Originally Posted by
DSchles
Norm has given you an argument. I'll give you a different one. Suppose you're using your strategy and indices for a six-deck game and, suddenly, the shoe drops on the floor and five decks spill out, leaving only one deck remaining in the shoe. Are you now suddenly playing a single-deck game? Do you understand how utterly ridiculous such an argument would be? Or, in similar fashion, if you held the six decks in your hands and, instead of dealing from the top, you turned the pack over and began dealing from the bottom deck only, would you now be playing single-deck blackjack? Oh!
Nonetheless, there is an entirely different concept that is valid, and that is the basis for the floating advantage. If you are counting a shoe game, and you get to a point where only one deck is remaining, AND, you have a count of, say, zero, then your edge at that moment is, in fact, consistent with that of a single deck off the top. But this is a very different idea from the one that you have been espousing.
Don
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks