Heat, HL rooms, and higher min tables.

[Freightman]

As regards 1, I actually started with a shoebox and $15 k (as the banks were giving less than 1% interest back then). Its now, $68k so I am up about $48k in 4.5 years or about $11k a year. About 2, I am a fiscal conservative so I use loss limits and take breaks when on losing streaks, walk away with $200 to build my confidence back up and such. Technically, I have a $68k BR but I would not allow myself to lose more than $7k in any month. If I approached it, I quit for a while. I did not go broke because I did not try to aim high.

About 3, its actually inaccurate. I learned far more from this forum and BJ21. They say I ignored advice because I played rated. Fact is that when I started, I did not know not to play rated, so I played rated and let my experience be my guide rather than what some pros who had not played rated in decades were telling me. I decided to take advice on how to play the actual game of BJ but decided that pros who had not played with a players card in decades were not really qualified to educate me on it. Bottom line is that I now balance my play. If I have a winning session or two, then I quit using players card at that chain and only "find" the card when I am losing and plan to leave without winning (get back to even or take a small loss). For now, despite OSN, I am still reaping benefits from my players card, getting comped room in LV, MS and other places.

As far as actually play is concerned, the forum has helped me tremendously. I have chosen to report my play and get ridiculed for doubling for less, not doubling when I should have, less than optimal betting and other such things. I remember their ridicule and I make the right play when situations arise, overcome my frugal instincts and make the full double, insure for full amount, playing optimally and more. The full time pros have to get their hostility out so they do not simply respond to a query by saying someone made a mistake, they ridicule them but the message does get across.

I gave considerable thought to the YouTube video. I trust you found it appropriate, and to your satisfaction.

[trucker]

One of my struggles has to do with discomfort with heat. I walk into a casino that has both DD games and 6deck games ($25 min) on main floor and HL room. The main floor DD game and 6 deck games have 2-3 ploppies playing at each of the $25 min tables, the 1-2 pit folks keeping an eye on about 10 tables (BJ carnival, baccarat, craps). The HL room has a 6 deck and a DD game without anyone playing (could walk in and play heads up) and a pit person who will likely hawk the table you sit at as you are the only player in the room. I find myself playing the main floor with the ploppies.

If I get the courage to go for it, I play differently under scrutiny, reduce my spread, bet more in first round, leave bet out after win even if count tanks and more.

I am left wondering if playing the less desirable tables where I can get optimally is better than the better games in the HL room that require cover and less optimal betting.

I have wondered this as well. Every book I have read says ploppies don't affect your results. That there is no such thing as a " hot " or "cold" shoe or dealer......books also say you want more hands per hour. So playing with others takes away some hands per hour...but the conditions out on the main pit with 1 boss watching many tables seems better for heat considerations...I also have access to limited casinos in my area...I think I am going to play in the regular pit with the ploppies if I can find an equal game. Seems like a better choice for me. Seems like it would be better for you too.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[BoSox]

.I think I am going to play in the regular pit with the ploppies if I can find an equal game. Seems like a better choice for me.

You may be able to find a game in the regular pits with the exact same upfront house edge but as far as being an equal game with the high end area could not be further from the truth. At least a few dozen differences exist, and it all starts with a casinos tolerance levels. Regardless of the size of the players playing bank he/she can only play at levels the casino is comfortable with. Bottom line you would not want to be the biggest bettor in the big room. Now someone with a smaller bank who has had some previous success in the regular pits and wants to try out the waters in the high end and upon entering sees $50 and $100 dollar minimum tables with a sign stating NMSE, where he/she has been normally playing $10 and $15 tables I would not call that equal. Ploppies will also be playing at these tables but there is a big difference from the ploppies you are accustomed to ignoring, piss off a few of the wrong ones in the high-end area and your playing time may be numbered.

Staying with the smaller banked players "much more of those than the well banked" who try out the high-end area probably are thinking I will just use a smaller spread in this room. I do not think that is a good idea you would now be playing a weaker game, combined with a NMSE game. Some others will be thinking about using more camouflage further weakening your game. I would ask the player doing this what is your "not the listed" normal minimum bet if this casino was a no heat "until there is" place? If it was under $50 dollars I would recommend heading back to the other room as you have no business being there. Say the player said he now bets $30 as his normal minimum bet, on the small tables wonderful, stay there as he has plenty of options. Starting with opening with $30 bets an increasing when the TC rises or dropping down to $20 or $10 "waiting bets" in slightly negative counts. What does this accomplish? Camouflage by maintaining a bigger spread by subtly hiding the fact. You keep your top bets constant based on the TC, and by starting a shoe with $30 instead of $10 will also help hide the size of bet jumps required when the TC starts turning favorable, especially the first big jump at a TC that is more based on the up front house edge.

