Blackjack vs Poker
 

Which one has the better profit potential with least amount of effort?

A friend of mine plays $25 min BJ at Borgata, six deck shoe, and routinely takes home $1000 or more a weekend. Of course, he card counts.

I play the $3-5 NL game at Borgata, my usual take home might be double my buy-in, about $300-400 for the weekend.

I feel that more or less these 2 games are at the same level, $25 min BJ is lowest you can play on a weeknight or weekend. $3-5 NL is a moderate NL game at the Borgata.

There are a number of advantages with BJ card counting,
- playing against the house with set rules, you only need to play the odds, no deception involved like bluffing in poker. Alright, you need to do a little of "bluffing" like blowing off some money so they don't label you a counter but that's not as difficult as calling an all-in bluff.

- my friend got his black Borgata card after like 10 weekend sessions, perhaps a total of 80 hours. You need 1000 hours of playing poker before you'll get the card.

Been reading Knockout Blackjack, doesn't seem particularly difficult to master. In fact my friend doesn't even take card counting seriously, he picked it up from another friend and his system is not rigorous at all. Still he beats the game fairly well.

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
Alright, you need to do a little of "bluffing" like blowing off some money so they don't label you a counter but that's not as difficult as calling an all-in bluff.


[/ QUOTE ]
Define difficult.

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
In fact my friend doesn't even take card counting seriously, he picked it up from another friend and his system is not rigorous at all. Still he beats the game fairly well.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is true, in respect to BR management, knowing the index plays, etc...then he's been getting extremely lucky and will soon go broke.

Generally speaking, BJ takes a bigger BR, and you'll experience much wilder variance...hold on!

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
A friend of mine plays $25 min BJ at Borgata, six deck shoe, and routinely takes home $1000 or more a weekend. Of course, he card counts.

[/ QUOTE ]
this figure doesn't sound realistic nor sustainable. a KO 1-8 spread on a good 6-deck game (75% pen) has an expectation of about +0.63%. assuming 60 hands dealt per hour with a minimum bet of $25, the average earnings is around $10/hr. so in the long run, I'd expect him to earn no more than the same or slightly less than you do playing $3/5NL, and with a LOT more volatility.

[ QUOTE ]
my friend got his black Borgata card after like 10 weekend sessions, perhaps a total of 80 hours. You need 1000 hours of playing poker before you'll get the card.

[/ QUOTE ]
this I can believe since a card counter's average bet is about 2x the flat minimum, and comps are generally 20% of that. so if the floorperson was putting him down at $50 or more, then $10+/hr in comp sounds about right.

not that there's a gigantic value about getting Borgata Black, but there are ways to get the upgrade for considerably less bankroll risk or time than either blackjack or poker. for example, there was a recent opportunity for players to get upgraded to Total Rewards Diamond tier at Harrah's or Showboat for a relatively low wagering requirement, and with a 5x comp rate which made it virtually breakeven with the HA. With just 4-5 hours of action and theoretical loss of below $200 (not even including bounceback cash when I return), I am now a VIP at the same level as a slot machine player who has theoretically lost as much as $4000. best of all, I can take the Diamond card to Borgata this weekend and get upgraded to Black on the spot for an entire year.

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

What? You've never been in a situation with bottom set, the board shows a 4 flush on the river. Opponent goes all-in. Compound the fact that you've built up your stack all night to a respective size, one wrong move and good bye hard work.

If that's too easy, how about 3 flush on the river.

[ QUOTE ]
Define difficult.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

I've talked to him about this. It's now been about 20-25 sessions where he's had about 20+ winning session. His biggest win has far outstripped his worst loss. After a point, it's no longer luck. My friend appears to have good innate ability at BJ. Looks like he started off lucky and used his early winnings to maintain a good pace.

[ QUOTE ]

If this is true, in respect to BR management, knowing the index plays, etc...then he's been getting extremely lucky and will soon go broke.

Generally speaking, BJ takes a bigger BR, and you'll experience much wilder variance...hold on!

