Baccarat Types of card players

[cyph]

THE PLAYERS

We’ve explored the fundamentals, a few nontraditional systems, and the possibility of mechanical and electronic assistance, so now it's time to focus on the player.^.,,

Tourists

Most tourists are weak basic strategy players, and they rarely take any other cards into consideration except their own. Not surprisingly, most tourists have heard of card counting, some even have a basic idea of how it works, but they generally fall into the group that still believes that card counting is a skill requiring mathematical wizardry and a photographic memory. They can't fathom how it could be possible to count down six or eight decks. They may even opt for playing one deck versus the shoe without a clear understanding of why, as evidenced by the popularity of 6 to 5 single-deck blackjack. But most importantly, they have been conditioned to believe that blackjack is one of the best bets in the casino, hence the worldwide popularity of the game.

Card Watchers

These are the players who occasionally look past their own hand, they're the card watchers'. They’ll increase the bet after a round of'babies' (small cards), or decrease the bet after too many big cards or aces have been played. They may even think back a round before taking insurance or making a tough decision. They play the game two or three rounds at a time.

These players clearly understand the basic premise of counting cards, but don’t have the desire or discipline to take it to the next level. Watching is the extent of their analysis.

Imitators
Next we come to the hoards of players who like to think of themselves as bona fide counters. They’ve

 

[cyph]

read a few books, spent some time at home practicing, grasped the fundamentals, and have developed a cursory knowledge. They make some good plays, and some bad. Their bankroll is the trip money in their pockets. They do not adopt a specific bet spread, other than to bet more when the deck is rich. They want to believe that their knowledge is enough to win—it is not. They like to brag about getting backed off, almost surely a mistake on our part. They may even run lucky for a while and credit their sporadic success to their limited knowledge. These players are filled with false hope and pretense. They're doomed, and the country is loaded with them.

I wish I had a dime for every person who claims to be a card counter, but when asked, "What count do you play?", they respond with, "You know, plus, minus, I watch the big cards." Their response alone precludes them from having any chance to win over the long haul,

When the industry decided to fade blackjacks skill angle, the tourists, card watchers, and imitators were the reason. These were the players who made the casino operators look like altruists by offering the public a beatable game.

Amateurs

Most winning card counters are amateur or part-time players. They’ve mastered the technical fundamentals, and usually play small to medium stakes with little interest, or heart, to play high stakes. Wins are not generally parlayed into bigger banks and bigger bets, and when they lose, they often stop playing for a while and quickly lose interest in the uphill battle. They are gainfully employed and make more money working for a living than they do playing blackjack.

Most are content with playing a better than average game; they take the game seriously, but not overly so. The game is more of an intellectual exercise than a way to make money.

Amateurs can play every weekend if they live close to a gaming destination, but the majority are visiting casino jurisdictions every few months, sometimes less.

Some have very impressive longrun results, yet most have only learned to survive, grinding out short money or breaking even. These players can be a thorn, but they are not a significant threat. In most situations, fading nickel counters and many conservative green check counters, is cheaper than hiring shills.

Professionals

The solo, full-time professional blackjack player is a rarity, especially one who plays for high stakes. According to the most knowledgeable sources, the consensus is that the number of successful, solo players is probably in the 100 to 200 range, worldwide. And for those who have won substantial money, I'd bet that the number is significantly fewer. Given the deterioration of the game, playing solo

 

[cyph]

is a tough nut to crack, especially when compared to the numerous advantages of team play.

For those who continue to beat the game under ^solitary umbrella, we’re talking about the very best players in the world. They have not only mastered ithe games complexities, but have conquered the psychological aspects of winning and getting away with it, all of those intangible skills you can't learn from books. With todays game often requiring a novel approach to be successful, they are also some of the most innovative players around.

Many pros only play part-time, and it might even make more sense to classify them as amateurs since they don’t have the desire to play the game around the clock, but they could. They are often successful in some other business or endeavor, so playing blackjack is not their only source ofincome. This said, they definitely play the game for the money. They are as skillful as their full-time counterpart, they read everything they can on the subject, they stay on top of the most recent developments, they network with the best players in the world, and will often hook up with professional teams. Many are professional gamblers, and playing blackjack is just one of their talents.

Professional Teams

Far and away the most successful strategy in the history of casino blackjack is team play. Card counting teams are probably responsible for 80% to 90% of all the money won on the square! Admittedly, these percentages are merely speculation on my part, but for what it's worth, my guess is probably conservative.

There are many strategies that require more than one player, counting cards does not, yet team play makes all the sense in the world.

Team play was first described in Beat the Dealer in his chapter,"The Fine Points of Play”, under the topic of "The Enormous Advantage of Teaming Up with Other Players". Professor Thorp explained how two players teaming up with the same bankroll, and playing on different tables, had the same earning power of four players. Take two players, each with a $1,000 bank, betting $5 to $20, and lets say that each one wins $10 an hour. With a combined bank of $2,000, they can both bet twice as much, each now spreading $10 to $40, winning $20 an hour. The team now earns $40 an hour, which is four times the earning potential of the individual player. With no additional capital and no additional risk, each player doubles his hourly win just by teaming up!