[BoSox]

I would like to add to my previous post, somewhat newer players should stop looking for higher listed minimum tables, and look at the max bet listing on the smaller tables. Everything else being equal what is your top bet? Chances are you can make any bet you want to make on those smaller tables.

[Freightman]

I would like to add to my previous post, somewhat newer players should stop looking for higher listed minimum tables, and look at the max bet listing on the smaller tables. Everything else being equal what is your top bet? Chances are you can make any bet you want to make on those smaller tables.

They're many venues that have that huge differential between min and max bets. They're just as many, if not more that have limited spreads - example 5-100 or 5-200 would be common red chip min max spreads.

[Freightman]

Further to Bosox nice post 16,
The well banked player at lower min bet, who is shoe string banked at the higher min bet, should consider the creative opportunities that are available to him at the lower min bet table.

Without getting into specifics, the opportunity exists to look like an idiot, "hide" a big spread and literally go to town. Of course, low table population really assists in this regard.

[BoSox]

Plus1. Amen to that.

[trucker]

Yes for the reasons BOSOX and freightman pointed out and also table rules same. I'm playing in regular pit

[SplitFaceDisaster]

Play smarter, learn more skills and develop better judgement. Reduce your losses, increase your win percentage. Sims can be beaten.

Freightman, I`ve heard you mention this before. I have a feeling that the things I`m thinking of in regards to this are only a small percentage of what you`re referring to... I think the reason that I didn`t ask you if you`d mind expounding on this before was that you said you didn`t want to mention them on an open forum, which I completely understand. If that`s still the case, no worries. However, I`m dying to know every bit of what you mean. Especially because I think I remember you saying you play a simple count like hi-lo (that`s what I play too). Maybe you`re referring to tweaking it for better PE like you mentioned in the other thread? Any clues or breadcrumbs you can give me here? Other than switching to the FBM ASC of course hahaha

[Three]

Freighter uses a level 3 count. Sims can be beat by gathering more information and using it in a way the sims can't.

[Freightman]

Freighter uses a level 3 count. Sims can be beat by gathering more information and using it in a way the sims can't.

Further, betting strategies can be designed to portray you as a weaker player, when in fact, the illusion created helps to increase spread. You will be pegged as a counter, but not a good one. Cumulative is what will eventually get you. The additional information alluded to by 3 can and should be adopted to your "poor" betting and "poor" deck estimation.

The comments, since they are "off sim", require stronger bankrolls. Although I don't do his much anymore, it is important for newer players to keep fairly detailed records - the reason being to spot trends in your long term play. That was the beginning of a gradual metamorphosis, which also incorporated abstract strategies. I had ideas, but didn't really have a plan, and never really articulated my thoughts. Independant of that, and in more detail, others, here, had articulated generalities approaching my line of thought. I simply observed and adapted to my style of play - and READ, UNDERSTAND.

For now, I'm being purposely vague - simply suggesting you expand your paradigms.

[Freightman]

As an example to my post 24, I used to put in lots of hours when I had my local stores. I played at or close to EV. It didn't phase me that my average dollar loss exceeded my average dollar win. I was comforted by the comments if a well known respected poster, who suggested that was his trend etc. I always had a high win rate, most of it natural, not manipulated. The high win rate compensated for the higher dollar loss than win factor, and I was happy.

Somewhere along the line, I jotted on paper my average win loss dollar amounts against varying win percentage rates, then looked again by evening the average win loss dollar amount, then worked different win percentage rates against lower average dollar losses. The cumulative effects were staggering.

To make a long story short, I worked at incorporating ideas and adopted strategies that would help me do this. The results, still short term, maybe a year, are a reduced dollar win rate, a high percentage win rate, and a greatly reduced dollar loss rate. Effect on overall win is somewhat staggering. I think it important to note that the law of large numbers always applies, and that the traditional accepted percentage hands won, lost or tied, remains unchanged.

[Three]

Not many do short term results research. I have been mocked for doing so. It is the most overlooked aspect of the counting game. Winning less but more frequently and losing less but less frequently does wonders for not appearing a threat and your sanity as you don't stray as much from EV on the way to the long run. As Freighter said these short term gains are washed out in the long run. Long term stats don't even show them. But when playing it is so obvious that giving up a little EV, SCORE, etc for steadying short term results is much better. But the research allows you to pick a low average buy-in with smaller wins and losses instead of huge buy-in requirements and wild swings around EV.

That said if you choose to endure huge swings and have the BR and intestinal fortitude to withstand them, you will get to your long term EV. You may burn a few more stores when trying to do so but in the long run both ways get you to pretty much the same long run. I have found a number of ways to tighten the distribution of results around expectation while moving the peak into more positive territory. That is all that is required to see the same kind of change in results. Long term stats always say you are giving something up but as a player you will say it is not anything you will regret being rid of.