i was as surprised as you are balance of judgement. funny thing i could not event turn things around, i was playing one shoe after another with tc -1 +1 and did not spread my bets much. my last counting was about 30 mins ago and i lost there. so they should have seen me count and decide what to do for 30 minutes then acted upon it.
To KJ, et al,
Tthree is quoting me.
This year, playing in Europe, I won > US$8,000 in under an hour.
I was summarily 86'd.
I had no choice but to return to the casino the following day.
(for reasons that I am certainly unable to publicly reveal.)
Upon my return the Casino Manager approached and said that I had "Just been lucky"
and was welcome to play in his casino at any time. Needless to say, I had more than a few choice words for him.
Yes I use Hi-Opt II; and since there were few enough decks, I was side-counting both Aces and Sevens.
I also know a redoubtable A.P. that had his 86'ing "reversed" in the U S A
He realized that in his last 2 shoes he was shuffle-tracking. He was not "moving his money with the count."
He demanded to see the casino Shift Manager. With a 'straight face' he swore that he was
not counting cards, as he stridently requested that his play be reviewed by the Shift Manager himself.
The reversal was accompanied by an apologetic handshake. That was several years ago.
I can certainly understand the STer not correlating with the count. I still would have thought reversals to be fairly rare though, it would imply that the casino employee knows enough about counting to think you're not counting (with HiLo), but not enough knowledge about counting to realise that you actually are.
Interesting story Flash and I don't doubt every word is true.
26 people have jumped off the Golden Gate Bridge and lived to tell about. But that doesn't make it a good idea. My point: It's rare...just like a back off reversal. The odds are stacked against you and there is a strong possibility that you are doing much more harm than good. Heat, back offs and barrings are part of our business, as you well know. The best approach is to move on drawing as little attention and making yourself as non-memorable as possible. Then this location becomes available to you again after a short break. If you try to talk your way out of it, plead your case to a higher up you are only bringing more attention to yourself and insuring a lasting memory. Instead of losing that location for a short period of a couple months, you may have to stay away for years. And what is the upside? You successfully negotiate a reversal. As I said, you are not buying yourself a clean slate, you are at best buying very limited additional time with much extra scrutiny. The needle is swinging pretty far to the negative side on the risk-reward meter.
There are really just eight (8) (virtually) cost-free hands to misplay.
Needless to say, these are generally plays with an index of ZERO.
The most outstanding plays include:
- Ace-Deuce vs. 5
- Ace-Four vs. 4
- 12 vs. 4
- Ace-Seven vs. Ace (NOT vs. 9 or 10.)
Last year I was playing alongside of a team member.
There was a PROMO; making the game "positive off the top."
I was betting roughly $100 to $800.
He was betting $200 to 2 x $3,000
He played with cover. I played without.
I was "trespassed". He was unmolested.
Draw your own conclusions,
but … Q. E. D.
BJSV (or whatever it is now called) uses Griffin's actual EOR's for each card to determine your edge not a count. If you use a multiple level count it probably makes your edge actually match more closely the computer evaluation of your betting. Only when a human is counting you down the old fashioned way using high-low are there minor differences in TC and still when you're above a 1%advantage with High-Low chances are you're above a 1% advantage with Zen, A02, KO, or Hi-Opt-II. Remember all of these are between 96% and 99% betting correlation. Where there may be a difference between evaluation of you with a multiple level count and a single level count is for face down games where you can see all the cards of the other players or count by inference based on the actions of the other players...the surveillance operator will not have access to the same count information as you until after the hand is complete and this assumes the surveillance person can see all of the cards from busted hands. (this is why Bellagio deals their double deck game face up). If you play a face up game using a two level count is not any help to you at all.Originally Posted by Tthree
I've had a backoff partially rescinded at an unnamed casino but this was because I used to also play some craps and video poker and my host got me put back in. I know a few other people who were reinstated with apologies...but it is an extremely rare occurrence and I doubt a multiple level count was the reason for it.
"Blackjack Survey Voice", it is my understanding, a la "facts on the ground", is rarely used.
Whether this is a purely pragmatic issue, or merely an interesting academic distinction;
on behalf of myself, Tthree, and the silent lurkers on this forum, I appreciate the brief disquisition.
[please pardon the oxymoron]
Posting Permissions
-*-
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks