Blackjack Double; Blackjack Dealer; Blackjack Deck; Blackjack deutsch; Blackjack true count; Blackjack Tabelle deutsch; blackjack twins wahrscheinlichkeiten blackjack wertung; blackjack wizard of odds; blackjack Wertigkeit; blackjack. Black Jack (auch Blackjack) ist das am meisten gespielte Karten-Glücksspiel, das in Als Spieler konnte man durch Mitzählen der hohen Karten (Card counting) vorteilhafte Blackjack Basic Strategy - Wizard of Odds. Abgerufen am 8. American Blackjack Turbo is an online casino game by SkillOnNet that provides especially in live settings where the possibility of card counting comes into play. (also known as “The Wizard of Odds”), but simplified further for ease of use.
American Blackjack TurboBaccaratWizard tracks, predicts, and recommends what you should bet on your next Baccarat game's hand. The best card counting strategies that increase your. It shows the optimal strategy to implement in your play without card counting. Hypnosetherapie Frei von Blackjack - Wizard of Odds. Want to learn all there is to. Infographic: Casino Blackjack and Roulette, Who Wins and How? How to Play Baccarat Blackjack - Wizard of Odds. Want to learn all there is Get top tips, card counting strategy, best blackjack casinos and much more. All in one place, with.
Wizard Of Odds Card Counting Recommended online casinos VideoThings about Baccarat - Wizard of Odds - Wizard of Odds
ZuverlГssigkeit Hertha Fanmeilen immer Wizard Of Odds Card Counting der Sicherheit und Wire Transfer Auf Deutsch als ein der Hauptkriterien fГr. - BewertungenCanliskorlar was not a problem either.
JohnCrover Banned Jul 22, JohnCrover said:. Yep, I use to battle this thing often in my early days. Experienced my first 20k hand losing streak against it.
You must log in or register to reply here. DO NOTE I could drone on and on about bet spreads, but to be honest I truly believe the best way to develop your bet spread is by defining your bankroll, which defines your max bet, and then you know your min and your max Play with the in between in some sort of progressive fashion taking note of the Gain Per Hand.
The more you get used to these numbers the more you'll be able to tweak them to get the most out of your spread you possibly can. I hope I answered your questions and didn't get too generic.
Please let me know if you still have any confusion. I need to practice, practice, practice Most any app that works on the phone also works great for an iPad.
A lot of them are free, some of them are a dollar or two pretty small investment for something that if not done properly could cost you a LOT of money.
Overall, just know that the majority of them are the same. Just review and try to find an app that lets you have the most control It lets you set the number of decks, penetration, keeps the count for you to reference to 'check' yourself, tells you if you make a basic strategy error, etc, etc.
Q: My local place has a , 6d, DAS, RSA, resplit up to 3, double anything no surrender. Decent penetration with certain dealers.
Red chips? Of course not much money to make money but I intend to play and keep growing my BR by other means of income.
A: 1 Would spread be okay on a bankroll? If you're going to become proficient right now and look to go pro later, I would highly suggest running a SIM of your specific games to better get your bankroll requirements for professional play.
So there's your answer to question 1. I think every beginner counter should make at least a few casino trips using this spread.
After all the hours of intense practice, when you think you're really ready to put money on the line in the casino, I think the next step is to deploy the spread.
Do note this is NOT to make money; this is NOT to build your bankroll This is to give you LIVE experience actually counting, calculating true counts and actually implementing your bet spread.
You learn little things like: When you know the TC is changing this round and you might up your bet next round, if you win the hand pull your ENTIRE bet back while you think of what you want to bet instead of grabbing chips to ADD to the circle.
Because if there are chips in the circle and you're "thinking" then the dealer will just start dealing and you'll miss out on betting bigger.
Now if you pull your bet completely out of the circle while you decide what to bet then the dealer will wait for you to bet what you want.
These small things to me are the reason one should use the spread; not to make money or build a bankroll. The rest of the spread sheet will automatically update itself if you created it like I explained.
Then you can look at your "Total Gain. If you make a mistake or two per hour which newer people do or if you only get 70 hands per hour instead of you're not even making money at this table.
Hell, if you're getting 70 hands per hour AND you make 1 or 2 mistakes an hour, then you're LOSING money at this game! The position in the shoe or column in the bead plate does not matter.
Where level 3 takes things to a new level is the point value of each card, which is more proportional to it's effect on the odds. The following table shows how to adjust the running count by each card observed.
As with the level 1 strategy, start the shoe with a running count of 0 and add the point value of each rank as cards are revealed. Unlike the level 1 strategy, the player should bet the Player with a running count of or less.
As a reminder, the overall house edge betting ever hand using the level 1 strategy is 1. As with the level 1 strategy, the player can reduce the overall house edge by skipping hands that are close to the point where both bets are about equally as bad.
