Quote:
Originally Posted by Langdon
1) potentially rhetorical: if you find yourself with a bad dealer do you move to a different table, just suck it up for the eventual change, or just lower the bet to the minimum until the change and then pick it back up?
2) how do they track you? I saw them enter my starting chips with my card but not later add-ons. do they track just how many chips you start with, chips + time at the table, rebuy chips? I've heard "average bet hourly" but how do they track that?
3) is there really a structural or strategic advantage to playing with a smaller shoe size? is it just a better ability to count or track the cards? for low mins I saw 2-deck, 4-, 6- and 8-deck. is there really a difference?
Thanks for the TR!
As far as the blackjack goes -- it is roughly as easy to count regardless of shoe-size, but the smaller shoes are better for two different reasons -- first and foremost, smaller shoe is better off the top, assuming all other rules the same (smaller house edge). Second, and related to the first, due to the way the swongs work, you'll end up in the profitable spots more frequently in smaller shoes (since they shuffle away the bad/get to the good faster, essentially).
Also, as a novice counter, if I screw it up somewhere along the way, it's a lot faster to hop out and back in at the shuffle on 2-deck compared to 8.
All of that said -- counting compared to poker is not great at small stakes. The variance is extremely high, so for most bankroll sizes, you can make around 3x as much at poker with the same risk of ruin. You're almost certainly best off just playing the matchplays as DaNit originally suggested.
As far as bad dealers -- I played about 50 hours of blackjack last year, and can only remember two dealers as particularly bad for any reason -- I'd probably take that as a reason to pack up and move to the next casino, or next table, or whatever, especially in Vegas. There's just so many places to play blackjack, why would you want to spend time with a dealer you dislike for any reason?
As far as rating -- they're trying to determine your average bet-size, and they use your chip-in/chip-out as a proxy for that (as well as a way to eventually identify counters). Usually the pit critter is wandering around keeping some moderate track on how much you're actually betting using their computer. The computer has an imputed hands per hour based upon number of spots in action at that table -- so it just multiplies it out, and if you're using multiple sizes then the pit boss inputs them both and it comes up with some sort of weighted average.