mikmuk: Question for Don

[mikmuk]

Where I play, there are a lot of 6 and 8 decks games. I made some money strolling from table to table, spotting a shoe which started earlier but had only few rounds into the game, waiting for it to become +8 and then wong in.
The casino wont mind this tactic, I guess because I obviously wong to some negative shoes too. I assume in the long run I have some advantage, since some of the shoes will be higher than +8 (due to the cards which were dealt before) and they will balance the negative shoes.
Am I right? Do I have some advantage playing this way?

[Trapper]

Don posted below that he is away until Sunday evening. I'll take a stab at your question. You should consider the cards in play before you started counting to be undealt cards. You are essentially wonging in to a game with penetration worse than if you had started backcounting from the shuffle. The value of playing this way depends on the overall penetration (the cards behind the cut card and the cards in the discard tray before you started to backcount.) It should be fairly easy to figure out. For instance if you are wonging in to a six deck shoe with one and a half decks cut off and there is half a deck in the discard tray before you start counting, the penetration of the game is now about 67% instead of 75%. If the pit is wary of backcounters, you will probably not buy much additional time by this strategy. If your casino has lots of six and eight deck games, why not start counting from the shuffle or use a wong out strategy?

[mikmuk]

why not start counting from the shuffle or use a wong out strategy?

too suspicious. beside, I can get more positive shoes this way, since I can immediately eliminate obviously negative shoes. why would anybody suspect me? I'm just an impulsive gambler, strolling the casino and join a random table which many times will be negative. To add to the confusion, I back counting csms, and even join them occasionally for few rounds of low bets.
But I'm still not sure if I really have advantage, or i was just lucky.

[jblaze]

This is as obvious as back counting. You should not consider jumping into a game that's already one deck deep. Therefore, you will only start playing when relatively few cards have been played, i.e. you will be back counting in the eyes of the casino - and you will be back counting with worse pen in the eyes of an advantage player. It is also likely you are not ramping down your bets due to worse penetration, so you are overbetting, and this is most disastrous.

You can eliminate obviously negative shoes by watching the first few rounds from the start of the shuffle. If you walk by a table that's a deck deep, and see all face cards on the table, it is more likely those cards you did not see that have already been dealt were nice tiny little cards, neutralizing your perceived negative count.

Penetration is crucial, from the looks of it you would be a lot better off if you understood just how crucial penetration is. Back counting CSMs is what you say it is - impulsive gambling.

> why not start counting from the shuffle or use a wong
> out strategy?

> too suspicious. beside, I can get more positive shoes
> this way, since I can immediately eliminate obviously
> negative shoes. why would anybody suspect me? I'm just
> an impulsive gambler, strolling the casino and join a
> random table which many times will be negative. To add
> to the confusion, I back counting csms, and even join
> them occasionally for few rounds of low bets.
> But I'm still not sure if I really have advantage, or
> i was just lucky.