Aleatoric: Dubious re high-stakes SP 21

[Aleatoric]

To deflect what might seem like criticism to some, let me say up front that I have the greatest admiration for the achievement of Kat Walker in cracking the code of Spanish 21, and I think that for recreational and low-stakes players, her book should have a tremendous effect.

However, after speaking with a serious BJ AP about this, I had to agree with him that the opportunities for making money at higher levels seem to be limited. By far, most of the places offering a playable game (S17 or H17 redoubling)are located in either the Pacific Northwest or the North East.

As far as the Northwest goes, by far most of the redoubling games are in small casinos with max bets of $100-200. A handful offer $500 max games. But, as the poster from Washington mentioned in a thread below, in any case, one can only redouble to the max bet, so in a $100 max game, your top bet could only be $25. So much for high stakes in the Northwest.

In the Northeast, most of the SP 21 tables are crowded for most of the day. Part of the problem is that, unlike with regular BJ, there are no higher limit tables. In part, though, this is just a chronic East Coast problem.

My friend claims that crowding is actually more of a problem than with regular BJ, because the game at a fuller table is even slower, perhaps 40 rather than 60 h.p.h., because many players need to have the rules explained, and many players are Asians, who, he says, like to 'squeeze out' their hands.

In dealing with this issue in Australia, Kat says she will play during graveyard, say starting to play at 4 a.m. to play heads-up, but I'm assuming that even so, the pit crew is used to seeing high level play at Sp 21. Here, my friend says, max bets at the game rarely top $100 and most are well below. He believes that a high-stakes (+500 max) Sp 21 player, playing head-up at that hour of the day would attract tremendous scrutiny. And as we have seen, there are only a handful of Eastern casinos where this is even a possibility. And in half of these the max bet at Sp 21 is $500, and at the other half $1000.

My friend suggests that there is a very good place to play SP 21...Australia. He may be going.

I hope that some here will be able to shoot holes in this hypothesis, and that there are opportunities for serious play that I'm not seeing. Again, this is not intended as a criticism of Kat, but as an attempt to take a look at the realities of playing this game in the U.S..

Al

[orster52]

> To deflect what might seem like criticism to some, let
> me say up front that I have the greatest admiration
> for the achievement of Kat Walker in cracking the code
> of Spanish 21, and I think that for recreational and
> low-stakes players, her book should have a tremendous
> effect.

> However, after speaking with a serious BJ AP about
> this, I had to agree with him that the opportunities
> for making money at higher levels seem to be limited.
> By far, most of the places offering a playable game
> (S17 or H17 redoubling)are located in either the
> Pacific Northwest or the North East.

> As far as the Northwest goes, by far most of the
> redoubling games are in small casinos with max bets of
> $100-200. A handful offer $500 max games. But, as the
> poster from Washington mentioned in a thread below, in
> any case, one can only redouble to the max bet, so in
> a $100 max game, your top bet could only be $25. So
> much for high stakes in the Northwest.

> In the Northeast, most of the SP 21 tables are crowded
> for most of the day. Part of the problem is that,
> unlike with regular BJ, there are no higher limit
> tables. In part, though, this is just a chronic East
> Coast problem.

> My friend claims that crowding is actually more of a
> problem than with regular BJ, because the game at a
> fuller table is even slower, perhaps 40 rather than 60
> h.p.h., because many players need to have the rules
> explained, and many players are Asians, who, he says,
> like to 'squeeze out' their hands.

> In dealing with this issue in Australia, Kat says she
> will play during graveyard, say starting to play at 4
> a.m. to play heads-up, but I'm assuming that even so,
> the pit crew is used to seeing high level play at Sp
> 21. Here, my friend says, max bets at the game rarely
> top $100 and most are well below. He believes that a
> high-stakes (+500 max) Sp 21 player, playing head-up
> at that hour of the day would attract tremendous
> scrutiny. And as we have seen, there are only a
> handful of Eastern casinos where this is even a
> possibility. And in half of these the max bet at Sp 21
> is $500, and at the other half $1000.

> My friend suggests that there is a very good place to
> play SP 21...Australia. He may be going.

> I hope that some here will be able to shoot holes in
> this hypothesis, and that there are opportunities for
> serious play that I'm not seeing. Again, this is not
> intended as a criticism of Kat, but as an attempt to
> take a look at the realities of playing this game in
> the U.S..

> Al

I think all your points are valid. Spanish 21 players are much slower than regular bj players. They simply take more time guessing what to do. You probably overestimate the pit being competent to evaluate your play even at larger stakes. I've only played hundreds, not thousands, but am usually the biggest player by far. The pit looks, but does not see. Graveyard is best to get rid of the civilians. The local place I do most of my play has barred me from regular bj, so I play spanish 21 because I can. Good luck.

[AutomaticMonkey]

> To deflect what might seem like criticism to some, let
> me say up front that I have the greatest admiration
> for the achievement of Kat Walker in cracking the code
> of Spanish 21, and I think that for recreational and
> low-stakes players, her book should have a tremendous
> effect.

> However, after speaking with a serious BJ AP about
> this, I had to agree with him that the opportunities
> for making money at higher levels seem to be limited.
> By far, most of the places offering a playable game
> (S17 or H17 redoubling)are located in either the
> Pacific Northwest or the North East.

> As far as the Northwest goes, by far most of the
> redoubling games are in small casinos with max bets of
> $100-200. A handful offer $500 max games. But, as the
> poster from Washington mentioned in a thread below, in
> any case, one can only redouble to the max bet, so in
> a $100 max game, your top bet could only be $25. So
> much for high stakes in the Northwest.

> In the Northeast, most of the SP 21 tables are crowded
> for most of the day. Part of the problem is that,
> unlike with regular BJ, there are no higher limit
> tables. In part, though, this is just a chronic East
> Coast problem.

> My friend claims that crowding is actually more of a
> problem than with regular BJ, because the game at a
> fuller table is even slower, perhaps 40 rather than 60
> h.p.h., because many players need to have the rules
> explained, and many players are Asians, who, he says,
> like to 'squeeze out' their hands.

> In dealing with this issue in Australia, Kat says she
> will play during graveyard, say starting to play at 4
> a.m. to play heads-up, but I'm assuming that even so,
> the pit crew is used to seeing high level play at Sp
> 21. Here, my friend says, max bets at the game rarely
> top $100 and most are well below. He believes that a
> high-stakes (+500 max) Sp 21 player, playing head-up
> at that hour of the day would attract tremendous
> scrutiny. And as we have seen, there are only a
> handful of Eastern casinos where this is even a
> possibility. And in half of these the max bet at Sp 21
> is $500, and at the other half $1000.

> My friend suggests that there is a very good place to
> play SP 21...Australia. He may be going.

> I hope that some here will be able to shoot holes in
> this hypothesis, and that there are opportunities for
> serious play that I'm not seeing. Again, this is not
> intended as a criticism of Kat, but as an attempt to
> take a look at the realities of playing this game in
> the U.S..

Well all right, let's look at the reality.

Beating SP21 is something I would compare to beating Super Fun 21. The game had/has a limited reach, low table limits, but nonetheless a few players have taken quite a bit of money out of those tables. Nobody's going to earn a living playing Super Fun but enough players have benefited from it to make it worthwhile analyzing and learning the game, for some.

Likewise with SP21. I agree, this is an opportunity for the Northeast and Canada. But can you begrudge us this- look at what the alternatives are! Grind out 8D games with a SCORE of 40 for a while and you'll see the appeal. Out West there are different opportunities.

So while I'll never forget about playing blackjack, as long as I can make 2-3 times as much at a SP21 table I'm going to do it. It's a pleasure to do it. We have SP21 tables with $500 and $1K limits here and that's enough for most of us, and the hold at those tables must be so enormous that they are never going to notice any money missing. Consider the ability to play SP21 as just one more item in the skill set of an AP.

[Aruuba]

there are only a > handful of Eastern casinos where this is even a
> possibility. And in half of these the max bet at Sp 21
> is $500, and at the other half $1000.

What are the limits in AC? Like maybe 10-500 and 25-1000?

Tables can and do get crowded but I also see alot of empty ones on weekdays anyway last time I was there. Usually a $25 min though. Your buddy could maybe find empty tables at the start of a shift like noon or so. Don't know why either one of them couldn't accomodate the occasional $500 bet.

Has he actually played yet? Anyway that plane ticket to Australia is alot of EV.

What do you call a "low-stakes" player? Just wondering.

[alienated]

My post is also not intended as a criticism of Katarina Walker's book, which I find useful in its analysis of the game.

I just have a small quibble over the notion that pontoon in Australia attracts less scrutiny than blackjack. IMO, this is not really true today. It may have been true in the past. I'm pretty sure this change is unrelated to the appearance of Katarina's book, since it occurred earlier.

A couple of examples may illustrate. In one of the larger Australian casinos, when pontoon first appeared, blackjack and pontoon were both dealt from 8-deck shoes. Blackjack pen was a horrendous 5/8, while pontoon was initially 7+/8. Table limits were (and still are) similar for both games in this casino. This tends to indicate less casino concern about pontoon initially, although even at this point I think the lower concern may have simply been a rational response to the weaker knowledge of the average player in this game. However, over time, as counters began to play pontoon in preference to blackjack, penetration in pontoon gravitated towards the blackjack penetration. Today, both blackjack and pontoon in this casino are CSM games, eliminating counters altogether.

Another example. In one of the smaller casinos, when pontoon initially appeared it was an 8-deck hand-shuffled game. Pen was decent on both blackjack and pontoon at the time. A side bet was offered in both games, the casino apparently not realizing that the absence of tens in pontoon shifted the odds in the player's favor enough to give the player the edge! Upon learning this lesson, and still apparently not overly concerned about counters, the casino switched the pontoon game to 4 decks with decent pen (rather than adjusting the payout structure, perhaps to minimize dealer error when switching between games). The decrease in decks put the side bet back in the casino's favor, but made the pontoon game significantly better for counters than the blackjack (though table limits were lower). However, today both blackjack and pontoon in this casino are also CSM games, presumably a reflection that the casino is aware of counters hitting pontoon and not just blackjack.

I think Katarina Walker when in Australia mainly played in a casino over the other side of the country from the above two examples, in a casino that had long used CSMs for blackjack but not pontoon. I therefore think it is understandable that she would perceive less casino concern over pontoon than blackjack.

There are still non-CSM pontoon games in some Australian casinos. However, I don't believe there is any benefit in terms of less casino scrutiny.

None of this is to suggest that pontoon is unplayable. It is simply to indicate that you should expect scrutiny in this game similar to what you face when playing blackjack. I think the attraction of pontoon for the Australian casinos is not that it stops counters any more than blackjack, but because the average player is very far from a basic strategist in pontoon - much more so than with blackjack. I used to wonder, when reading about the old days in Vegas, how they could possibly offer games that were even off the top for the basic strategist (or even slightly positive off the top). The answer of course is that players used very poor strategy. It's similar with pontoon today. It has a lower theoretical house edge than (Australian) blackjack assuming basic strategy is used by all players, but I bet the casinos' actual edge is much higher in this game than in blackjack.

[Aleatoric]

> Well all right, let's look at the reality.

> Beating SP21 is something I would compare to beating
> Super Fun 21. The game had/has a limited reach, low
> table limits, but nonetheless a few players have taken
> quite a bit of money out of those tables. Nobody's
> going to earn a living playing Super Fun but enough
> players have benefited from it to make it worthwhile
> analyzing and learning the game, for some.

> Likewise with SP21. I agree, this is an opportunity
> for the Northeast and Canada. But can you begrudge us
> this- look at what the alternatives are! Grind out 8D
> games with a SCORE of 40 for a while and you'll see
> the appeal. Out West there are different
> opportunities.

> So while I'll never forget about playing blackjack, as
> long as I can make 2-3 times as much at a SP21 table
> I'm going to do it. It's a pleasure to do it. We have
> SP21 tables with $500 and $1K limits here and that's
> enough for most of us, and the hold at those tables
> must be so enormous that they are never going to
> notice any money missing. Consider the ability to play
> SP21 as just one more item in the skill set of an AP.

It sounds like you're pretty much confirming what I wrote - as I said, SP 21 should be a positive outlet for sub-$500 max players. I guess the question of whether SP 21 can be played without heat at a higher level is still open.

[Aleatoric]

> there are only a > handful of Eastern casinos where
> this is even a

> What are the limits in AC? Like maybe 10-500 and
> 25-1000?

> Tables can and do get crowded but I also see alot of
> empty ones on weekdays anyway last time I was there.
> Usually a $25 min though. Your buddy could maybe find
> empty tables at the start of a shift like noon or so.
> Don't know why either one of them couldn't accomodate
> the occasional $500 bet.

> Has he actually played yet? Anyway that plane ticket
> to Australia is alot of EV.

> What do you call a "low-stakes" player? Just
> wondering.

I don't know what casinos in AC you've been in, but my friend and I (separately) have put in a fair amount of time scouting the major casinos in AC and CT in the past six weeks or so and found, to our surprise, most SP 21 too crowded (4 or more players per table) between the hours of 10 a.m. and midnight to be worth playing. I'm not saying that the odd empty table doesn't appear during this time, but keep in mind the phenomenon of the 'mirage' empty table - one where, as soon as you sit down, four others immediately join in - a familiar experience to all of us.

Also you mention seeing 'a lot' of empty tables on weekdays - most AC casinos have only three or four SP 21 tables, and during weekdays only one or two are open, usually full. Caesar's has, I believe, seven, and open two during weekdays. Trump Plaza ditto. I could go on. Like Foxwoods, which has almost as many SP 21 tables as all of AC combined (and all full, including the two $25 min. when I was there last week) the casinos now 'manage to full' opening only as many tables for a game as they can fill and closing tables as they decline to even two or three players.

My friend has looked over Kat's book at my suggestion, and is trying to decide whether it's indeed possible to play at his usual level with less heat, even though he'll be limited to grave. He may decide that this limitation isn't worth the trouble, but we'll see.

[Aleatroric]

> My post is also not intended as a criticism of
> Katarina Walker's book, which I find useful in its
> analysis of the game.

> I just have a small quibble over the notion that
> pontoon in Australia attracts less scrutiny than
> blackjack. IMO, this is not really true today. It may
> have been true in the past. I'm pretty sure this
> change is unrelated to the appearance of Katarina's
> book, since it occurred earlier.

> A couple of examples may illustrate. In one of the
> larger Australian casinos, when pontoon first
> appeared, blackjack and pontoon were both dealt from
> 8-deck shoes. Blackjack pen was a horrendous 5/8,
> while pontoon was initially 7+/8. Table limits were
> (and still are) similar for both games in this casino.
> This tends to indicate less casino concern about
> pontoon initially, although even at this point I think
> the lower concern may have simply been a rational
> response to the weaker knowledge of the average player
> in this game. However, over time, as counters began to
> play pontoon in preference to blackjack, penetration
> in pontoon gravitated towards the blackjack
> penetration. Today, both blackjack and pontoon in this
> casino are CSM games, eliminating counters altogether.

> Another example. In one of the smaller casinos, when
> pontoon initially appeared it was an 8-deck
> hand-shuffled game. Pen was decent on both blackjack
> and pontoon at the time. A side bet was offered in
> both games, the casino apparently not realizing that
> the absence of tens in pontoon shifted the odds in the
> player's favor enough to give the player the edge!
> Upon learning this lesson, and still apparently not
> overly concerned about counters, the casino switched
> the pontoon game to 4 decks with decent pen (rather
> than adjusting the payout structure, perhaps to
> minimize dealer error when switching between games).
> The decrease in decks put the side bet back in the
> casino's favor, but made the pontoon game
> significantly better for counters than the blackjack
> (though table limits were lower). However, today both
> blackjack and pontoon in this casino are also CSM
> games, presumably a reflection that the casino is
> aware of counters hitting pontoon and not just
> blackjack.

> I think Katarina Walker when in Australia mainly
> played in a casino over the other side of the country
> from the above two examples, in a casino that had long
> used CSMs for blackjack but not pontoon. I therefore
> think it is understandable that she would perceive
> less casino concern over pontoon than blackjack.

> There are still non-CSM pontoon games in some
> Australian casinos. However, I don't believe there is
> any benefit in terms of less casino scrutiny.

