walmartian: "illustrious 18, etc."

[walmartian]

the more i keep track of fours, fives, and sixes in no more than 2 decks game, as well as variations based on "ill 18", etc...the more i "think" too much about what variations in play to make on certain hands. one dealer said u think too much. i was coming to wonder why it seems like when i use the count only for betting purposes, rather than for playing variations as well, i do better than when i vary plays and make hitting or staying decisions based on the count and how many fours, fives, and sixes remain to be played. the more i "think" into the game, the more i seem to lose in the long run. the long run for me in this case is about 3 years straight--overall. 2 years prior, i couldnt lose...and i played perfect BS without tracking fours, fives, and sixes. what recommendations should i consider in this perplexing situation? its hard to turn the brain off when ur at a table, now that i know whats what.

[OldCootFromVA]

If you're gonna do that, why not just use an accepted, proven counting method such as HiLo?

Not only will you gain the advantage, but the proven indices tell you exactly (well, reasonably close to "exactly") when to deviate from basic strategy.

[OldCootFromVA]

I've done some overthinking in the past as well. It almost seems that it predicts the opposite of what actually happens.

I've learned the hard way: K.I.S.S.

[PunkEye]

> the more i keep track of fours, fives, and sixes in no
> more than 2 decks game, as well as variations based on
> "ill 18", etc...the more i "think"
> too much about what variations in play to make on
> certain hands. one dealer said u think too much. i was
> coming to wonder why it seems like when i use the
> count only for betting purposes, rather than for
> playing variations as well, i do better than when i
> vary plays and make hitting or staying decisions based
> on the count and how many fours, fives, and sixes
> remain to be played. the more i "think" into
> the game, the more i seem to lose in the long run. the
> long run for me in this case is about 3 years
> straight--overall. 2 years prior, i couldnt lose...and
> i played perfect BS without tracking fours, fives, and
> sixes. what recommendations should i consider in this
> perplexing situation? its hard to turn the brain off
> when ur at a table, now that i know whats what.

You don't mention the conditions(pen, *players) you play under nor spread or bankroll. You should not be using Hi-Lo in pitch games in any case. Shoe games can only realistically be beaten with shuffle tracking or hole carding, if that is your bent.

[OldCootFromVA]

> You should not be using Hi-Lo in pitch games in any case.

What crap. Hi-Lo was invented back in the day when ALL games were hand-held and nobody had ever heard of a "shoe."

You sound like the typical gambler who gets frustrated because counting does not work the way it does in the movies.

[PunkEye]

Untrue Cootie baby. But what is factual is that Uston knew far more than you abut the game. That's why he never used Hi-Lo. It's a weak system.

[OldCootFromVA]

> Untrue Cootie baby. But what is factual is that Uston
> knew far more than you abut the game. That's why he
> never used Hi-Lo. It's a weak system.

No, Uston's ego was such that he swapped the Seven for the Two for next-to-zero benefit just so he could have his own name on a count.

Don't like to speak ill of the dead, but his main "contribution" was poisoning the Atlantic City well for the rest of us.

[Disagree About "poisoning the Atlantic City well for the rest of us.&a]

Uston's case was ruled on by the New Jersey Supreme Court in the fall of 1982. The brief golden age of blackjack in Atlantic City ended a year before that. The New Jersey Casino Control Commission repealed the regulation that had required all casinos to maintain set percentages of $2 and $5 tables early in 1981 and repealed the regulation that had required all casinos to offer early surrender in the summer of 1981, without mandating a compensating favorable rule.

It is likely that early surrender was put into the priginal regulations by the Commission in 1978 by accident or without an understanding that the rules gave the player a 0.1% basic strategy advantage. Late surreneder had been much more common than early surrender in all other jurisdictions. Early surrender came into being because of the rule that prohibited the dealer from checking his holecard until all players finished playing their hands in order to prevent collusion between the player and dealer. The original rules also did not allow resplitting of pairs, which is very rare.

The Commision made a procedural error when it removed surrender. Uston realized this, initiaed legal action and surrender was restored for a short period before the Commission used its "emergency" powers to remove surrender and the governor signed onto the "emergency" order. I participated in a "Save Surrender" demonstration called by Ken Uston. It was a lot of fun; it wasn't Tahrir Square.

