Blackjack

[horses4courses]

Originally Posted by wiffleball whizz

I'm shocked you actually are allowed to tell people where you work....the gambling industry is being very deregulated....

You have to love what your doing if you work in surveillance...I couldn't do it as I like interacting with customers way to much...

I'm not permitted to discuss details of my job.
Generally speaking, though, it's not an issue.
There are only a handful of casinos on the lake with table games.
Where I work is not hard to figure out.

I am discouraged from socializing at work, and I don't.
Worked in race/sports for years - surveillance gave me a whole new perspective.
It's a good gig....except on the odd occasion when your work follows you home.

[BlueShoe]

Were I an innovative casino manager, with no opposition from corporate superiors, I would bring back and reinstall the best blackjack game in North America, with the best rules:
Single deck.
Naturals pay 3-2.
Dealer stands on soft 17.
Double down on any first 2 cards.
Late surrender.
At least 3/4 of the deck dealt if sufficient cards remain to do so.

No way you say, the club would get clobbered by the hordes of experts that would descend in droves? No they would not, in fact, the opposite would happen, the game would be a big moneymaker, the tables would be jammed and it would be hard to get a seat. First of all, place a low minimum bet rule and a very low upper bet limit. $5-$200? $5-100? The full time expert pros need to wager blacks, not greens and reds. Next, what experts, and how much do they earn? The best players on the planet earn perhap 1% of their action, Dave earlier stated that his bottom line was .7% during his playing days.

The vast majority of blackjack players do not even play perfect basic strategy, so what chance do they have to perfect a counting game? If a good game were offered the ploppies would swarm to it and the wannabe counters would also. As we old hard nosed veterans know, it ain't that easy. Many, if not most that try counting wind up losing more than they would have flat betting and playing good BS.

With the prevalent corporate mindset, with the MBA type beancounters in charge of casino policy, what are the chances of good BJ games coming back? Not very good, imo, but we can always hope. We also hope to someday see 10% mutuel takout on wps bets and 12% on all exotics, but not holding my breath on that one either.

[wiffleball whizz]

Originally Posted by horses4courses

I'm not permitted to discuss details of my job.
Generally speaking, though, it's not an issue.
There are only a handful of casinos on the lake with table games.
Where I work is not hard to figure out.

I am discouraged from socializing at work, and I don't.
Worked in race/sports for years - surveillance gave me a whole new perspective.
It's a good gig....except on the odd occasion when your work follows you home.

Agree.....

[wiffleball whizz]

Horses 4 courses a little off topic here but we just bid for shifts for the new poker room at Maryland live casino.....there were 5 dealers that came with the director from Florida they had 1-5 in seniority I was #6 basically had my choice of days off and shifts......I chose 10am sat and sun off.....that's priceless in the casino industry.....pretty sweet right?

[traynor]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Since you are a surveillance agent...please allow me to ask you a question:

If what Dave Schwartz said was right -- and it unquestionably is -- then why are the casinos so paranoid in their approach when dealing with card counters? So what if a tiny minority are capable of beating the game in a serious way; the vast majority of the counters who consider themselves proficient are simply not good enough in applying their supposed skill in a casino setting...and they cannot escape the ranks of the losers.

Why not just deal to the counters...and let the chips fall where they may? Just make sure that the betting spreads stay within acceptable limits, that's all. Don't you think the money that these "wannabe experts" stand to lose will more than make up for the money that the relatively few legitimate experts stand to win?

IMO...the casinos are missing the boat here. Blackjack is the most popular casino table game simply because of the notion that the game can be BEATEN...and the casinos are doing everything in their power to falsify that notion. THEY SHOULD BE FOSTERING IT INSTEAD! They don't need an edge against every single player out there in order to secure a healthy overall profit for themselves.

Can you imagine what would happen if the word suddenly came out of Las Vegas that the counters were free to play the game again...as long as they didn't get too greedy with their betting spreads? Every Tom, Dick and Harry who has ever attempted to count cards would suddenly flock to the casino while the liberal rules were still in effect...and the popularity of blackjack would skyrocket...along with the casino profits. Players are seldom as good as they think they are...and the money lost by the losers will always greatly outnumber the money won by the few legitimate experts. This law is so universal in its effect that it can practically be considered to be a law of nature.

There is no better advertisement for a gambling game than the belief that it can be BEATEN. If you are the casino, and you know the first thing about human nature...then you FOSTER that belief. You don't do everything in your power to falsify it.

Every Tom, Dick, and Harry with fantasies of fame and fortune at the blackjack tables would realize they have been snookered all along into believing that all they need is a $14.95 book and a couple of hours practice at the kitchen table to Win Big. It is the "continual threat of being barred as a card counter" that keeps mediocre players shoveling money into the tills. Few things are as sweet (to the wannabes) as the taste of forbidden fruit. It is in the best (financial) interest of casinos to do everything they can to foster and bolster that belief.

In the real world, the percentage of (relatively highly skilled) solo card counters who can earn substantial amounts is microscopic. Many try. Most fail. Most of those who fail attribute the losses to "negative swings" rather than their own lack of skill. The same thing is true of most "blackjack teams."

Blackjack is beatable. Blackjack can be very profitable. On this topic I am 100% in agreement with Dave Schwartz (someone who quite obviously has been there and done that)--most "card counters" are just not good enough.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by traynor

Every Tom, Dick, and Harry with fantasies of fame and fortune at the blackjack tables would realize they have been snookered all along into believing that all they need is a $14.95 book and a couple of hours practice at the kitchen table to Win Big. It is the "continual threat of being barred as a card counter" that keeps mediocre players shoveling money into the tills. Few things are as sweet (to the wannabes) as the taste of forbidden fruit. It is in the best (financial) interest of casinos to do everything they can to foster and bolster that belief.

In the real world, the percentage of (relatively highly skilled) solo card counters who can earn substantial amounts is microscopic. Many try. Most fail. Most of those who fail attribute the losses to "negative swings" rather than their own lack of skill. The same thing is true of most "blackjack teams."

Blackjack is beatable. Blackjack can be very profitable. On this topic I am 100% in agreement with Dave Schwartz (someone who quite obviously has been there and done that)--most "card counters" are just not good enough.

You sometimes comment while quoting my posts...without me knowing whether or not you agree with them.

[Valuist]

I'm guessing most of the card counters that aren't pros are like a lot of what we see at the track, and in the sportsbook. The racing handicapper who never watches replays, the football handicapper who thinks watching a lot of NFL games qualifies him to handicap the NFL, and the card counter who hasn't practiced enough to warrant a deep bet spread.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Valuist

I'm guessing most of the card counters that aren't pros are like a lot of what we see at the track, and in the sportsbook. The racing handicapper who never watches replays, the football handicapper who thinks watching a lot of NFL games qualifies him to handicap the NFL, and the card counter who hasn't practiced enough to warrant a deep bet spread.

I think most gamblers have no problem following their "systems", as long as things go as expected. It's when things start going wrong that the "problems" begin.

Having a workable system or method is one thing. Having the discipline and the confidence to follow it through thick and thin is something else entirely...

[lansdale]

Originally Posted by Valuist

Any BJ players out there? For anyone thinking of learning card counting, I strongly recommend the Casino Verite software. Great way to practice without having to pay financial dues in a real casino.

Hi Valuist,

CVBJ is the gold standard of BJ practice software, universally admired in the BJ world, and used by many pros, including, at one time, the MIT team, if you're familiar with their exploits. Norm Wattenberger also offers a number of other very useful software products, depending on the extent of your interest in the game.

I have played both on teams and as a solo player for many years, and just to counter some of the misinformation about the game that appears in this thread (which is, after all, dedicated to horseracing), it is *by an order of magnitude*, a much easier way of making money than handicapping horses. Does that mean everyone can do it? Of course not. But for a serious, disciplined player who puts in the work, and has the requisite ability, it's very doable.

Assuming the player is able to count and make playing decision accurately, there are two reasons they haven't passed tests as team members: some couldn't screen out the distractions of the casino, some actually couldn't physically make max bets, even they knew they knew they were correct (and even though it wasn't their money). And usually these aspirants were otherwise bright, capable people. So, if you're capable of executing the first three of these (obviously the fourth doesn't apply to individual play), you should be successful.

