On the issue of tournaments and counting.

[BigJer]

The first one I posted was about competing against players at other tables. The think the second was some of the players advance to the next level.

I understand, as you, about the minuscule advantage in certain situations. But Wong seems to make it a bigger deal than it supposedly is.

ETA: What situations are those?

[Gronbog]

I will start by saying that counting can sometimes give you a minuscule extra advantage in certain situations depending on the format of the tournament.

ETA: What situations are those?

Basically in accumulation tournament situations where you need to go all-in and winning a blackjack will reach your goal. For example: An accumulation tournament with no maximum bet where the goal is to win 1.5 times your bankroll with blackjack paying 3:2 or 2 times your bankroll with blackjack paying 2:1.

In this situation you're all-in so if you lose you're out. If you get a blackjack, you've reached your goal. If you win your hand, you can bet to reach your goal on the next hand. There is less chance of getting stuck in a win/lose cycle and running out of time. So you can afford to wait for a while to make your move for a couple of reasons.

• If you are successful with your all-in bet and reach your goal, other less experienced players who see you do this will copy the strategy, thus increasing their chances of beating you and pushing you down a spot in the rankings. By waiting, you can make the move toward the end of mid-session. Some players at your table may have busted out and it is less likely for other players to be watching your table at that point in the round. I can't tell you how many times folks have come up to me saying "I saw what you did and I'm going to do that too" after the session.
• If you catch a high count you have a marginally increased probability of hitting the magic blackjack which takes you to your goal right away.