Say if you do not use straight counting but advanced techniques (Shall not mention) then is it true we can stay more than the one hour per session advocated for counters? Or even much more because they will think we are just lucky?
if you’re referring to advanced strategies while counting - yes - excluding shitholes, you’ll be evaluated as just being lucky with that ugly variance around the corner just waiting to get you. It will be cumulative that will get you in the end.Originally Posted by Iwantmoney
It matters what you are doing exactly. For example hole-card/next-card plays happen to be correlated with many actual cheating techniques. They may be legal but casinos often do not understand that: they just look at the tapes and see you betting into and making plays on information you would not normally have.
If you are doing something which isn't correlated with cheating techniques or counting then yeah you will last a lot longer. As FM says your cumulative win will eventually get you bounced. The only way round that is to use skew plays, where the distribution of wins is mostly negative most of the time, but ultimately results in a huge win. If you have an off-the-top edge for example any kind of progression betting system which escalates with a win will cause you to lose your majority of sessions even though you will win long-term.
However it was stated in another thread provided you play unrated and are not noticeable they do not usually set you up and cumulate your wins? Imagine Mr. A won 1340.5 that day, today let’s see how much he wins? Imagine the number of players they have to create a table for?
If no one tracks cumulative win or any other metric indicating you are an AP then you can't be banned because of that.
However even then eventually someone is probably going to notice you win a lot and take it up with management. Probably. It is a good idea to advertise your losses and keep your wins quiet for that reason.
Eventually with computerization of inventory and Moore's law it is likely this will all get automated. I'm never too crazy about Andersen-type plays for this reason-whatever the reality now that approach will become obsolete.
When you play more advanced games, the tendency is for the EV to go up and the heat to go down. This means that you can generally play more with less of getting backed off.
I also don't agree with "don't play more than one hour." Some games, like Las Vegas double deck, an hour is probably pushing it. Other games, if the crew is clueless and you have a lot of travel time between casinos, you'll never make money playing one hour sessions.
You need to be very careful about accepting these rigid "rules" that are thrown around. It's not to say that "don't play more than an hour" is a useless rule. It is useful. But it's best to understand why the "rule" exists, so that you can understand when there are exceptions.
The Cash Cow.
So many problems with this. Yes, casinos tend to watch high limit more than the floor.
But stupid casinos are stupid. And they may not even watch the high limit room. And even if they do watch the high limit room, they may use some kind of silly, rigid game protection strategy than can easily be manipulated. The more casinos there are, the more stupid casinos there are. There are not that many competent game protection people to go around.
Winning doesn't always lead to you getting analyzed, either. Many casinos will do tape reviews of big winners from each day. But many don't. And even if they do, you can beat this in many ways, such as not looking like what they're worried about, keeping your wins small enough that you're not frequently on their watchlist, or keeping your "wins" small enough that you're not frequently on their watchlist. If they don't know you're winning, you won't get heated up for winning.
It's almost always a mistake to have these kind of rigid "rules". It really does a disservice because people read something like this, they don't understand the nuance, and they just assume that any play in high limit is going to get them bounced. Or that they can't win a lot and get away with it. This rigid thinking is a huge problem in the AP literature and on many of the boards.
The Cash Cow.
Stupid casinos are stupid until they’re not. I don’t see why you find my comments a problem or why you imply my comments are rigid. Hi limit rooms are my preference. One point I did not make is that many hi limit rooms will more closely scrutinize Baccarat over Blackjack. That said, you can’t hide the fact that you’re counting - what you can do is implement strategies that make you look less competent and which in reality increase your EV.
Granted, to do this, one needs a very good grasp of the nuances. Thank you you Snyder, Wong and a host of others. I don’t really use CVCX ir CV Data anymore - I did a whole bunch of that years ago and I would encourage serious players to heavily play around with CVCX on spreads, ramps etc. to help improve one’s paradigms. They’re strategies beyond that, but that’s a story for another day.
Now, assuming a counter has done everything right, a point will come when a threshold is reached and that will be the end of that. What will get you bounced quickly are insulting hi limit spreads while wearing Walmart specials, arm pit stained 2 day old shirts, with greasy unkempt flat hair by sleeping in your car or one’s poor manner on a Colin trained monkey.
In others, persona with deceptive skills are the way to go.
I respectfully disagree. And, in fact, it doesn't matter whether you can or cannot hide the fact that you are counting. What matters is whether you look like the casino thinks it looks like when someone is counting. It is often possible to modify your attack to still have an advantage, but not look like their perception of what a counter looks like.
Or, they may have a rigid game protection procedure that can be beaten. For example, many casinos will call upstairs for a "skills check" to see if you are counting. This may be human or computerized. In many cases, if you "pass" a skill check, you are given a pass to play. There are a lot of ways to manipulate them with this information.
Or they may only look for people who are winning with bet variation. But you can play very high stakes while flat betting and not get heat.
The Cash Cow.
There does seem to be an enormous amount of resistance around this simple fact for something so trivial to prove.
Working out somebody is counting with a high degree of confidence is trivial. The only thing that is going to protect you from being detected someone competent is keeping the sample size so small the analyst doesn't have enough data.
There are many people working for casinos who cannot identify counters-that does not disqualify the truth of the above statements.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks