the flow of the cards". I would especially try to do this after a hand with a lot of high cards (so anyone who knows anything about counting would see that the count just decreased). As I understand it from the reading I've done (though not calculations... I'm purchasing the QFit software soon to start being able to run sims), the disadvantage of one versus two hands at minimum bet is not significant. This would, to a pit boss of low experience, look like I was putting more money on the table after the count just dropped significantly, though I actually I was just adding a hand at minimum bet; that is a decrease in EV, but not a _big_ one, right?. I would also try to do this if the count was approaching the pivot point from below, so that I could quickly raise the bets and have two hands on the table instead of one at a higher count, without making it look like I was adding a hand _because_ the count was high. Lastly, if the count was low, or dropped significantly, and I lost a hand (and wanted to get more money off the table), I could switch back to one hand, and it would not look suspicious, since I was just a player that frequently switches between one and two hands without apparent reason, other than wanting to "fix the flow of cards". Boy did it piss off some other players who were superstitious, but other times when it "worked" they would be more grateful, if surprised lol; either way, no skin off my back.

So, I'm curious what you guys think of this, and if it is actually way worse for my EV than I think it is. Again, I haven't run the numbers, though am hoping to figure out how to create a sim of this in the near future.

Thanks so much! I'm glad to be aboard the forum.

Also, if there are parts of this post I should edit out, or delete entirely, since it is public, let me know.

[Freightman]

Welcome.
The sims are the sims, and they espouse the theoretical VS the sometimes divergent practical. Nice work. No need to be robotic.

As 2 squares only 1x minimum, the cost is negligible. They're many ways of hiding ability (initially). For myself, I pride myself in my inconsistency.

[JamesonDetroit]

Thanks! I appreciate the confirmation of the low cost of adding a second minimum-bet hand, and am glad to hear it. It really did seem to work (but again, variance is a poor teacher); there was only one moment when I felt any heat from a pit boss, and that was after a fast tripling of the chips I had on the table (to the tune of four figures). But it was really just the "glare", I assume to see if I was made uncomfortable by it. I was mellow and headed out to cash my chips the next time I lost three hands in a row, or took a bad beat. "Uh oh, this is a bad sign."

[JamesonDetroit]

And yes, "inconsistency" was the appearance I was aiming for. Glad it works for you too!

[RCJH]

SS, you may have been inadvertently and correctly using opposition betting. At table min, I often play two hands. I'll also ride a big bet into a dropping count, leaving it until it loses. Get the software and sim it.

If it was just positive variance, you don't want to repeat it, as the results could be completely the opposite. Nice haul, though!

[Freightman]

SS, you may have been inadvertently and correctly using opposition betting. At table min, I often play two hands. I'll also ride a big bet into a dropping count, leaving it until it loses. Get the software and sim it.

If it was just positive variance, you don't want to repeat it, as the results could be completely the opposite. Nice haul, though!

RCJH brings up a nice point. Don't know your real experience level, or strength if bankroll. As opposition betting tends to work against the logic of most sims, and requires a strongish bankroll - suffice it to say you have a tool which will help u to improve spread. You're a good 1/3, at least, on the way there.

[BoSox]

If a boss seemed interested in my play, and I was minimum betting low counts, if I lost a hand or two in a row I would often switch to two hands "to try and fix the flow of the cards". I would especially try to do this after a hand with a lot of high cards (so anyone who knows anything about counting would see that the count just decreased).

SuperSmash, welcome to the board.


When I read the above quote, I see a red flag right away. Why does a boss seem interested in someone minimum betting? There is a reason for that and you spelled it right out for him. When you wrote:

My persona at the table is not far from my one in real life (makes it easier to maintain); friendly, funny, and happy to be playing, though quick to start steaming (not really, just in appearance) when runs of bad luck come which allow me to raise bets fast "in frustration" when the count demands it.

Pit crews do take notice as they are not completely stupid, plus the eye upstairs has their back. What you are doing does not go unnoticed, and the subsequent reason he was watching you. Be careful on how much and when you are raising the sequence of your bets. They know when steaming is taking place, and when it is not.

[What me worry]

I was playing early in the morning not long ago only one pb watching 3 bj tables and one full roulette table. Pb hawked my table for 2 shoes and left to tend to something on roulette I was down a couple hundred doing exactly what you were while the pb watched. Pb came back 3 shoes later I'm up 1500 pb immediately called surveillance. Just stay aware of your surroundings and the house phone.

[Meistro123]

he was probably just asking for a fill

[What me worry]

I was sitting close enough to the house phone I heard the whole conversation and a fill was never requested.

[BoSox]

The importance of learning to use a counting system flawlessly does not even come close to the importance of learning how to get away with it. Which involves learning how to evaluate a casino properly by scouting not only for tolerance levels, crowd conditions, discretionary dealer cuts etc. Then looking completely natural while playing, your comportment dealing with employees, and problem gamblers. As well as being a great actor, putting on a facade that looks completely normal, such as showing real emotion to the action, all the while just playing the math. All the things that you cannot learn in books. These are the type of things we should be telling the new players. Stealth, recently made a similar post, that I really liked. There is so much more to the game than just learning to count the cards!

[21forme]

The importance of learning to use a counting system flawlessly does not even come close to the importance of learning how to get away with it. Which involves learning how to evaluate a casino properly by scouting not only for tolerance levels, crowd conditions, discretionary dealer cuts etc. Then looking completely natural while playing, your comportment dealing with employees, and problem gamblers. As well as being a great actor, putting on a facade that looks completely normal, such as showing real emotion to the action, all the while just playing the math. All the things that you cannot learn in books. These are the type of things we should be telling the new players. Stealth, recently made a similar post, that I really liked. There is so much more to the game than just learning to count the cards!

Well said, Bosox.

[BoSox]

he was probably just asking for a fill

So evidently you have no problem with steaming by continually raising your bets while losing hand, after hand? Because that is what the OP is saying, I will repeat it again.

SuperSmash wrote:

"My persona at the table is not far from my one in real life (makes it easier to maintain); friendly, funny, and happy to be playing, though quick to start steaming (not really, just in appearance) when runs of bad luck come which allow me to raise bets fast "in frustration" when the count demands it."

What me worry wrote:

"I was down a couple hundred doing exactly what you were while the pb watched."

Meistro, I am not talking about variance at all, as that did not seem to concern the op. I strongly feel that being behind in a session does not give you extra options to do as you please, that is bullshit. You make some large bets at the right time and just happen to lose them and the count is maintaining or rising along with your bets. I say it is the wrong time to be steaming continuing to raise your bets when losing previous hands. Who the hell does that, except for a few dumb degenerates who temporarily have money, only card counters do, a huge red flag. What better time is there than to throw you out, when you are losing and the count is through the roof? The op was playing in AC where they could have only restricted him but the point is too important.


In a recent thread started by Zeebabar, Meistro123 wrote:

"I split tens vs five and six at TC +7 or above. At this point the gain from splitting is simply too great to ignore, and before that the extra +EV isn't really worth the variance incurred from giving up a "sure thing".

" and before that the extra +EV isn't really worth the variance incurred from giving up a "sure thing".

At the strike point your only concern is variance? Not one mention or thought about how it looks to the pit/eye, you are either a ploppy or CC. Zee's thread was also meant for new players, I think you are showing some bad judgement, and it surprises me, as I do respect your knowledge of the game.

PS: Two card twenty's are not a sure thing.