Obviously, there's a great deal more to it than that, but if you're interested, I'd be happy to recommend some books or software tools.

Cheers,

lansdale

[traynor]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

You sometimes comment while quoting my posts...without me knowing whether or not you agree with them.

In this case, the comment would (most likely) be considered disagreement. Other than an "us against them" dichotomy in which anyone who walks out of a casino with money (like anyone who walks out of a used car lot with money) is considered "the enemy," I think the casinos are far more interested in perpetuating the belief that blackjack can be beaten than they are in barring counters.

Specifically, with anything other than someone making incredibly foolish plays coupled with blind luck, the short version is that it is way easier to spot "counters" by seeing who wins than by tracking their playing decisions. Since everyone is supposed to lose, anyone who wins must be a counter. One could be the best counter in the world and play just about anywhere--as long as one is losing.

[lansdale]

Originally Posted by horses4courses

I couldn't agree more with this.
Working as a surveillance agent, I watch many BJ players.
The above statement covers a large percentage of them.

People ask me "Do you catch many card counters?".
I answer " Yes, quite a few."
You might think that these people are shown the door. Not usually.
Their problem is generally money management, and that's why we can let them continue to play even though we know they are counting, and that they have a good grasp of basic strategy.
Many can't handle losing situations. When they get that inevitable back door beat holding a 20 (the dealer catching 21 after multiple hits), you can see smoke coming out their ears - and they start playing accordingly.
Discipline, or lack of it, is the difference between decent players and excellent ones.
In Tahoe, we have the added advantage as surveillance agents of being so quiet these days on the tables, that advantage players stick out pretty quickly. It's much easier for successful BJ players to blend in at a busy Las Vegas casino, or anywhere that's busy, than it is if you are one of the few playing black chips, or higher.

I can count down an 8-deck shoe with the best of them.
My knowledge of strategy is excellent.
Would I play BJ to supplement my income?
Under the right circumstances, I would answer yes.
Bankroll as a family provider, and my current profession, won't allow it.
Dave is right, though. It's a great game for a small minority.

horses,

Tahoe has offered nothing but worthless games for the serious or pro BJ player in the last twenty years, so your 'Maytag' reference is probably the most relevant. So who are these 'advantage players' you're backing off? Quarter players who got lucky? Surprised, spluttering civilians who get backed off as 'professional counters' by paranoid and ill-trained surveillance personnel are an endless source of amusement to real pro players.

Cheers,

lansdale

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by traynor

In this case, the comment would (most likely) be considered disagreement. Other than an "us against them" dichotomy in which anyone who walks out of a casino with money (like anyone who walks out of a used car lot with money) is considered "the enemy," I think the casinos are far more interested in perpetuating the belief that blackjack can be beaten than they are in barring counters.

Specifically, with anything other than someone making incredibly foolish plays coupled with blind luck, the short version is that it is way easier to spot "counters" by seeing who wins than by tracking their playing decisions. Since everyone is supposed to lose, anyone who wins must be a counter. One could be the best counter in the world and play just about anywhere--as long as one is losing.

I'd like to believe you...but what you say here contradicts a direct experience of mine.

I was playing blackjack in Las Vegas 3 weeks ago...and a card counter seated right next to me was barred from playing even though he happened to be losing heavily at the time.

The conversation went something like this:

SUITS - "Sir...your game is a little too tough for us, and we cannot allow you to play blackjack here any longer. But please feel free to continue playing any of our other games."

COUNTER - "But I am losing about $2,500."

SUITS - "We know that, sir. And we'd like to keep it."

[Valuist]

Originally Posted by lansdale

Hi Valuist,

CVBJ is the gold standard of BJ practice software, universally admired in the BJ world, and used by many pros, including, at one time, the MIT team, if you're familiar with their exploits. Norm Wattenberger also offers a number of other very useful software products, depending on the extent of your interest in the game.

I have played both on teams and as a solo player for many years, and just to counter some of the misinformation about the game that appears in this thread (which is, after all, dedicated to horseracing), it is *by an order of magnitude*, a much easier way of making money than handicapping horses. Does that mean everyone can do it? Of course not. But for a serious, disciplined player who puts in the work, and has the requisite ability, it's very doable.