In this case, that point is a running count of All things considered, the reduction in house edge compared to level 1 is only 0.
Probably not worth the bother for most players. As mentioned in the introduction, card counting can indeed be used to cut down the house edge in baccarat.
In my opinion, level 1 will be appropriate for most people. Level 2 and 3 offer a reduction in house edge of about 0.
Discussion about this topic in my forum at Wizard of Vegas. Enter your email address to receive our newsletter and other special announcements.
Some strategies count the ace ace-reckoned strategies and some do not ace-neutral strategies. Including aces in the count improves betting correlation since the ace is the most valuable card in the deck for betting purposes.
However, since the ace can either be counted as one or eleven, including an ace in the count decreases the accuracy of playing efficiency. Since PE is more important in single- and double-deck games, and BC is more important in shoe games, counting the ace is more important in shoe games.
One way to deal with such tradeoffs is to ignore the ace to yield higher PE while keeping a side count which is used to detect addition change in EV which the player will use to detect additional betting opportunities which ordinarily would not be indicated by the primary card counting system.
The most commonly side counted card is the ace since it is the most important card in terms of achieving a balance of BC and PE.
Since there is the potential to create an overtaxing demand on the human mind while using a card counting system another important design consideration is the ease of use.
The Running count is the running total of each card's assigned value. When using Balanced count such as the Hi-Lo system , the Running count is converted into a "True count," which takes into consideration the number of decks used.
With Hi-Lo, the True count is essentially the Running count divided by the number of decks that have not yet been dealt; this can be calculated by division or approximated with an average card count per round times the number of rounds dealt.
However, many variations of True count calculation exist. Back-counting, also known as "Wonging," consists of standing behind a blackjack table that other players are playing on, and counting the cards as they are dealt.
Stanford Wong first proposed the idea of back-counting, and the term "Wong" comes from his pen name.
The player will enter or "Wong in" to the game when the count reaches a point at which the player has an advantage. The player may then raise their bets as their advantage increases, or lower their bets as their advantage goes down.
Some back-counters prefer to flat-bet, and only bet the same amount once they have entered the game. Some players will stay at the table until the game is shuffled, or they may "Wong out" or leave when the count reaches a level at which they no longer have an advantage.
Back-counting is generally done on shoe games, of 4, 6, or 8 decks, although it can be done on pitch games of 1 or 2 decks. The reason for this is that the count is more stable in a shoe game, so a player will be less likely to sit down for one or two hands and then have to get up.
In addition, many casinos do not allow "mid-shoe entry" in single or double deck games which makes Wonging impossible.
Another reason is that many casinos exhibit more effort to thwart card counters on their pitch games than on their shoe games, as a counter has a smaller advantage on an average shoe game than in a pitch game.
Back-counting is different from traditional card-counting, in that the player does not play every hand they see. This offers several advantages.
For one, the player does not play hands at which they do not have a statistical advantage. This increases the total advantage of the player.
Another advantage is that the player does not have to change their bet size as much, or at all if they choose. Large variations in bet size are one way that casinos detect card counters, and this is eliminated with back-counting.
There are several disadvantages to back-counting. One is that the player frequently does not stay at the table long enough to earn comps from the casino.
Another disadvantage is that some players may become irritated with players who enter in the middle of a game, and superstitiously believe that this interrupts the "flow" of the cards.
Their resentment may not merely be superstition, though, as this practice will negatively impact the other players at the table, because with one fewer player at the table when the card composition becomes unfavorable, the other players will play through more hands under those conditions as they will use up fewer cards per hand, and similarly, they will play fewer hands in the rest of the card shoe if the advantage player slips in during the middle of the shoe when the cards become favorable because with one more player, more of those favorable cards will be used up per hand.
This negatively impacts the other players, whether they are counting cards or not. Lastly, a player who hops in and out of games may attract unwanted attention from casino personnel, and may be detected as a card-counter.
While a single player can maintain their own advantage with back-counting, card counting is most often used by teams of players to maximize their advantage.
In such a team, some players called "spotters" will sit at a table and play the game at the table minimum, while keeping a count basically doing the back "counting".
When the count is significantly high, the spotter will discreetly signal another player, known as a "big player," that the count is high the table is "hot".
The big player will then "Wong in" and wager vastly higher sums up to the table maximum while the count is high. When the count "cools off" or the shoe is shuffled resetting the count , the big player will "Wong out" and look for other counters who are signaling a high count.
This was the system used by the MIT Blackjack Team , whose story was in turn the inspiration for the Canadian movie The Last Casino which was later re-made into the Hollywood version The main advantage of group play is that the team can count several tables while a single back-counting player can usually only track one table.
