Card Counting Not That Profitable....

[Blackjack]

From everything that I've read,

Playing by yourself implementing a standard 1-5 system or even a 1-10 system (dangerous - you might get 86ed), you are only gaining about 1%. Yes, it's +EV but imagine your playing at Foxwoods.

$5-$25 bets. Lets say 150 hands an hour. You probably will wager about $2000 an hour. Multiply that by .01 and your hourly EV is only about $20 an hour - assuming PERFECT play and PERFECT counting.

Seems like a lot of work and a shitload of hassle if you get 86ed from your favorite poker casino.

I guess the only way to make it truly worth doing is to do what the MIT card counters did - work in teams. Couldn't you use cell phones or something like that to text message a teammate when the count is high?

How could you make card counting lucrative again?

[MicroBob]

Your general points are correct...you have to vary your betting a lot with a good-sized bankroll to have a semi-reasonable edge.

However...there is VERY little chance you will get booted from a casino for spreading $5-$25.
There are SOME really uptight, idiot floor-people out there who would toss you for counting with a $5-$25 spread...but they aren't very common.

In most places you could sit there for several hours everyday for months and MAYBE they would notice on your players-card that you aren't really losing and will then ask you to leave. But any modest rat-holing of chips would help prevent them from noticing that you are actually long-term profitable.

[cardcounter0]

You are right, if you are betting a few red chips, blackjack isn't that profitable. If you play Texas Hold 'Em $3/$6, poker isn't that profitable either.

Now if you play Hold 'Em $30/$60, poker can be very profitable. Likewise, start throwing some black or purple chips around on the blackjack tables, and you will make some money.

At these levels, don't worry about the '86. That is just a sign to go take a break, eat dinner, play another casino for a while, before coming back.
[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Iceman]

"I guess the only way to make it truly worth doing is to do what the MIT card counters did - work in teams. Couldn't you use cell phones or something like that to text message a teammate when the count is high?"

A lot of casinos have a rule that any player who enters in the middle of a shoe can only bet the table minimum.

[playersare]

the "MIT team" strategy would not work at foxwoods or anywhere on the east coast because of widespread NMSE policies.

the 8-deck shoes are not worth counting, and a great majority of 6-deck games are $25-100+ limits, wonging prohibited, and located in the VIP pits subject to higher floor scrutiny. mediocre penetration keeps the +TC opportunities to a minimum.

in nevada and mississippi, the scene is more open so you can actually still grind out some theoretical profit in the long run (eg. Barfarkel "You've Got Heat"). however, the physical game of cat and mouse that even a low-stakes AP endures is a major deterrent to most would-be counters.

I've read just about every good blackjack book there is but never discovered a good enough real-life situation where is was going to be worth my time, effort and bankroll to invest beyond basic strategy and flat betting the minimum. Since I've started online poker whoring and dog paddled my actual playing skill up to +0.44BB/100, blackjack has become just a recreational pursuit.

[CORed]

The biggest benefit of team play in blackjack is the pooled bankroll and playing more hands. This reduces your risk of ruin, allows you to play for higher stakes, and increases the probability that your actual results will be close to your expected results. Using spotter-big player tacitcs can help a little bit for cover, in casinos without no mid-shoe entry rules, but the casinos are familiar with this tactic. Ken Uston used it in the '70's, and I'm not sure that he invented it. The downside of team play is that it's hard to know whether somebody on the team who is losing is stealing, playing incorrectly or just having a bad run.

If you just wong some tables with bets less than $100 while waiting for your poker seat to open up, you probably won't get '86'ed. The worst that's likely to happen is a "back off" where they tell you you can play any game but blackjack.

[popniklas]

sorry for being a bj noob, but what does "86ed" mean?

[soah]

Game selection is absurdly important. When I dabbled in card counting I was spreading $5-150 with minimal betting cover at a doubledeck game with 75% pen and decent rules other than H17. I had a great hourly expectation there and nobody paid the slightest bit of attention to me. From what I've read about Foxwoods, you're probably wasting your time. Lots of eight deck shoes with lousy pen and NMSE? If you want to count cards, you're going to have to travel and locate the exploitable games/dealers.

[MicroBob]

$5-$150 on double-deck??
you're my hero!! That totally rocks.

That said....if I had a large enough bankroll where I was comfortable with that kind of spread I can think of at least 2 places where I believe I could pull this off so I might give it a try at some point.



Agreed that what I've heard about the 8-decks at Foxwoods is not very good for the would-be counter. As I recall..don't they typically cut-out the last 3 decks of the shoe?
With pen that lousy it just isn't going to be very beatable.
If you can enter mid-shoe there it's no picnic.

[cardcounter0]

Life is too short to play 8 decks ....