jay: Blackjack tips for pro counters and why they wont win from counting alone

[Sam]

Few players would brag if they simply met their EV day and day out. Most of us play with such limited bankrolls that our EV is ridiculously small. Certainly nothing worth bragging about when one considers hours worked and money earned. What puffs us up and causes us to brag is when positive variance meets up with a good count and mistake-free play. Our win far excedes our EV. Many of us whine and moan when negative variance meets up with a good count and mistake-free play. Even though we know both swings are basic to the game, we brag and whine anyway.

It seems that the certitude of advantage play would cause us to see that the big win or the big loss is nothing worthy of a brag or a whine. For an AP to brag about a big win rings as false to me as a progression bettor bragging about a big win. An end of the year report that reflects true or nearly true EV might be a better sign that method trumps luck.

> Relative to the way BJ used to be dealt (S17, SD, down
> to the last card), sure, there are no good games
> anymore. So as a relatively new counter, although I
> respect the veterans' experience, I also realize that
> their perspective is colored by the way things used to
> be that no longer apply to what I have to do to win at
> BJ.

> Look, an 8/1.5 game is not desirable but playable. You
> just grind away at it, the swings are big and the N0
> is high but the win rate is there and it is real.
> Maybe not big enough to satisfy Ken Uston, but I'm not
> Ken Uston. Shop for opportunities, learn a little
> rudimentary shuffle tracking, work your comps and the
> money is there. Generally the worse the game the less
> the heat, so here in the East where the games are
> mediocre but you can get away with nearly anything,
> you learn to really push the envelope.

[Parker]

> Parker,
> In your effort to take jay's post apart you went a bit
> overboard.I have read many books on Blackjack but the
> one with the most substance in it is definately
> "Million Dollar Blackjack". As the rules
> haven't changed since 1981, it cannot be called
> obsolete. It's like saying the Bible is essentially
> obsolete.

The rules have not changed, but playing conditions certainly have changed a great deal. In addition, we have a better understanding of the the mathematics behind the game. However, "obsolete" is probably a little strong - there is still much to be learned from MDBJ, and it certainly deserves a place in every blackjack library. Still, I would not want to rely upon it as my primary reference work.

It is interesting that you mention the Bible, as many people regard Uston with something approaching religious zeal. When I wrote my post, I fully expected to be accused of blasphemy or worse.

> It is pretty naive to think that jay would just have
> to read BJA3 to become successful.Modern computer
> simulations cannot change anything about the player's
> chances, they have only a describing function.

I never said or implied that reading BJA3 (or any other book) would make him successful. I merely said that he would find it enlightening. I think he will.

> I'm sure
> jay knew everything he had to know about the game. If
> he still lost it was not for lacking know-how but
> because he failed to put this effectively into
> practice.May be he was not disciplined enough or he
> was using a counting system that was beyond his
> abilities and he made too many mistakes who
> knows.Reading yet another book wouldn't change
> anything about this.

No, but BJA3 will provide him with the tools he needs to analyse the games and his play. In his posts he claims to have played in Las Vegas full time for two years, but never mentions anything about heat or back-offs. This leads me to suspect that he may not be playing a strong game.

> I'm a bit surprised jay thinks he lost because of poor
> penetration because Uston already insisted on the
> importance of penetration.He even knew about the
> effects of floating advantage which is crucial for a
> professional.Unfortunately,Don plays it down in his
> book.

I don't think he plays it down at all, but rather provides a detailed, mathematically correct analysis. It only becomes significant in well-penetrated games, which brings us right back to penetration.

But I'll leave that for Don to address, if he wishes.

[Don Schlesinger]

> I don't think he plays it down at all, but rather
> provides a detailed, mathematically correct analysis.
> It only becomes significant in well-penetrated games,
> which brings us right back to penetration.

> But I'll leave that for Don to address, if he wishes.

Of course I don't play it down. I state clearly that both Uston and Revere mention the effect of FA, without, perhaps, truly understanding the reason that it exists and without being able to clearly quantify its effects -- first done by John Gwynn, in his landmark study with me. I once discussed the FA personally with Uston. As many know, he didn't do his own math and really had no explanation for why it existed nor how to quantify it.

