Blackjack Blackjack 101: Table Selection

Say, a player knows the basic strategy well, but isn't a combat-ready card counter yet. The player walks into a casino one day with $500 cash, and wants to spend his/her time in the casino, and plays blackjack as long as possible.

The casino has two types of blackjack tables:

(A) the 2-deck, $10-min bet tables, pay 6-to-5 for blackjack, and

(B) the 8-deck, $25-min bet tables pay 3-to-2 for blackjack.

What do you suggest? At A? Or at B?

Or, simply don't play and save the $500 for some other day.

 

This is my thinking. The $10 table minimum may look cheap, but a 2-deck 6-to-5 blackjack is a VERY EXPENSIVE GAME. No intelligent player should play 6-to-5 blackjack.

The house’s advantage is about 1.62%, and a basic-strategy blackjack player is expected to lose $0.162 in average for every $10-bet. Similarly, the house advantage is only about 0.46% in the 8-deck 3-to-2 blackjack, and the player is expected to lose $0.115 in average for every $25 wager.

With the same bankroll, playing the $25 table paying 3-to-2 for blackjack, instead of the $10 table paying 6-to-5 for blackjack, is expected to last 40% longer.

 

I choose C. Move on. 2 decks max. 3.2. 60% pen.

It's your job to get casinos to offer fair games. You dont do it by supporting bad games.

 

It may be easy for a luck few to say that, but in the US and many places around the world is that there may not be any 3-to-2 2-deck blackjack within 500-mile radius.

Also, the reality in life for many, card counters included, is that sometime one may get caught short in cash and can scrape together only 500 dollars to escape from in-laws' coming to town.

 

Better things to with your and in laws money than blow it at a blackjack table you cant win in the first place. No?

 

A hard-pressed blackjack player/counter may paraphrase some famed quote: "With 500 dollars, the hope remains, the counts go on, the struggles continue, the idea of turning the tables on the house will never never die."

 

A shot was fired.
A scream was heard.
From someone hit by
a flying ....
Hmmm. What rhymes with heard?

 

Too deep. Mockingbird?

 

Lol. Close enough.

 

Question: If a casino only offers two-deck 6-to-5 blackjack, can a SUPERB a card counter reasonably expect to win there?

 

Certainly not for someone who places a value on time.

Perhaps playing pick up stocks with ones butt cheeks would be a more viable resource of productivity.

 

Many card counters have in fact retired from card counting FOR YEARS, but they still hang on their claims as being a CARD COUNTER PAR EXCELLENCE at one time or the other. Can they do it just to prove a point?

 

You have a point. Making a living can be a very broad term. I seriously doubt there are "legions" of card counters scattered throughout Las Vegas and the US winning consistently.

You would be the table selection expert far more than me.

What is your standard criteria for your selection process?

 

Don't have really rigid criteria, but before I sit down, I normally pay attention to:
1. Rules & deck numbers (S17 or H17, surrender available or not, side bets offered, etc.)
2. Penetration.
3. Table limits (Table Max-to-Min ratio is also important)
4. Multiple hands or one-on-one possibility. No mid-shoe entry, etc.
5. Chattiness and characters at the table

 

I have something different at the very top of my list and that is casino tolerance. I mean the greatest game in the world, with the best rules, conditions means nothing if that casino freaks on anyone spreading 1-3. AND I have seen casinos like that.

After that penetration and rules/conditions in that order (for shoe games that I mostly play). The reason for that order, is great penetration can overcome some crappy rules (not 6:5 or something like that), but something like H17 or NDAS. BUT better rules can rarely overcome lousy penetration. With lousy penetration, you just aren't going to see enogh really good counts to make any real money.

Just my take, for the circumstances I play.

 

2. Where do you draw the line on Pen?
5. Is there a minimum number of players that dictate whether you sit down to play, get up to leave. I assume you wouldnt leave a positive deck.

4. Do you always start play at the beginning of a sjoe?

 

If a new dealer comes, and cuts off more than 25% of the shoe, I would weasel out.

I prefer one-on-one, no mid-shoe entry and avoid playing at a full table, but often impossible.

I don't back-count, so I must start playing at the very beginning of the shoe to know the count. But if I had already "wonged out", I may sit out the early part of the subsequent shoe to wait for a good opportunity to get in unless no-mid-shoe is the rule.

 

I think 1-3 spread cannot beat a shoe game regardless of the penetration.

What do you consider an acceptable penetration for 6 decks? And for 8 decks?

 

That was my point. No sence in even looking at anything else if it is a place that isn't going to let you get any real money down.

My absolute minimum penetration for a 6 deck game is 75%. Most of my 6 deck games are 80-85%, but I have few I play that are that bare minimum.

8 decks, I have only 2 in my rotation. They both have between a deck and deck and a quarter cut off. I won't play anything worse than that for 8 deck. Just too many better choices with 6 deck games.

 

Many old-time card counters practiced the art of "wonging". They would rush to a table and plop down huge bets when the true count is high enough. A No-Mid-Shoe-Entry rule would render the art "wonging-in" at the nick of time useless.

But in today's 6 or 8-deck shoe games, Moraine would say it is better off for a "solo card counting practitioner" to play at a table with a FIRM No-Mid-Shoe-Rule-Entry rule. If you wait and wait and finally see that a good shoe/count is in the making, the chances are that the good count will stay at that level for quite a while. You would want to be able to keep as much as possible of the good shoe to yourself. Any influx of new players is unwelcome. Without a FIRM No-Mid-Shoe-Entry Rule, you are at mercy of others.

Moraine would further add that an astute card counter today shall also learn the art of how to turn the "No-Mid-Shoe-Entry" rule to your advantage. To-wit, you wouldn't mind to have a full table at the beginning of a shoe when you are betting the table minimum, but when the count is getting into a +1 or higher AceMT True Count territory, you would want to become the only player at the table if possible.

Any ideas on how to turn a "full table" into a "one-on-one" table when you so wish?