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

I had been trying to find out what a good hourly BJ rate was. My friend appears to be doing $80-100 per hour. It is widely divergent from your numbers. But I believe he steps it up after a while. 8x = $200. He goes beyond this, top bet could be $500, I'll have to ask him. His system is not optimized, which is why I believe that the floor hasn't tagged him as a counter, just lucky.

[ QUOTE ]
this figure doesn't sound realistic nor sustainable. a KO 1-8 spread on a good 6-deck game (75% pen) has an expectation of about +0.63%. assuming 60 hands dealt per hour with a minimum bet of $25, the average earnings is around $10/hr. so in the long run, I'd expect him to earn no more than the same or slightly less than you do playing $3/5NL, and with a LOT more volatility.

[/ QUOTE ]


He gets lots of perks with the card. 2-3 free nights in a room. He's been offered free show tickets. Life is good when you're beating the house and they want you back!

[ QUOTE ]
this I can believe since a card counter's average bet is about 2x the flat minimum, and comps are generally 20% of that. so if the floorperson was putting him down at $50 or more, then $10+/hr in comp sounds about right.

not that there's a gigantic value about getting Borgata Black, but there are ways to get the upgrade for considerably less bankroll risk or time than either blackjack or poker. for example, there was a recent opportunity for players to get upgraded to Total Rewards Diamond tier at Harrah's or Showboat for a relatively low wagering requirement, and with a 5x comp rate which made it virtually breakeven with the HA. With just 4-5 hours of action and theoretical loss of below $200 (not even including bounceback cash when I return), I am now a VIP at the same level as a slot machine player who has theoretically lost as much as $4000. best of all, I can take the Diamond card to Borgata this weekend and get upgraded to Black on the spot for an entire year.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
After a point, it's no longer luck. My friend appears to have good innate ability at BJ.

[/ QUOTE ]
Cannot happen.

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
I had been trying to find out what a good hourly BJ rate was. My friend appears to be doing $80-100 per hour. It is widely divergent from your numbers. But I believe he steps it up after a while. 8x = $200. He goes beyond this, top bet could be $500, I'll have to ask him. His system is not optimized, which is why I believe that the floor hasn't tagged him as a counter, just lucky.

[/ QUOTE ]
$100/hr at a $25 table is an expectation of over 6%. that is simply impossible to maintain in the long term. I also don't buy that your friend openly gets away with a 1-20 spread. while it's true that you can't legally get barred from playing blackjack in AC, any significant black action is going to tagged as "checks play" even at the Borg, and it is next to impossible to bet $500 in a single hand without both the pitboss and surveillance watching that player for the rest of the night. any combination of early shuffles or mediocre cuts will destroy his supposed advantage over the house. you might consider posting these stats to the more experienced players at www.bj21.com and see what they say.

and no offense to your friend's credibility, but if he's upstairs playing BJ while you're downstairs all night at the poker tables, how can you truly verify each other's results?

[ QUOTE ]
He gets lots of perks with the card. 2-3 free nights in a room. He's been offered free show tickets. Life is good when you're beating the house and they want you back!

[/ QUOTE ]
um, any old lady who plays quarter slots can get free rooms and show tickets. these cost the casino next to nothing to give to the player. free liquor and limo rides, then we'll investigate further.

this last statement you made shows how green you guys are about the casino business. congrats on your short-term luck, but don't try preaching to others about some new "system" you friend has created, when you don't have any tangible data to back it up.

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

Ouch, belligerent are we. As a poker player I don't enjoy any of these "easy" perks you so readily get. A free room for 2 to 3 nights is a real perk. Casino generally only give out discounted room rates to most players.

Geez, you make it sound like I'm trying to hawk a "system". My friend does well at the BJ tables and I want to see if others do it too. If they do, I'll switch from poker. Don't blast someone just because they're asking for more information.

[ QUOTE ]

um, any old lady who plays quarter slots can get free rooms
and show tickets. these cost the casino next to nothing to give to the player. free liquor and limo rides, then we'll investigate further.

this last statement you made shows how green you guys are about the casino business. congrats on your short-term luck, but don't try preaching to others about some new "system" you friend has created, when you don't have any tangible data to back it up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
My friend appears to have good innate ability at BJ

[/ QUOTE ]

While it is true a BJ player must have the "smarts", there really is no "innate" ability that makes one BJ player better than another.