Assuming the player is able to count and make playing decision accurately, there are two reasons they haven't passed tests as team members: some couldn't screen out the distractions of the casino, some actually couldn't physically make max bets, even they knew they knew they were correct (and even though it wasn't their money). And usually these aspirants were otherwise bright, capable people. So, if you're capable of executing the first three of these (obviously the fourth doesn't apply to individual play), you should be successful.

Obviously, there's a great deal more to it than that, but if you're interested, I'd be happy to recommend some books or software tools.

Cheers,

lansdale

I am familiar with the MIT team. I believe the Russian guy from the early 90s team helped design the CV software.

Definitely agree with your assertions. Not everybody can beat it, but I'd have to think a higher percentage could beat blackjack than the racetrack.

[lansdale]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

Card counting is not effective for eight deck games, as the profitable situations are extremely rare.

My understanding is that what is considered the most profitable approach when it comes to BJ is shuffle tracking, a skill that is related to visual observance talent rather than counting which is a strictly logical concept.

I am under the impression, that the constantly changing rules and regulations are converting a once beatable game to a negative expectation proposition similar to craps or baccarat.

Of course, this does not mean that basic strategy does not exist or it is not necessary.

It is beyond any doubt that a pair of eights should always be split; this decision is not a matter of opinion but a fact that we can prove mathematically. Although BJ might have a slightly negative EV if basic strategy is followed, it can be converted to the most expensive casino game if decisions depend on guessing and intuition.

Speaking strictly about minimizing the casino's edge, I think that the best bet is going to be in craps, taking the pass line plus maximum odds. Given that it is possible today to find 5X, 10X or even more, the take out is very small. Besides that, even in this nearly zero rake game, you are again a guaranteed looser assuming that you continue to bet for long enough periods.

Any casino game, including slots, craps, BJ, PAI-GO and everything else, should be avoided at any cost for the serious gambler.

Without cheating it is impossible to beat...

Hi DL,

I know you're a bright guy, but you clearly haven't invested much study in BJ or possibly you would be playing it. First, certainly an 8-deck game is no prize, but is still beatable, and, depending on penetration (cut card placement) is a better game than a badly-cut 6-deck game (the other most common option). The great advantage of both these shoe games is that they get very little heat from casino personnel.

Indeed, shuffle-tracking, although tricky, can be much more profitable than straight counting. The major drawback is that most casinos no longer offer trackable shuffles.

The rules and conditions have certainly gotten worse, and, if fact, most games are worthless to professional players, but playable games remain, especially outside the U.S..

Cheers,

lansdale

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by lansdale

Hi DL,

I know you're a bright guy, but you clearly haven't invested much study in BJ or possibly you would be playing it. First, certainly an 8-deck game is no prize, but is still beatable, and, depending on penetration (cut card placement) is a better game than a badly-cut 6-deck game (the other most common option). The great advantage of both these shoe games is that they get very little heat from casino personnel.

Indeed, shuffle-tracking, although tricky, can be much more profitable than straight counting. The major drawback is that most casinos no longer offer trackable shuffles.

The rules and conditions have certainly gotten worse, and, if fact, most games are worthless to professional players, but playable games remain, especially outside the U.S..

Cheers,

lansdale

Certainly Black Jack is not my game. I still do not perfectly know basic strategy, setting aside its modifications based in the running count. Unfortunately I have blown a lot of $ betting BJ in the past. I have not played a single hand for at least seven years, so I admit I know little about the game.

I have never used CVBJ, but during the years I have written several BJ simulators since I am reluctant to accept what is written in the related books at face value..

Some of the books I have read about are Thorp's Beat the dealer, Revere's Playing BJ as a business (both outdated today), Blackjack Black Belt, KO, and the Theory Of Blackjack. I think KO and Black Belt looks are the most up to date although I found the theory of BJ very interesting besides the fact that is only about one decked games...

Again, just by reading books, I am under the impression, that without shuffle tracking (which I think is as loosely defined as the body language of the thoroughbred) you can not expect too much from today's game.