Don

[jay]

Hi, Parker. Regarding you mentioning about if I got heat or backoffs. I've never gotten Heat or have been backed off. Let me tell you why.. 1)I'm now 23 years old.. when I was playing professional BJ, I started at just over 21.. Due to my young face and age... MANY casino personnel suspected I didnt know what I was doing and that my piling stacks of chips were just short time(when I was winning of course). Heres another reason why I didnt get heat or backoffs.. 2)I'm african-american(Black).. Casinos still think a typical counter is a white guy, probably a bit older.. with glasses.. I'm black and I'm young(not what the typical counter is-fact).. and I was an honor student in school.. Math was my strongest subject. I scored a 100% on numerical ability on my recent IQ test.. and the test also stated that my precision ranks with the best of them. No Frank Saloman, I rarely made mistakes buddy. If I made a mistake it was from me being VERY tired.. I played perfectly.. and yes I won for a long time before going on a major losing streak.. The losing streak could of been more because of emotions.. My emotions started getting involved.. Thats why I insist in my first post that mind and spirit is much more important than counting.. If you have negative thoughts in your brain.. No matter how powerful your system or how great your counting skills.. you will increase chance of lost. If anyone is interested in a good psychology book.. check out "Way of the Warrior"..which discusses the Way of the legendary Samurai and the psychology of those great warriors. An amazon.com search is where you can find it. Also Frank, guess what.. I didnt read MDBJ until AFTER my losing streak. Thats when I realized I wasnt getting enough penetration! As Ken stated- Single Deck, 2 players- 5 rounds-good game. 3 players- 4 rounds- good game.. 4 players- 3 rounds- good game. 5 players- 2 rounds not good. 6 players- 2 rounds- fair game. When I started searching for those single deck games and got them(rarely). Thats when I didnt lose. Listen to Ken Uston.. My favorite and probably the best blackjack player of all time.

Jay
Pro Gamer

[Brick]

you let jay think what he wants.

[jay]

> you let jay think what he wants.

Brick. Check this out. When I played using the AOII system and found games based on Ken Uston's penetration requirements.. My game was unbeatable. Period. YOU can think what you want. Also, let me say this. Why do you think casinos changed their penetration? They changed it because they read Million Dollar Blackjack. I believe Million Dollar Blackjack was the most effective blackjack book ever written. Blackjack for Blood is my second favorite due to the incredible system it outlines.
Later,
Jay

[Shaggy18VW]

[Saboteur]

"No Frank Saloman(sic), I rarely made mistakes buddy."

Hey, honor student, I think you meant to write:

"No, Frank Salmon, I rarely made mistakes, buddy".

Starting a new paragraph would've been best, too.

As written, you've unintentionally slammed poor Francis.

(My apologies to Francis; it could've happened to anyone!)

[jay]

> "No Frank Saloman (sic) , I rarely made mistakes
> buddy." Hey, honor student, I think you meant to
> write:

> "No, Frank Salmon, I rarely made mistakes,
> buddy".

> Starting a new paragraph would've been best, too.

> As written, you've unintentionally slammed poor
> Francis.

> (My apologies to Francis; it could've happened to
> anyone!)

Uh.. Uh.. Too petty for me bro to respond on that. I like perfecting the complicated, moneymaking things in life. Things that dont make me money or help me, I simply have no interest in. Try again pal.

Jay

[Sun Runner]

> .. Thats why I
> insist in my first post that mind and spirit is much
> more important than counting .. If you have negative
> thoughts in your brain .. No matter how powerful your
> system or how great your counting skills .. you will
> increase chance of lost.

Jay, welcome to the board. For better or worse we can agree on this. I personally believe the difference in winning or losing at most everything in life is so small it is almost to scary to talk about. And I believe the difference is attitude.

Attitude more important than counting? We agree that attitude is very very important but it won't overcome poor preperation.

> I scored a
> 100% on numerical ability on my recent IQ test.. and
> the test also stated that my precision ranks with the
> best of them.

Probably so could RAINMAN but he's not gonna be a long run winner for a lot of reasons.

Respectfully, it takes more than math skills and mental acuity to beat the game. For you to deem yourself a professional BJ player, and not know how much penetration effects the game, should tell you that you're not a professional at all.

To that end, I'd be slow to tell other 'professionals' (who happen to be winning signifigant sums regulary) and other grinders (who happen to be winning regularly, the size of their winnings probably limited only by their BR) that the game is unbeatable.

Maybe BJ is not your game, that's fine. But it's still beatable. Just because you have logged a lot of hours on bad games and/or hit a run of negative variance does not make your observations valid.

I'm thinking you spend enough time in the sports book and the deviation dog will find you there also.

If your as smart as you think you are, forget about the IQ test, forget about what the counselors at school told you, stick around, study up, and learn the game.

Or don't.

Good luck to you.