> None of this is to suggest that pontoon is unplayable.
> It is simply to indicate that you should expect
> scrutiny in this game similar to what you face when
> playing blackjack. I think the attraction of pontoon
> for the Australian casinos is not that it stops
> counters any more than blackjack, but because the
> average player is very far from a basic strategist in
> pontoon - much more so than with blackjack. I used to
> wonder, when reading about the old days in Vegas, how
> they could possibly offer games that were even off the
> top for the basic strategist (or even slightly
> positive off the top). The answer of course is that
> players used very poor strategy. It's similar with
> pontoon today. It has a lower theoretical house edge
> than (Australian) blackjack assuming basic strategy is
> used by all players, but I bet the casinos' actual
> edge is much higher in this game than in blackjack.

Alienated,

I've admired your posts on BJ21, but never realized that you were from Australia. I appreciate the detailed post on pontoon in your country. From what you and Kat say, standard BJ has a higher house edge there than here, which is why she chose to play pontoon. But she does say that, even considering the poor basic strategy play of the average player, many casinos there also still tend to overestimate the house edge, which is obviously beneficial to APs.

Re the issue of pit scrutiny, Kat does seem to imply that there is relatively limited heat in Oz, although I may have misread her. Certainly there would a greater measure of heat there than there is (so far) in the U.S. on this game, where casino personnel are not aware that it is vulnerable.

But the main reason why my friend would consider going there would be the possibility of playing the game in the kind of high-limit rooms that Kat describes, which are not available (to my knowledge) for SP 21 in this country, where he could play heads-up undisturbed.

If you have the time, I, and am sure others on this board would appreciate any more comments you might have on Kat's book, on pontoon or on Oz BJ in general.

Thanks again.

Al

[Aleatoric]

> I think all your points are valid. Spanish 21 players
> are much slower than regular bj players. They simply
> take more time guessing what to do. You probably
> overestimate the pit being competent to evaluate your
> play even at larger stakes. I've only played hundreds,
> not thousands, but am usually the biggest player by
> far. The pit looks, but does not see. Graveyard is
> best to get rid of the civilians. The local place I do
> most of my play has barred me from regular bj, so I
> play spanish 21 because I can. Good luck.

You make it sound like it is possible to play SP 21 at larger stakes without much of a problem, even playing during off hours. In a way, this was the question I was hoping to see answered. Obviously, things are working out for you, so hopefully, they also will for my friend. Thanks for your reply and best wishes for continued good fortune at the tables.

Al

[Aruuba]

> It sounds like you're pretty much confirming what I
> wrote - as I said, SP 21 should be a positive outlet
> for sub-$500 max players. I guess the question of
> whether SP 21 can be played without heat at a higher
> level is still open.

I guess what I was trying to say that even an optimal better with a $12.5K roll might reach a $500 max bet but not very often.

But that might represent a 50-1 spread. But most of the time would be spent at a much smaller spread.

But, you're right, I think the question of heat or not at large spreads is a central question. Spreading to multiple hands could be an alternative. Back-counting to a smaller spread another possibilty.

Playing with however many players is up to the individual to decide if the lower hourly win rate is worth it compared to alternative uses of his bankroll.

I'd at least come up with my bet plan and try it and see how it goes. I mean in AC it's not like they can kick you out for counting anyway.

[alienated]

"I've admired your posts on BJ21, but never realized
that you were from Australia."

Thanks for the kind compliment. alienated sometimes claims to be from Australia - alienated's alter ego Ted Forrester suspects this may be true. ;-)

"From what you and Kat say, standard BJ has a higher house edge there than here, which is why she chose to play pontoon."

That's right about the house edges. Blackjack rules in Australia are not as favorable as many of the US games. Typical blackjack is 6 or 8 decks, S17, D9, DAS. Most casinos don't impose full blown ENHC (as explained in Katarina Walker's book), though a couple do. They usually offer either BB+1 or OBBO as also explained in Katarina's book.

I think Katarina indicated in her book that the initial motivation for playing pontoon was that blackjack was CSM in her local casino. (Australia is quite large in land mass for such a small population, with only one casino, or less, in each notable city, and only thirteen casinos in total). For this reason, it is fairly normal for an AP to base themselves at one location, then make regular trips to other parts of the country. I think Katarina indicates that she was based in Perth, with trips elsewhere interspersed. To make Perth work for her, she had a strong motive to look into pontoon.

I think the lower house edge was an added bonus that she only realized later.

"But she does say that, even considering the
poor basic strategy play of the average player, many
casinos there also still tend to overestimate the
house edge, which is obviously beneficial to APs."

