Lets say...that you're obviously counting - with no effort to cover and you've got an aggressive spread...
In your experience, does the casino care if you're card-counting as long as your down?
Naturally, it varies from one place to the other. But, it shouldn't make a difference if you're winning or losing. If you're perceived as a threat to the casino, you're occupying a seat that could potentially go to someone who is going to lose over the long run. They have no reason to want you to continue playing.
Don
That really demonstrated the incompetence of the casino. One time when I was exiting a casino after playing blackjack, I over heard these dealers were talking to each other saying that guy was a counter but he was losing. There is no reason for a casino to ban losers.
Email: [email protected]
I think you got the backwards. Sharp casinos will ban counters (assuming competent counters) while they are losing because they understand that short term results are just variance and allowing them to play is long term -ev. Not so sharp casinos will watch counter to see if they are winning or losing and decide accordingly.
You are really putting the cart before the horse. If I remember correctly, one of the greatest blackjack counters, Peter Griffin, was probably not winning in casinos at all. That was even when he had access to plenty of single deck and double deck games. Nowadays, there are no that many Grifins left.
Email: [email protected]
I remember reading that too. Do you think it was because he didnt play enough? I'm borderline mentally retarded and I'm a lifetime winning player on the crap games we have today. With the quality games back then I'm pretty sure N0 is like 40 hours. How could someone playing an advanced count (and most likely incorporating side counts as well) not be a winning player on a game with an N0 of 40 or probably even less .......
That just means Griffin was not totally confident in his own math and theory about blackjack. I guess he was concerned about too many bugs in his simulation programs. Another reason I can speculate is that these earlier computers were not powerful enough to simulate the complexity of these games. BTW, what is N0? What is N0 for a 8 deck game as opposed to a 6 deck game? I just learn everything from talking to experts.
Email: [email protected]
People are different. Personalities are different too. He probably was not bold in real gambling because I read saying he was a shy guy.
Last edited by aceside; 05-05-2021 at 06:17 PM.
Email: [email protected]
You really have to stop. You've reached a point where, totally and completely ignorant on a subject, you will write anything just to hear yourself talk. Griffin not totally confident in his own math and theory???!!! Peter was and remains to this day the foremost theoretical mathematician on the game of blackjack the world has ever seen. Your statement is profoundly ignorant.
And he was NOT a losing player! He played for small stakes and surely played a fine winning game. He simply had no desire to play for higher stakes and, therefore, his wins were modest.
You would do yourself and this forum a huge favor if you wouldn't speculate in areas about which you know absolutely nothing whatsoever. Why not just be quiet? As the well-known saying goes: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt."
Don
Last edited by DSchles; 05-06-2021 at 10:24 AM.
Bookmarks