[pm]

Yeah, like Sun Runner said, it's kind of weird that you played so much blackjack without even evaluating the pen of your games. Seems like the most basic step to take after learning how to count cards is to enter your bank & game (i.e. rules and pen) into BJRM/CVCX and look at your estimated winrate/growth rate/ROR. It probably wouldn't take more than a minute to figure out that you're getting into a situation where you're probably going to end up grabbing your ankles (due to a bad game or too small a spread or not enough bank or whatever). It's weird that someone would go through hundreds of hours of play without having the absolute minimum information required to play blackjack.

[Praying Mantis]

> Alright guys. Heres the deal. It is very difficult to
> win consistenly from professional blackjack in todays
> casinos.. Heres why you cant win from card counting
> alone..

Definitely not easy. But, anything worthwhile isn't EASY.

I think you need to talk to a few players. One's I've talked to that "ONLY" count and played for a lot longer than your two-year period, have told me point-blank, they have won and have the spreadsheets to prove it! Have they had long periods of not winning, sure...but if you're the "Math Expert" you claim to be, you should be fully aware of variance and know that the losing comes with the winning. It doesn't matter what you've done on your last session, trip, or even YEAR...look over a ten-year period, go back and SEE if you're winning. If you're playing winnable games and your skills have been honed properly, you can't do nothing BUT win! Math is math and it doesn't change, surely you understand that?

> B. Double Deck games are dealt until theres
> approximately 1 deck remaining.. thats about the best
> penetration your going to get in todays casino.

Is that right? For a player that calls himself a "Pro" and has lived off of blackjack for two solid years, I sure would like to find out where you've been playing to where you can't find a DD game that has pen beyond one deck. I can take you to MANY games that give 70% and MORE! One game deals down to about 10 cards! How can you say what you're saying?

> C. Multiple Deck games arent dealt enough for you to
> win consistently as well. Just check Ken Uston's
> Million Dollar Blackjack.. NONE of the games today..
> qualifies as a GOOD game based on the great Ken
> Uston's book - Million Dollar Blackjack.

I normally don't play shoes, but I have seen and played games that have dealt 5 out of 6. If you need more pen than that to win, perhaps you need more PRACTICE!

> Now, I believe if someone still wants to play
> professional blackjack.. Since there are no good games
> in Las Vegas today.. based on Ken Uston's great book..
> The most important thing is NOT cardcounting. The most
> important thing is playing with a relaxed, focused,
> optimists mind. This is the real deal here.. this
> should help your winnings.. long and short term. Good

I agree that you must be mentally optimistic about your results, but be truthful, how many times have you sit down at a table "knowing" you were gonna clean their clock only to be enlightened? Math is math and the cards don't know what kind of attitude you have and could care less. Variance takes over no matter how "POSITIVE" you are.

I do believe that negativity leads the mind to make plays and decisions we shouldn't that definitely hurts our game, but a positive attitude alone won't change your results if Mother Flux rears her ugly head.

btw, welcome to the site.

PM

[Parker]

> Hi, Parker. Regarding you mentioning about if I got
> heat or backoffs. I've never gotten Heat or have been
> backed off. Let me tell you why.. 1)I'm now 23 years
> old.. when I was playing professional BJ, I started at
> just over 21.. Due to my young face and age... MANY
> casino personnel suspected I didnt know what I was
> doing and that my piling stacks of chips were just
> short time(when I was winning of course). Heres
> another reason why I didnt get heat or backoffs..
> 2)I'm african-american(Black).. Casinos still think a
> typical counter is a white guy, probably a bit older..
> with glasses.. I'm black and I'm young(not what the
> typical counter is-fact)..

These days, your youth is actually a liability. Most of the members of the MIT teams were barely old enough to be in a casino. Your race might buy a little cover -- except that these days, you're just as likely as not to find a member of your race in the pit - and I don't think he (or she) will be fooled.

I stand by my statement: If you indeed played full time for two years in Las Vegas with no heat or back-offs, you were probably not playing a very strong game.

> and I was an honor student
> in school.. Math was my strongest subject. I scored a
> 100% on numerical ability on my recent IQ test.. and
> the test also stated that my precision ranks with the
> best of them. No Frank Saloman, I rarely made mistakes
> buddy. If I made a mistake it was from me being VERY
> tired.. I played perfectly.. and yes I won for a long
> time before going on a major losing streak.. The
> losing streak could of been more because of emotions..

No. You had a losing streak because it was inevitable. Anyone who plays this game for any length of time will experience losing streaks.