That's interesting. I did read that. I can't confirm it, but certainly it seems plausible. As we all know, casinos have been known to make errors from time to time in such analyses in the past.

"Re the issue of pit scrutiny, Kat does seem to imply
that there is relatively limited heat in Oz, although
I may have misread her. Certainly there would a
greater measure of heat there than there is (so far)
in the U.S. on this game, where casino personnel are
not aware that it is vulnerable."

I think Katarina's description of the manner in which Australian casinos deal with skilled play is spot on. Basically, they make the games on the main floor bad for APs, because strictly speaking, a player can't be barred just for being skilled in Australia. (However, they can be restricted - including flat betted to table minimum - which can amount pretty much to the same thing.) In contrast, the high-limit rooms are categorized differently and the casinos can deny access. The consequence is that games are better in the high-limit rooms and scrutinized closely, whereas scrutiny on the main floors is not as intense (though it is still present).

I think you are right that scrutiny in the US may presently be less for SP21 than blackjack. I think pontoon has risen to greater popularity in Australia than SP21 has, at this stage, in the US (which I get the impression remains on the margins).

"But the main reason why my friend would consider going
there would be the possibility of playing the game in
the kind of high-limit rooms that Kat describes, which
are not available (to my knowledge) for SP 21 in this
country, where he could play heads-up undisturbed."

That makes sense. Just expect scrutiny in the high-limit rooms. IMO, treat it the same as blackjack. Any techniques that help to disguise your friend's edge will be just as beneficial in pontoon as in blackjack. For instance, if he can use a little shuffle tracking or sequencing so the betting is not so closely aligned to the count, it will help.

"If you have the time, I, and am sure others on this
board would appreciate any more comments you might
have on Kat's book, on pontoon or on Oz BJ in general."

First, Katarina's game analysis skills are far beyond mine, so I found the book very useful. Before the book came out, I was making use of Wild Bill's SP21 analysis to get ballpark figures for advantage by true count in pontoon. My play primarily involves sequencing and/or tracking and the ballpark figures gleaned from Wild Bill's SP21 info served me well. I appreciate all the additional details that have been included in Katarina's book, and also the accurate numbers for the games I actually play.

I prefer to use a simple, balanced count system. For blackjack I use hi-lo. For pontoon I use one of the level 1 systems Wild Bill suggested, which uses the same tags as hi-lo except to also include the 9 as a big card. Although this would be weaker than Katarina's unbalanced hi lo, I prefer it because it is balanced. But that is just my personal preference.

Australian blackjack is not great. Apart from the typically high house edge, most casinos on their main floors offer either bad penetration on their shoe games or, increasingly, use CSMs instead. Australia is not quite a CSM-only country yet, but it may get there before too much longer. (In the high-limit rooms, games are still non-CSM, but expect to be closely monitored.)

Pontoon is also dealt from CSMs on some casino main floors, though there are still countable games in others. (Again, high-limit rooms will offer better games but you'll be closely watched.)

> Thanks again.

> Al

You're welcome. Good luck to you and your friend.

[alienated]

While a little tracking or sequencing may help to disguise your friend's play, shuffles in the Australian high-limit rooms are usually either 3-passers or of the Shuffle Master ASM variety. This may make the tracking/sequencing cover angle less feasible for your friend (though I don't know).

[Aleatoric]

> I guess what I was trying to say that even an optimal
> better with a $12.5K roll might reach a $500 max bet
> but not very often.

> But that might represent a 50-1 spread. But most of
> the time would be spent at a much smaller spread.

> But, you're right, I think the question of heat or not
> at large spreads is a central question. Spreading to
> multiple hands could be an alternative. Back-counting
> to a smaller spread another possibilty.

> Playing with however many players is up to the
> individual to decide if the lower hourly win rate is
> worth it compared to alternative uses of his bankroll.

> I'd at least come up with my bet plan and try it and
> see how it goes. I mean in AC it's not like they can
> kick you out for counting anyway.

Multiple hands, as you say, may be the answer to my friend's problems, and he is thinking about it. Re backcounting, per my comments on crowding, except for rare occasions, I don't see it as a viable option. Re spread, clearly this doesn't seem to be much of an issue, as far as I can tell, but may become one. Thanks.

Al