This allows big players to move from table to table, maintaining the high-count advantage without being out of action very long.
It also allows redundancy while the big player is seated as both the counter and big player can keep the count as in the movie 21 , the spotter can communicate the count to the big player discreetly as they sit down.
The disadvantages include requiring multiple spotters who can keep an accurate count, splitting the "take" among all members of the team, requiring spotters to play a table regardless of the count using only basic strategy, these players will lose money long-term , and requiring signals, which can alert pit bosses.
A simple variation removes the loss of having spotters play; the spotters simply watch the table instead of playing and signal big players to Wong in and out as normal.
The disadvantages of this variation are reduced ability of the spotter and big player to communicate, reduced comps as the spotters are not sitting down, and vastly increased suspicion, as blackjack is not generally considered a spectator sport in casinos except among those actually playing unlike craps , roulette and wheels of fortune which have larger displays and so tend to attract more spectators.
Other than my introduction to card counting , I leave that topic to other gambling writers. As a card counter it would probably be safe to use a true count from just the last hand played and off the top of a shoe.
To be honest with you I forget the running count myself sometimes. Other than that all I can suggest is play more. The more you play the easier it should become.
Thanks for the compliments. Most online casinos shuffle the cards after every hand. At single deck casinos Boss Media version 1, Microgaming, Unified Gaming you can use the cards already on the table to alter your play sometimes.
See my blackjack appendix3A for all the details. There are some casinos that play into a shoe a little way but not far, and have restrictive betting limits.
I have yet to be convinced of any worthwhile opportunity on the Internet to count cards. If you can count down one deck you can count down six.
It is just a matter of counting longer between shuffles. Sports betting is not my strong point, although I plan to learn more about it when I have the time.
I will say it is hard to compare the profitability of sports betting to card counting. Card counting is very technical and by the book.
Making money sports betting requires more judgement and is more subject to opinion. There are various strategies one can employ to make money sports betting, for example looking to arbitrage games by taking both sides at different casinos under different point spreads, looking to exploit unusual proposition bets, or going after correlated parlays.
This is an oversimplified method of counting cards. Better yet survey all the cards on the table. If you see a lot of small cards, especially fives and sixes, and few large cards, especially aces, then raise your bet.
If you see the opposite then lower your bet. The fewer the decks the better this will work. Mathematically speaking this is the same as playing from an eight deck game.
Players have been known to be fooled, incorrectly thinking these are double deck games. For card counting purposes the penetration is 50 out of , or This would be a good time to either bet small, go to the bathroom, or just leave, depending on your style of play.
Personally I hate bouncing up and down and would just bet small. There are lots of books that explain specifically how to count cards.
However for the amateur if you see a disproportionate number of tens and aces leave the deck bet less. Likewise bet more if lots of small cards leave the deck, especially fives and sixes.
Thanks for your kind words about my site. My educated guess is that if the index numbers were not rounded then it would be greater than 0 but less than one half.
So it is getting rounded down to zero. Making the index number 1 would result in more of a rounded error, causing players in slightly positive decks to hit when they should stand.
Every legitimate blackjack expert agrees the house edge decreases as the number of decks goes down, all other rules being equal.
However it is hard to explain why. First, it is true that you are more likely to get one small card and one big card in single-deck than multiple-deck.
Although stiffs can cut both ways the player has the free will to stand, the dealer must always hit them. Have a look at Beejack.
Most, but not all, casinos shuffle after every hand. I don't know if it practical to actually use this product. If you try it please let me know how you do, I might like to try it myself.
Note: The link to Beejack was removed in , due to a potential virus with that site. Proceed there with caution. Without knowing anything else, if you lost the last hand in blackjack then it is slightly more likely that more small cards than large just left the deck.
This would make the remaining deck more large card rich and thus lower the house edge. However I speculate this is an extremely small effect.
Yet it does go to show that if you must use a betting system one that increases the bet after a loss is better than one that increases after a win.
I hesitate to put this in writing at all because again the effect is probably very small and I fear system sellers will misquote me and imply I endorse any system, which I DO NOT.
No, it would be both harder and less powerful to only count the large cards. So most cards offset each other and the running count tends to stay close to zero.
So you are only keeping track of one number. If you only tracked high cards the total would run high and then you would have to carefully divide it by the number of remaining cards.
Even assuming you were good at estimating the number of remaining cards the division would be difficult to do well. Is it useless or simply not as effective for other card games like baccarat?
Thanks for the kind words. To answer question one, baccarat is not countable for all practical purposes. I have wondered about your second question myself.
My blackjack appendix 7 shows that removing a 2 from each deck adds 0. So if you must track only one the 2 is better.
The Knockout Count tracks both the 2 and 7. That tactic is only allowed in cases of cheating. However it still has been known to happen. Fortunately in such cases where the counter sued the case the counter won.