Uston was a publicity hound, but ending arbitrary and capricious backoffs and barings of players who used their superior skills in a lawful manner is clearly in the public interest. Blame the Commission, the New Jersey Legislature, the New Jersy courts for the Campione ruling and the concentration of too much casino ownership in too few hands, but don't blame Uston.

[OldCootFromVA]

> Uston's case was ruled on by the New Jersey Supreme
> Court in the fall of 1982. The brief golden age of
> blackjack in Atlantic City ended a year before that.
> The New Jersey Casino Control Commission repealed the
> regulation that had required all casinos to maintain
> set percentages of $2 and $5 tables early in 1981 and
> repealed the regulation that had required all casinos
> to offer early surrender in the summer of 1981,
> without mandating a compensating favorable rule.

> It is likely that early surrender was put into the
> priginal regulations by the Commission in 1978 by
> accident or without an understanding that the rules
> gave the player a 0.1% basic strategy advantage. Late
> surreneder had been much more common than early
> surrender in all other jurisdictions. Early surrender
> came into being because of the rule that prohibited
> the dealer from checking his holecard until all
> players finished playing their hands in order to
> prevent collusion between the player and dealer. The
> original rules also did not allow resplitting of
> pairs, which is very rare.

> The Commision made a procedural error when it removed
> surrender. Uston realized this, initiaed legal action
> and surrender was restored for a short period before
> the Commission used its "emergency" powers
> to remove surrender and the governor signed onto the
> "emergency" order. I participated in a
> "Save Surrender" demonstration called by Ken
> Uston. It was a lot of fun; it wasn't Tahrir Square.

> Uston was a publicity hound, but ending arbitrary and
> capricious backoffs and barings of players who used
> their superior skills in a lawful manner is clearly in
> the public interest. Blame the Commission, the New
> Jersey Legislature, the New Jersy courts for the
> Campione ruling and the concentration of too much
> casino ownership in too few hands, but don't blame
> Uston.

Uston broke the cardinal rule: NEVER call attention to yourself.

Instead, he calls a press conference ahead of time (this was in '78) bragging about how bad he was going to beat the casino. Resorts ran to the CCC begging for permission to ban him, which was denied. Next day, Uston & Co. hit them for a couple of hundred g's; so Resorts goes back whining to the Commission, which now grants them permission to bar counters. THAT his how he poisoned the well for the rest of us.

Sure, Uston subsequently got the state supreme court to rule people could not be barred merely because they played well, but that was over a year later and the damage had already been done. After that, the games sucked so bad, Uston himself moved to France, if you'll recall.

With all the clueless big betting players from New York flooding the town when Resorts and then Caesar's first opened, we'd have been able to keep on milking that extremely lucrative cow for months (if not years) if Kenny Uston had kept his big mouth shut and just played blackjack.

[PunkEye]

> Uston broke the cardinal rule: NEVER call attention to
> yourself.

> Instead, he calls a press conference ahead of time
> (this was in '78) bragging about how bad he was going
> to beat the casino. Resorts ran to the CCC begging for
> permission to ban him, which was denied. Next day,
> Uston & Co. hit them for a couple of hundred g's;
> so Resorts goes back whining to the Commission, which
> now grants them permission to bar counters. THAT his
> how he poisoned the well for the rest of us.

> Sure, Uston subsequently got the state supreme court
> to rule people could not be barred merely because they
> played well, but that was over a year later and the
> damage had already been done. After that, the games
> sucked so bad, Uston himself moved to France, if
> you'll recall.

> With all the clueless big betting players from New
> York flooding the town when Resorts and then Caesar's
> first opened, we'd have been able to keep on milking
> that extremely lucrative cow for months (if not years)
> if Kenny Uston had kept his big mouth shut and just
> played blackjack.

So find a different casino to milk. There are plenty 'nough opportunities. Just quit bellyachin' about Uston.

[OldCootFromVA]

> So find a different casino to milk. There are plenty
> 'nough opportunities. Just quit bellyachin' about
> Uston.

No opportunities like A.C. in '78, and probably never will be again.

Also, not bellyaching -- just setting the record straight.

[PunkEye]

> No opportunities like A.C. in '78, and probably never
> will be again.

> Also, not bellyaching -- just setting the record
> straight.
If AC is your only venue, then you have a major problem.