Blackjack Card Counting of Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow

IF you can do it for the 2 and 5 you can do it for the rest. Count the 7 as +.5 and the 9 as -.5 while you are at it.

Why do it half-assed?

TATER SAYS: For one thing he dropped the 1/2 counts from 4 to 2. DROP THE 2 up the 5 to 2 and now you have no 1/2 point counts. RUN your Sims. Very likely you had a Level 2 outperforming a Level 3. DEPENDS ON RULES,PEN, INDICES, AND BET SPREAD.

 

Every camouflage move has its cost. How to avoid the suspicion of card counting at minimal costs is an art. Different card counter may use different approach best suited for one's persona. The advantage or disadvantage of some camouflage tactics may be too difficult to be ascertained or quantified. Some cover plays can be used at a very little quantifiable cost, however. This is Moraine's favorite cover play: Always stands on 16 vs. 10 regardless of the count.

Reasons: A card counter's frequent changes of plays is a telltale sign of card counting. Basic strategy says surrender or hit on 16 vs. 10, but card counters know that one should stand on 16 vs. 10 at any positive counts. Since card counters bet only a little at negative counts and a lot more at high positive counts, always stand on 16 vs. 10 sacrifices only a little at negative counts, but makes the card counters' stand on 16 vs. 10 at positive counts looks very natural. Never hit on 16 vs. 10 in fact is the cheapest cover play that card counters can ever find.

 

Informative post Moraine. The majority of 16 vs 10 hands are won when the deck is negative. Single and double deck players are leaving money on the table when 57% low cards remain vs 43% high cards. THAT CAN be an expensive cover. ESPECIALLY IN A STRAIGHT UP GAME. HENCE, the card you didn't hit may be the card that starts your next hand.

I suspect shoe plays have already impersonated Elvis and "left the building" by the time a shoe reaches that level.

 

Thanks for the info from single deck/double deck players' perspective. I know many old school card counting gurus dismissed the needs for any cover plays. But, if a card counter ever wants to impersonate a novice blackjack player not knowing the basic strategy, I would still say that, among all cover plays, standing on 16 vs. 10 is still the cheapest (or the least expensive) to be deployed.

For the first two cards, only 8-8, 9-7, or 10-6 can make up a hand of 16. If surrender is available, basic strategy (for shoe games) says split 8-8 vs. 10, but surrender 9-7 vs 10 and 10-6 vs. 10. So hitting on 16 vs. 10 has applications only after the player has drawn at least one card.

For shoe games, I think the EV of Hitting on 16 vs 10 is about -0.5398, while the EV of Standing on 16 vs. 10 is about -0.5404. The difference is 0.0006 only. For a $25 bet, that translates into a camouflage cost of 1.5 cents for not hitting on 16 vs. 10 at negative counts.

In shoe games, especially the 8-deck games, while good positive true counts seldom show up in the first half of the shoe, but once a good count shows up, it tends to stay there for quite a long-while too. There will be plenty of opportunities for card counters to up their bets. Bet spreads of 1-to-12, 1-to-18, or even much higher should be achievable for a well-camouflaged counter.