Article 199 of alt.gambling:
\nPath: polyslo!usc!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!hellgate.utah.edu!wasatch!jacobs
\n>From: jacobs%cs.utah.edu@wasatch.utah.edu (Steven R. Jacobs)
\nNewsgroups: alt.gambling
\nSubject: Blackjack: Card Counting for the Complete Klutz
\nDate: 12 Sep 89 15:51:46 GMT
\nDistribution: alt
\nOrganization: University of Utah CS Dept
\nLines: 160<\/p>\n
Things have gotten too quiet here, so I guess I will post my card
\ncounting strategy. This is a simplified method, it uses only the
\nbasic strategy. It is very important that you fully understand
\nthe basic strategy before you try counting cards. Counting is
\nfairly easy in your home, but it is easy to get distracted in
\na noisy casino.<\/p>\n
This method works best at a table that offers insurance.
\nSimulations show that this method gives about a 1% edge
\nover the house, when using a 5:1 bet spread (bet 5 units
\nwhen the deck is favorable, 1 unit when the deck is
\nunfavorable). This high of a bet spread is not always
\npractical.<\/p>\n
The strategy table listed below is a revised version of
\nthe basic strategy table that I posted previously. It
\nis optimal for most single-deck games.<\/p>\n
—————————————————————
\nFor SINGLE DECK games:<\/p>\n
1) Start the count at -4 when the deck is shuffled.<\/p>\n
2) Count -2 for 10, J, Q, K<\/p>\n
3) Count +1 for everything else (including aces)<\/p>\n
4) Bet low when the count is negative, high when the count is
\n positive (actually, simulations show that you can bet high
\n for a count of -2 or above).<\/p>\n
5) Take insurance when the count is positive.<\/p>\n
6) Play basic strategy at all times (table shown below)<\/p>\n
—————————————————————
\nFor N deck games:<\/p>\n
1) Start the count at (-4 * N).<\/p>\n
2) all other rules are the same.
\n—————————————————————<\/p>\n
NOTES:<\/p>\n
The unique feature of this counting method is that it is
\n perfectly accurate for dealing with insurance. When the
\n count is positive, the player has the advantage when
\n taking the insurance bet. When the count is negative,
\n the house has the advantage, so insurance should not be
\n taken.<\/p>\n
Counting is best done by counting several cards at once.
\n It is easy to practice this counting method in the following
\n way:<\/p>\n
\t1) Count through a deck of cards, counting one card
\n\t at a time. Start at -4, and count through the entire
\n\t deck. After all of the cards have been seen, the
\n\t count should be ZERO. If it is not zero, a mistake
\n\t has been made somewhere. Repeat counting through
\n\t the deck one card at a time, until you can do it
\n\t quickly without making mistakes.<\/p>\n
\t2) Count through the deck, counting two cards at a
\n\t time. Look for the following patterns, adding
\n\t the correct amount for each pattern<\/p>\n
\t (X = 10, N = non-ten)<\/p>\n
\t\tNN\t+2
\n\t\tXN\t-1
\n\t\tXX\t-4<\/p>\n
\t Again, the count should be zero after all cards have
\n\t been seen. Repeat until you can do it efficiently.<\/p>\n
\t3) Count through the deck, counting three cards at a time.
\n\t Look for the following patterns, adding the correct
\n\t amount for each pattern.<\/p>\n
\t (X = 10, N = non-ten)<\/p>\n
\t\tNNN\t+3
\n\t\tXNN\t 0\t(this pattern is common)
\n\t\tXXN\t-3<\/p>\n
\t4) Practice against a computer blackjack game. When I
\n\t play, I usually count the cards by counting an entire
\n\t hand (player’s or dealers) at once. If there are more
\n\t than three cards in the hand, I mentally break it up
\n\t into groups of 1, 2, or 3 cards (I usually look for
\n\t “XNN” patterns and ignore those cards, since they
\n\t add up to zero). I usually count the cards just
\n\t before the dealer picks up the hand (exception: for
\n\t insurance, you should count your cards and the dealer’s
\n\t up card immediately).