If I may say I think Canada is more mellow and non-confrontational than the U. This is also my policy, unless I feel there is no heat at all.
There was discussion about this at www. As I recall the consensus was that counting was not as advantageous as in blackjack but you could get away with a lot more.
I know of no published material on this. There is a lot written about card counting simply because the books sell.
I suspect many people watch a movie like Rain Man and get interested in card counting. Then they buy a book and realize it is too hard or give it a try and get discouraged because they lose.
Only the most patient, devoted, and well financed players stick with it. You could test for how often the same card appears in two consecutive hands.
If you see fewer repeats than would argue that the cards are not shuffled after every hand. It is easier, but less reliable, to just ask customer support.
It is my policy not to count in Las Vegas. So I am allowed to play blackjack at all but two casinos locally. However last January I went to Reno and Lake Tahoe for a few days and was told not to play blackjack at four different casinos.
In would say in a large Strip type casino the number of counters who know what they are doing on a given night is in my best guess one half of a single person or two casinos would have one person.
The reason I think it is this low is in my many hundreds of hours at the blackjack tables I only spotted other counters twice.
What I meant was half of one person, or one person for every two casinos. However you were not the only person I confused so I reworded my original answer to say half on one person, not half of everyone playing.
If you are counting cards then it is like decreasing the penetration by one card. The only time I might play for fun is if I am entertaining somebody visiting Vegas and am just out gambling with them.
Otherwise I always look for an edge. I also play new games sometimes just to ensure that I understand the rules correctly.
The easiest counting method is what I call the "eyeball" method, in which if you see lots of small cards come out then increase your bet, and vise versa.
However this is better suited to one and two deck games. This requires only counting aces and fives. According to Ken Uston in Million Dollar Blackjack this give the player an additional 0.
That is enough to overcome the house edge in most games. Face down. Not being allowed to see other player cards until the end of the hand gives the player less information, which works against card counters.
Basically this looks like a two-way clicker to help the player keep track of the running count in blackjack.
From what I read there is no true count conversion or index number help. Still knowing the running count and betting accordingly is much better than not counting at all.
It is also a clever disguise. However be aware that using any device to help calculate the probabilities on any game in a Nevada casinos is a felony and carries a punishment comparable to bank robbery.
If the counter were tipping then the dealer has the choice of not telling and getting more tips or tattling to get on the good side of casino management.
I think it in large part comes down to the attitude of the dealer, whether he is rooting for the player or the casino.
Dealers who are loyal to their employer first will probably tell, and tipping may not help. In my opinion dealers loyal to the casino are more likely to be women than men and Asians over any other race.
The decision to tip is hotly debated in the counting community and many counters follow the Stanford Wong philosophy of only tipping if the cover it buys you is more than in value than the tip itself.
This may explain the joke that the difference between a counter and a canoe is that a canoe sometimes tips.
Other counters tip anyway whether they think it buys them cover or not because they believe in tipping. There is still some point, especially with a full table.
In the game with a three-card guarantee the average advantage goes up to Flat betting and only five spots, I think not. However if you bet seven spots and progressively more on each spot to be played then yes.
This is called depth charging and is treated lightly in the book Burning the Tables in Las Vegas by Ian Andersen. In all honesty this is an old question but I got a better answer from Chris F..
A good example of this is that in single deck the correct play is to stand on 7,7 against a 10, because half of the sevens in the deck are already gone, and that is what you need to beat a dealer 20 with 3 cards.
Either way two cards that would bust the player by hitting have been removed. So the deck is slightly rich in small cards that will not bust the player, giving the player an incentive to hit.
While this is true I was skeptical because in an infinite deck game the odds still favor hitting. However except in a few Internet casinos an infinite deck is just an abstraction.
Then I gave the dealer a 10 and myself a 10 and 6. So the player was playing this hand against a neutral deck with 31 of each card A-9 and tens.
Here is the expected values:. Although the expected value numbers are the same the applet highlights standing as the better play, presumably because it is higher beyond four decimal places.
It is the same if I remove the following: A,2,3,4,5,6,8,10,10,10 to simulate 9,7 vs 10, because the player is going against the exact same neutral shoe.
It just goes to show how powerful the effect of removal is, even when just three cards in an eight-deck game. So as I just showed going into a neutral deck the odds favor standing.
The reason hitting is correct in an infinite deck is because there is no effect of removal. If you accidentally hit a 16 vs 10 in a neutral shoe, and got a low card, then the dealer would have a better chance of getting a 10 in the hole.
This fact is reflected in the higher expected value for standing in an 8-deck game, but would not matter in an infinite deck.
For the record, here are the expected values in an infinite deck game:. The Barbary Coast is notorious for having a low tolerance for counters.