BJ is purely a mathematical game. In poker you play higher limits by getting better. In BJ, what separates a red player and a black player isn't necessarily skill, but BR.

I've got a program at home called BJ Risk Mngr. When I get home I can plug in some #'s to give you an idea of hourly expectation.

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

People exaggerate win rates. This is easy to do because the winning sessions are all recorded as due to skill, and the losing sessions can all be attributed to bad luck and ignored. You story of your friend's average win rate are not plausible.

NLHE with a $5 big blind should be much more profitable than green chip blackjack, with no risk of being identified and barred.

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

If Casinos allowed you to bet whatever you want (within their table limits) without any heat/barring then blackjack would be about 100X better poker game.
The problem is you have to limit your spread, and limit your playing hours to avoid detection. Your playing AGAINST the house, and they hate losing money.
With poker you can play to your hearts content and the casino is happy.

Your far better playing poker then blackjack these days.
BTW I used to be a card counter, red chip betting mainly $5-$60. The swings can be brutal. Having a 1% advantage means very little during each session, as you can still lose hand after hand with max bets out.

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

Spoke with my friend. If you take his biggest win, a weekend session that netted about $8-10k (it was a lights out session). Then his hourly win rate comes out to be $80-100. But exclude that win, the $1000 per weekend or $50 per hour seems to be more achievable and his norm.

$10 per hour seems pretty pathetic. Is this considered the expected win rate for a competent counter playing $25 BJ with the 1-8/10 spread at the Borgata. Getting conflicting info.

[ QUOTE ]
My friend appears to be doing $80-100 per hour.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

General assumptions...sorry if you gave excact specifics, I didn't go back and re-read the thread.

6 deck shoe, 5 decks dealt(very generous penetration).
$25 unit spread 25 - 300 (1-12 spread)
using Hi/Lo with the Illustrious 18 indices

Winrate/100 hands = $36.75. If you only get 60 per hour thats $22.05.

SD/100 = $841

30K BR gives you a ROR of 4.46%
10K BR = 35.45%
BR less than that, flirting with disaster.

If he spreads higher than $300, ofcourse that increases expectation, but also increases ROR.

And this all assumes play all(no wonging) and perfect play.
[ QUOTE ]
In fact my friend doesn't even take card counting seriously

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

nice to see the cold hard facts in this thread, thanks for that.

what does this mean: "this all assumes play all(no wonging)"??

thanks again.

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
what does this mean: "this all assumes play all(no wonging)"??

[/ QUOTE ]
this means you can't sit out of hands during the shoe with a negative count, nor can you jump into a shoe only when the count is high. you have to bet at least the minimum $25 each hand even when there is a negative expectation.

according to the recent issue of CBJN, all Borg tables with limits $25-6000 are No Mid Shoe Entry. you might be able to backcount at the lower $10-1000 tables, but then the OP friend's claim of a $8-10K win would be overwhelmingly unlikely.

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
what does this mean: "this all assumes play all(no wonging)"??

[/ QUOTE ]
You play every hand. No "shadow bets".

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

The innate ability I'm referring to is mathematical skills, like memory and the ability to quickly calculate the odds.

But you're right, once you're talking about the top 5-10% players, it's no longer a matter of keeping track of the cards.

Though a player like Stu Ungar was such a great counter, he could count 8 deck shoe, in his case he could tell you the suit and rank of the last card. That type of effortless ability has to translate into a big advantage versus someone who needs to really concentrate to keep track of the count.

[ QUOTE ]

While it is true a BJ player must have the "smarts", there really is no "innate" ability that makes one BJ player better than another.

BJ is purely a mathematical game. In poker you play higher limits by getting better. In BJ, what separates a red player and a black player isn't necessarily skill, but BR.

I've got a program at home called BJ Risk Mngr. When I get home I can plug in some #'s to give you an idea of hourly expectation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

Just want to comment on the relative intelligence required to card count in Blackjack as opposed to playing advantage poker:

Card counting, by itself, requires the intelligence of learning hand selection pre-flop in hold 'em.