\n—————————————————————<\/p>\n
Strategy Table<\/p>\n
S=stand H=hit D=double P=pair(split)
\n = “strong” hand, favorable to player
\n = “weak” hand, favorable to house<\/p>\n
<—- dealer possibility
\n—+—————————————-
\n 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 X A <—- dealer's up card
\n—+—————————————- Pairs
\nXX | S S S S S S S S S S
\n99 | PS PS PS PS PS S PS ps s s
\n88 | Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps Ph ph ph ph ph
\n77 | ps ps Ps Ps Ps ph h h s h
\n66 | ph ps ps Ps Ps h h h h h
\n55 | DH DH DH DH DH DH DH DH H H
\n44 | h H H DH DH H h h h h
\n33 | h h Ph PH PH ph h h h h
\n22 | h ph Ph PH PH ph h h h h
\nAA | PH PH PH PDH PDH PH PH Ph Ph Ph
\n—+—————————————- Soft Hands
\nAX | S S S S S S S S S S
\nA9 | S S S S S S S S S S
\nA8 | S S S S DS S S S S S
\nA7 | S DS DS DS DS S S h h h
\nA6 | DH DH DH DH DH H h h h h
\nA5 | h h DH DH DH h h h h h
\nA4 | h H DH DH DH H h h h h
\nA3 | H H DH DH DH H H h h h
\nA2 | H H DH DH DH H H h h h
\nAA | H H H DH DH H H h h h
\n—+—————————————- Hard Hands
\n21 | S S S S S S S S S S
\n20 | S S S S S S S S S S
\n19 | S S S S S S S S S S
\n18 | S S S S S S S s s s
\n17 | s s s s s s s s s s
\n16 | s s s s s h h h h h
\n15 | s s s s s h h h h h
\n14 | s s s s s h h h h h
\n13 | s s s s s h h h h h
\n12 | h h s s s h h h h h
\n11 | DH DH DH DH DH DH DH DH DH DH
\n10 | DH DH DH DH DH DH DH DH H H
\n 9 | DH DH DH DH DH H H h h h
\n 8 | h H H DH DH H h h h h
\n 7 | h h h H H h h h h h
\n 6 | h h h H H h h h h h
\n 5 | h h h H H h h h h h
\n 4 | h h h H H h h h h h
\n—+—————————————-
\nNOTES: 1) Use the "Hard Hands" table only
\n when the other tables do not apply.<\/p>\n
2) If splitting Aces is not allowed,
\n use the "Soft Hands" table.
\n—+—————————————-<\/p>\n
—
\nSteve Jacobs ({bellcore,hplabs,uunet}!utah-cs!jacobs, jacobs@cs.utah.edu)<\/p>\n
From usc!ucsd!orion.cf.uci.edu!uci-ics!zardoz!tgate!ka3ovk!teemc!mibte!gamma!towernet!pyuxp!nvuxj!nvuxh!hall Wed Sep 13 12:35:26 PDT 1989<\/p>\n
In article RLM@ceres.physics.uiowa.edu (Robert Mutel) writes:
\n>Could someone give a succinct summary of the situation regarding
\n>`favorable’ and `unfavorable’ shuffles in multi-deck blackjack? What
\n>should a player look out for? Will unfavorable shuffles affect basic
\n>players as well as counters?<\/p>\n
First, consider the totally random shuffle. This is what all card
\ncounters’ strategies are based on (because the mathematics are
\nalready combinatorially explosive without having to worry about
\nnon-random orderings.) It is also what the “basic strategy” of
\nnon-counters is based on. The totally random shuffle doesn’t exist,
\nbut it can be approached to a greater or lessor extent. <\/p>\n
Nonrandom shuffles can contradict the assumptions that went into
\nbuilding the strategies, and hence the counting and non-counting
\nstrategies can be sub-optimal in practice. Also, nonrandom shuffles
\ncan result in “like-card” clumping. Have you ever seen everyone
\nincluding the dealer get two 10-valued cards? Pretty annoying.
\nLike-card clumping is devastating to the players.<\/p>\n
Like-card clumping can be a natural or manufactured phenomenon. It
\nhappens naturally, because if you have low cards, you tend to take a
\nhit, and if the next card is low again, you may take another hit.
\nThis clump of low cards is preserved when it is picked up. A poor
\nshuffle will only slightly reduce the amount of clumping.<\/p>\n
Card counters, however, can put non-random shuffles to their
\nadvantage. This involves remembering (or recording with chips) the
\n“richness” of different segments of the deck as it is played.
\n“Shuffle-tracking” is then employed to estimate the richness of
\ndifferent segments of the shuffled deck. One can then use the
\ncut-card to “remove” unfavorable portions of the deck (i.e. get rid
\nof low cards.) See “Break the Dealer” for more information. (By the
\nway, I don’t have enough money to even think of trying this myself.)<\/p>\n
Okay, now you know what favorable and unfavorable shuffles do to
\nyou, so how do you recognize them? <\/p>\n
First, be on the look-out for “poor washing.” If a casino does not
\nmix up new decks well, avoid it. Furthermore, avoid playing at a
\ntable that started with new cards within the last few *hours*.<\/p>\n
Next, watch out for the “high-low” pickup, where the dealer picks up
\nthe cards in a high to low order. I’m sure there must be variations
\non this theme.<\/p>\n
Also, watch out for the “strip” shuffle. This is typically done by
\n“pinching” the top few cards and the bottom few cards off the
\nportion of the deck being shuffled. I don’t know why this shuffle
\nis non-random when combined with other shuffles, but the casinos
\nhave researched this, and know that it hurts the players, and so
\nthey do it. Note that “unfair” shuffles are illegal in Atlantic
\nCity. I have seen strip shuffles there.<\/p>\n
Last, be aware that inexperienced dealers, while they deal nice and
\nslow also shuffle poorly. Inexperienced dealers can let a clump of
\n4 cards slip by without getting shuffled.<\/p>\n
In sum, totally random shuffles are nice but do not exist, and
\nnon-random shuffles usually hurt, but can help, especially if you
\nare shuffle tracking. The casinos know all this and attempt to use
\nit to their advantage (they’re greedy, remember?)