Clearly, the concept of pooling money to boost earning power is a powerful one. Thorp ended his discussion with the following hypothetical scenario; this should get your attention...

... suppose a group of twenty players, each putting up $500, were to descend on a single large Nevada

casino... The pool of twenty players would be like twenty separate players each backed by $10,000.

Under average conditions they would win more than $500 each per hour. Unless stopped, the group

could drain off $250,000 per 24 hours of playing time/

 

[cyph]

Beat the Dealer was such a sensation, many players overlooked some of Thorps lesser observations, in particular his comments regarding team play. By all accounts, it took almost a decade before players began to see the potential of team play. On a very curious side note, these revelations did not appear in the 1966 revised edition of Beat the Dealer, apparently the fault of the editor.

Around 1971 a major development in team play was the big player/small player approach. This strategy is the brainchild of legendary card counter A1 Francesco (a pseudonym). With small players ontnumerous games, one or more big players roamed the pit waiting to be signaled into hot shoes with high positive counts. This ploy proved to be very successful

From this time on, it seemed as if every angle for beating the game utilized team play (computers, holecard, tracking, etc.). There was definitely strength in numbers. Players could increase their earning power, smooth out fluctuation (one of the biggest threats to the solo player), and feed on the camaraderie of the team for emotional support to help get through the tough runs. With all of these advantages, the obvious question arises: Why would anyone ever consider playing solo?

Industry sources have documented as many as 150 players connected to the same team. This is a serious organizational effort, but clarification is needed. Yes, these teams exist, but were generally talking about a handful of pros who specialize in recruiting both primary players (the BPs) and secondary role players. They may run 100 to 200 players through a team, over time, over many years, but most of these players work for short periods, make a few dollars, and move on. Many are college students, relatives, or close friends and acquaintances. When asked to play with a count team or tracking tream, many just do it for the thrill—the money is secondary. They get to bet thousands of dollars, stay in the penthouse suite, ride in the limo, get the best seats for the shows, and enjoy the best restaurants, all on the house. Who wouldn't want to live that dream for a while?

Without a revolving recruitment program, most teams are relatively small, perhaps from five to ten players, although there have been a few instances when much larger teams have been formed.

The best teams have plenty of money (in some cases, they have access to unlimited capital from outside sources). They are great teachers and organizers, and many even have their own training manuals. The training process is strict, extensive, and each player must learn certain skills and pass certain tests. They hire mathematicians and computer programmers for researching and developing new stategies, if they aren't already part of the team. The organizational scope and detail would surprise most gamers, as they run their teams like corporations. ■

These teams play with an edge, and they play until you say, "Uncle!” Some teams are known to forego all subtlety, they fire straight away, aggressively, and with hefty advantages. They fully expect to get your attention, and when they do, here they come with another BP, slightly different looks, same money, and it starts all over again. They can be pit bulls!

On the surface, team play sounds like the perfect plan, but just putting a few players together doesn’t guarantee any shopping sprees. Every team, sooner or later, gets hammered. They can, and do, lose entire banks. They're not immune to bad fluctuation and bad breaks. They routinely run

 

[cyph]

into problems with BPs getting backed off, scheduling conflicts, team stealing, personality conflicts, V excessive expenses, and long periods of break-even play. Sometimes: it just doesn't work.

In the final analysis, it’s clearly a losing proposition to fade these players. They are to be respected, | no question about it. But, at the core, they are still individual players and should be evaluated as such. | The only absolute option the industry has to stop this level of talent is to remove all possibilities of beating the game. If they cannot win, they will not play! Its that simple.

Today, from a game protection standpoint, blackjack team play is almost synonymous with 1 The Greeks, Core, MIT, Hyland, and many lesser known teams; It remains a bonafrde. threat. .'

 

[cyph]

PERSPECTIVE

Most gamers have never played the game on a serious level, so their card counting knowledge is almost exclusively garnered from the printed page, or from those who have learned from the printed page. J It should come as no surprise that most believe that card counting is relatively simple to learn and hugely profitable. Unfortunately, these beliefs are far from the truth, so it may be helpful to look at the game through a cynical eye.

Precision?

In a book hailed as the most authoritative analysis ever conducted on the science of casino blackjack, Peter Griffins Theory of Blackjack, the professor included a revealing chapter called “On the Likely Consequences of Errors in Card Counting Systems’’^ He opened with

The mathematical analysis of blackjack strategies is' only in rare instances what might be called an 'exact science'.,

The card counting doctrine is built on approximations. Count values are approximations based on the effect of removals. The true count—a misnomer, if there ever was one—is an approximation based on a player s best guess of the remaining cards, and this very important skill affects many areas of the game, including the betting strategy, estimating the advantage, and playing strategy changes. Deviations from basic strategy are made according to playing indices, which are also based on approximations. Griffin added his insight about the methodology:

There is at present no completely satisfactory resolution to such quandries and even the most carefully computed critical indices have an element of faith in them.

Its easy to question the exactness expressed in every book ever written about the game.

 

[cyph]

card counting device mechanical