Value of playing alone?

[Old new guy]

Heads up at $25 table, 6 decks. Count is up to where I have max bet out. Playing one hand. About 3 1/2 decks in. Guy sits at 3rd base and wants to come in. I ask if he could wait out the shoe. He reluctantly says ok. Then I’m promptly destroyed for the next 6-8 hands and the guy asks to come in now and I say ok. I know he could have come in anyway earlier but my question is what is the value in asking him to wait? Is it just more hands per hour? I know he could take aces or tens from me but he could also from the dealer. I’ll usually go to 2 hands (maybe 3) if someone comes in and the count dictates it. And if page numbers give the answer, I’ll take that Thanks

[bigplayer]

Not only more hands per hour but other players hurt you more in high counts as they steal your rounds just as they help you in minus counts by eating small cards. When the count is high you want to be alone. When the count is neutral or minus you want other players sucking up the rounds. Only problem is getting them to leave when the count goes up. The whole concept of back counting and table departure is based on this.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Old new guy]

Not only more hands per hour but other players hurt you more in high counts as they steal your rounds just as they help you in minus counts by eating small cards. When the count is high you want to be alone. When the count is neutral or minus you want other players sucking up the rounds. Only problem is getting them to leave when the count goes up. The whole concept of back counting and table departure is based on this.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks and I understand and agree with all that. Guess I’m looking for more of a quantified answer of what it costs me to “allow” another player to enter the shoe.

[bigplayer]

If you have an x% edge at that point it will remain the same on average (ignoring floating advantage). So how many rounds does the other player eat x how much you'd be wagering. He he reduces your EV by your average wager per round for each round he steals x your edge.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Old new guy]

If you have an x% edge at that point it will remain the same on average (ignoring floating advantage). So how many rounds does the other player eat x how much you'd be wagering. He he reduces your EV by your average wager per round for each round he steals x your edge.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So, for example, $300 x .025 x 4 rounds “stolen”? If so, then I’ve over complicated it

[aceside]

So, for example, $300 x .025 x 4 rounds “stolen”? If so, then I’ve over complicated it

I believe you are not over complicating this. Besides considering the positive EV here, we also need to consider the variance in this game. When we have two players at the same table, the variance is also larger and its will make the game more like gambling.

[Freightman]

When we have two players at the same table, the variance is also larger and its will make the game more like gambling.

Kindly explain as I’m somewhat of a rookie

[Freightman]

Typically, as a counter, I prefer heads up play. I need to battle my way through negative counts and get all of the positive counts to myself - the obvious conclusion being that the spread overcomes shitty counts thereby producing a profit. I typically don’t wong out.

All situations need to be evaluated. I played, other than stakes, a superlative game superbly cut game at a place in the middle of nowhere (1-8 beats it). The 5-100 game was crowded, so was the hi limit 10-200 (that’s right). I asked for a $25 min game to keep ploppies out, and was offered the following - Grandfather the existing $10 player, give me my $25 min, but limit me to $200 max.

I agreed to this. Reasoning was simple. Ploppie helped eat cards in negative counts and I spread in all positive counts. Nice arrangement which enured to my financial benefit.

[Freightman]

I should further comment that the next occurrence of my request for min 25 table, I was offered a 6 deck 25-100 max. I passed on that one.

[DSchles]

So, for example, $300 x .025 x 4 rounds “stolen”? If so, then I’ve over complicated it

Yes, that's exactly right. So, in this case, $30. And, of course, since aceside mentioned that, by adding an extra player, the variance would increase, you can rest assured that, of course, it would decrease! Any time you put less money on the table, your variance decreases. You can't play fewer hands (for the same amount) yet have your variance increase. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Don

[aceside]

Yes, that's exactly right. So, in this case, $30. And, of course, since aceside mentioned that, by adding an extra player, the variance would increase, you can rest assured that, of course, it would decrease! Any time you put less money on the table, your variance decreases. You can't play fewer hands (for the same amount) yet have your variance increase. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Don

I am looking at your saying the opposite. Does this mean I have been holding the wrong belief for the last three years? When we have two players at the same blackjack table, I the player just assume that my neighbor player is not willing to display all his cards to me and I just put all of them behind the cut card of this shoe; therefore, this is equivalent to dramatically decreasing the penetration of the shoe and thus increasing the variance per hand. I am a little bit confused now.

[Freightman]

And, of course, since aceside mentioned that, by adding an extra player, the variance would increase, you can rest assured that, of course, it would decrease!

Reminds me of a character from a Bob Hope movie that played in the early 60’s - Wrong Way Goldfarb

[Dog Hand]

<snip> When we have two players at the same blackjack table, I the player just assume that my neighbor player is not willing to display all his cards to me and I just put all of them behind the cut card of this shoe; therefore, this is equivalent to dramatically decreasing the penetration of the shoe and thus increasing the variance per hand. I am a little bit confused now.

aceside,

What??? Don't you get to see your coy neighbor's hole cards at the end of the round, when the dealer exposes each hand?

Dog Hand

P. S. I will admit that I have played pitch games in one now-long-gone casino, the Bally's on Lake Ponchartrain, where if the dealer busted, she would hide each player's hole cards if that player stood pat on two cards, since the player could not have busted. Similarly, if all the players busted or had BJ's, the dealer would not expose her hole card. Finally, if the dealer had a BJ, she would hide all the players' hole cards.

Are you playing in a casino that follows a similar practice?