\n—
\nMichael R. Hall | BAN |”I live in a country that I hate. I live
\nhall@nvuxh.cc.bellcore.COM | STRIP | in a country where I want to shoot the
\nbellcore!nvuxh!hall |SHUFFLES| politicians.” – Peter Buck of R.E.M.<\/p>\n
From sdsu!usc!apple!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pt.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!jr+ Wed Sep 13 12:37:33 PDT 1989<\/p>\n
>From: garym@crash.cts.com (Gary Morris)
\nNewsgroups: alt.gambling
\nSubject: Re: Blackjack: Card Counting for the Complete Klutz
\nDate: 13 Sep 89 01:48:40 GMT<\/p>\n
>>Simulations show that this method gives about a 1% edge
\n>>over the house, when using a 5:1 bet spread (bet 5 units
\n>>when the deck is favorable, 1 unit when the deck is
\n>>unfavorable). This high of a bet spread is not always
\n>>practical.
\n> Is using this high a bet spread practical in Las Vegas casinos? Don’t
\nthe
\n> dealers watch for this people changing their bets like this or is it
\nonly
\n> Pit Bosses you have to watch out for? Maybe a good size tip to the
\ndealer
\n> would help? (he might not notice the bet changes then \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n
My recent experience says that you will not get away with this very
\noften in LV, at least not playing with favorable rules. The last time I
\nwas there (3 months ago) doubling your previous bet was safe, but
\ntripling it brought immediate reshuffles in single-deck games (at least,
\nat the Frontier, Circus Circus & the Fremont).<\/p>\n
I haven’t been to Las Vegas for a while, but last month in Laughlin
\n> I found that only the 4 or 6 deck games were dealt face up, the one
\ndeck
\n> games were dealt face down. How can you count if the cards are dealt
\n> face down?<\/p>\n
First fo all, you really shouldn’t be playing with other people at the
\ntable. It greatly reduces your number of hands\/hour & thus, the
\nlikelihood of ending up ahead. In addition, when other people are at
\nthe table, it dilutes your chances of obtaining the cards you want when
\nthe count is high.<\/p>\n
But, if you have to play with other people around, you should just play
\nat face-up games or count the cards when the dealer collects them.<\/p>\n
> Shouldn’t count strategies be designed for 4 or 6 deck odds?<\/p>\n
Not if you want to win. My simulations show that the disadvantage
\nintroduced by 6 decks is tremendous (I haven’t experimented with 4
\ndecks, yet). In particular, my version of Hi-Opt I yields a 1.2%
\nadvantage against favorable 1-deck rules, but a -0.3% disadvatnage
\nagainst equally favorable 6 decks. Without some special help (like
\nearly surrender) I think it’s very difficult to beat a 6-deck game. I
\navoid them like disco music.<\/p>\n
JR<\/p>\n
From usc!ginosko!uunet!amdahl!eli Thu Sep 14 13:21:04 PDT 1989<\/p>\n
This is obviously late, but I didn’t see mention of it here, so:<\/p>\n
The Silver City Casino on the Las Vegas Strip is offering EARLY SURRENDER
\nat certain SELECT tables, but ONLY until September 30, 1989! (Early surrender
\nis when the player is allowed to surrender hands before the dealer checks his
\nhole card for potential blackjack)<\/p>\n
So anyone with a little vacation time should try to make it out to Vegas
\nin September and go get some of the free cash, esp. if you are a card counter.<\/p>\n
Blackjack is becoming such a difficult game to make any substantial money at
\nthat its always nice when a casino gives you a break…<\/p>\n
p.s. (early surrender gives the player a 0.62% higher expectation than if
\n it were not offered. “basic” early surrender stategy is to surrender
\n hard 16, but not 8-8 against a dealer’s 9 up, surrender
\n hard 14, 15, and 16 against a dealer’s 10 up, and to surrender
\n hard 5, 6, 7, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 against a dealer’s Ace up.)<\/p>\n