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

Your analysis is right, but I doubt he consistently getting penetration that good. Most good counters play two hands so if that is the case probably is playing at expectation. However, if he has won the vast majority of his sessions he has been getting lucky (uh, had a positive statistical fluctuation) and is for a rude awakening when he take a 100BB down turn.

To answer the original question, poker is easier to beat than blackjack. Poker players don't have to deal with heat, back off's, (flat betting, reduced pen in AC), obnoxious security guards, and all the other hassles that black jack players do. Plus there are very few good games in AC. ,

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

Can someone give me a few examples where a 'good' blackjack player would do something different than I would (just following my basic strategy).

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

Yeah, but there is no end play in BJ anymore so who cares if you can count? Poker is way better. I rather bet on greyhound racing than play BJ anymore.

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

The most obvious would be that a 'good' player would be standing on 16 vs T about half the time, while basic strategy always says to hit.

sometimes 5,4 vs 7 double down, sometimes 6,4 vs T double down, etc.

I guess the mark of a 'good' player would be that he doesn't always play the hand the same way or according to basic strategy, sometimes it is more profitable to do something else.

Also, a 'good' player might walk away from a table even after a 'hot' streak, or actually increase his bet after getting continually beat by a 'hot' dealer, as the winning or losing of previous hands actually has little to do with the remaining composition of the shoe.

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

When I said a "good" blackjack player I meant a card counter.

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
Your analysis is right, but I doubt he consistently getting penetration that good.........To answer the original question, poker is easier to beat than blackjack.

[/ QUOTE ]

That was the whole point of the post, some hard facts...and that to obtain those BJ results long term, you'd have to play in near perfect conditions...constantly.

OP just seemed to think his buddy had found a golden goose in BJ. Not dispute the fact that his buddy might very well be a good informed player, but with the sketchy details his friend seems to be playing a marginal game well above his BR and has gotten lucky.

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

Black jack is one on one, poker is one vs how many sit at the table.

Black Jack is beatable, if you can get the dealer 1 on 1, you can rack it up, if you follow the cards. I used to think playing 1 deck was the answer, not anymore. With all the rule changes and only 6/5, it's a house game, now.

It's all about ev -/+

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
Can someone give me a few examples where a 'good' blackjack player would do something different than I would (just following my basic strategy).

[/ QUOTE ]

Cardcounting, especially in multi-deck games, is primarily about identifying when you have an advantage and getting your money in then. Basicaly, aces and tens (tens includes face cards, becuase they are valued at ten) help the player, small cards (2-6) help the dealer. When the deck is rich in tens and aces, you bet more. When the deck is rich in small cards, you bet less. Bet variation is essential to gaining an edge by card counting. There are also some strategy variations, but they will not allow you to beat a blackjack game if you are flat betting, except in a deeply dealt single deck game with favorable rules, which don't exist any more. So, the main thing a 'good player' would do that a basic strategy player wouldn't is to make big bets when the count is favorable, and small ones when it isn't. He might also stand on 15 or 16vs. dealer 10 at times, or hit 12 against 4. He might also take insurance when the count is high. There are several more strategy changes, but they are not essential to getting an edge; they just improve the edge he gets from varying his bets a little bit. The two main problems with card counting are the high variance relative to the edge, and the fact that the casinos will throw you out if they know what you are doing.

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
$100/hr at a $25 table is an expectation of over 6%.

[/ QUOTE ]

In BJ you expect to make about 1 big bet per hour. If you are using a spread of $25 to $100 or $125 you could make $100 an hour and take home $1000 in a weekend.

Re: Blackjack vs Poker
 

Has your friend ever tried "Wonging" (table hopping)....or counting 2 or 3 tables at a time for game selection is just as key as counting...counting is only half the battle...you can run and count an 8 deck shoe for 3 to 4 hours on a negative count. Also if your friend is just starting out then I have to believe that he has not had time enough at the tables to develop skills for anti-detection....I've been working on camoflauge for 2 years...and can still sense heat once in awhile...math whizz or not these kinds of things take alot of time and practice to develop....so I wouldn't believe what your friend is telling you....