WILLSON'S CASINO

Last time I told you some thing about professional gamblers. Here I tell some Basic Strategy, which is a predetermined set of rules proven by computer simulation that represents the best possible way to play each hand. If you understand the game inside and out, and have committed every Basic Strategy decision to memory such that you can recall what to do almost instantaneously and under any circumstance, then you're probably ahead of about 99 percent of the blackjack-playing population. But that's not good enough. Because, as mentioned earlier, playing perfect Basic Strategy gets you only to about even with the house. Your bankroll will go up and down, and after some period of time you'll inevitably find yourself about even or at worst losing only a modest amount. But who wants to do that? Let's leave "being even" to the weekend warriors. We want to win in the long run. And there's no other way to do that but to keep track of the cards.

 The basic principle behind counting is actually quite simple. It amounts to nothing more than changing the way you play-and even more important, the amount you bet-based on what cards have been dealt. Remember that there are only a finite number of cards (regardless of how many decks are used); so by keeping track of those played, the counter acquires knowledge of what cards remain. And, in overly simplistic terms, when more high cards than low cards remain, the players often hold the advantage. Of course, only the cards counter 

 AN INTRODUCTION TO CARD COUNTING

 When such a situation will occur, and in that lies the keys t,

,om. , common misconception is that the actual process of card counted “, as more difficult as the number of decks in use increases. T ,e case at all. In fact, counting down a single deck or a hypoth ".

Comprising 99 decks are essentially equally difficult. The differ i- how frequently or infrequently the advantageous situations single-deck game, the advantage player doesn't have to a deck after deck before finding a truly ripe situation on which or put another way: advantage situations present themes l' 'eater frequency when fewer cards are used. Thus, the numb r in use has more to do with governing opportunity than it posing more or less difficulty. Ember that the dealer is forced to abide by a predetermined st, He must draw on all totals of 16 and below, and stand with 7. Think about it. That's a vital part of the overall equation. In a. rule and this rule alone that, in essence, represents the of! on which the entire process of card counting rests. When an eJltc, cards has been dealt (resulting in an abundance of high card g), the player is more likely to end up with a winning harm " - , err that occurs by simply beating the dealer outright or because ultimately must draw additional cards and thus has a higher ,. of busting. And, not surprisingly, the reverse applies dulH negative counts, when a lot of high cards have been dealt durance of low cards remains. Whichever the case, the profiqie

Counter bets more when he has the advantage, and less (or n6t ,en he doesn't.

The Five Core Concepts people erroneously assume that counters somehow mem card that's been dealt. That's simply not the case, and I'm u isn't a human on Earth who could remember every card dealt fro . Knows when such a situation will occur, and in that lays the keys to the kingdom.

A common misconception is that the actual process of card counting becomes more difficult as the number of decks in use increases. That's not the case at all. In fact, counting down a single deck or a hypothetical shoe comprising 99 decks is essentially equally difficult. The difference lies in how frequently or infrequently the advantageous situations arise. In a single-deck game, the advantage player doesn't have to wade through deck after deck before finding a truly ripe situation on which to capitalize. Or put another way: advantage situations present themselves at a greater frequency when fewer cards are used. Thus, the number of decks in use has more to do with governing opportunity than it does with posing more or less difficulty.

         

            While the life of a professional gambler does have its own mystique and glamour, the financial rewards in blackjack are often far less than some might expect. The reason for this primarily boils down to the fact that it is very difficult to play anywhere near as many hours as you might work in a normal job not because of fatigue or brain drain, but because the casino simply won't tolerate it. For example, if Caesars allowed me to sit peacefully at its tables from nine to five every day, and I could happily get in forty hours every week, I'd easily clear a million bucks a year and still be able to take a couple of weeks of vacation.

          Now, large casinos can easily absorb a loss like that, but they got to be big by plugging all the leaks. And it would be bad business for them to allow hordes of card counters to descend on their tables like locusts looking for easy pickings. Hence, there has evolved a cat-and-mouse battle between skilled players and the house. The casinos tolerate a certain amount of damage to their castle walls, but the boiling oil is sure to come out if you try and scale too high.

         This creates certain limitations on how much money individual card counters can scurry off with. Practically speaking, it is hard for solo players to get in long days at the tables. A full-time pro might only work three hundred hours over a twelve-month period. So instead of raking in a million a year and spending his vacations on a yacht in the Mediterranean, his expected return each year drops down to a much more pedestrian number. Therefore, many card counters are destined to spend their summers on the Allagash River in a canoe shooing away pesky mosquitoes rather than on a boat in the French Riviera fending off amorous Scandinavian blondes.

STANDARD DEVIATIONS

        A ballpark estimate of how much you can hope to make card counting is to take your top bet and multiply it by 25 to 30 percent. This is roughly what you will average per hour of play. That translates to about thirty bucks an hour with our benchmark $10,000 bankroll, which means a serious effort might only net $10,000 a year. Even worse, the recreational player (one hundred hours a year) might only bring home a meager $3,000. Hardly enough to quit' the day job.

        Yet thirty bucks an hour is still attractive enough to entice many people, especially when a few camped meals and shows are thrown in. If you desire a greater return for your labors, there is a simple solution to push you into a higher wage bracket-just start with a bigger bankroll and bet more. If you had $40,000 to work with, your potential hourly return should be over a hundred bucks an hour. And unless you're an attorney or a BMW mechanic, that's starting to sound like pretty good money.

        However, the problem is that unlike other jobs, you don't get paid by the hour. Your actual return will vary dramatically from your expected value (EV). These wild fluctuations are what drive many people out of the business and fall under the mathematical term "standard deviations" (SD).

        Here is an example to explain SD. If you were to flip a coin 100 times, the average results should be 50 heads and 50 tails. However, as everyone knows, there will be a certain amount of fluctuation in any short-term trial. Sometimes heads will clock in at 51 out of 100, and maybe the next test it will finish at 43 out of 100. However, there is an exact formula for predicting how often the results of these coin flips will land within certain parameters.

 

 

           

 

 

 

 

   If you want to earn big with some risk against your hard earned cash then playing blackjack tournament is the option for you. In this game you just got to believe in your luck because if only once your luck shines it makes you shine forever.

     Just when the budding romance was starting to heat up, Stanford Wong entered the bar and casually walked up to them. Without even acknowledging the girl, he gave Curtis a pat on the back and dumped the contents of the box into a shopping bag. A sheepish Anthony Curtis had to explain to his date how the huge win wasn't exactly all his-he had to share it with a team. When she realized his portion came out to less than $4,000, her passion mysteriously disappeared.

         Despite the bad luck at love, it still was his most memorable day gambling. Curtis nailed down many other big tournament wins$50,000 (twice), $60,000, and $125,000, but he still considers winning the World Match Play Championship his finest hour. That victory also firmly established Anthony Curtis as one of the all-time top tournament players. His triumph also illustrates another important principle-if you are more skilled than your opponents, you should seek out tournaments that reward expert play. In general, the better the rules and penetration, the more potential there is for your card-counting ability to influence the outcome.

 WORLD SERIES OF BLACKJACK

      In the past, I skipped tournaments for two reasons: As a high stakes card counter, I didn't want the additional visibility, and I felt there were greater profits in regular blackjack. However, I feel I overlooked the strong advantage sharp players could gain over their opponents in tournaments.

     I recently got invited to play in the prestigious World Series of Blackjack Tournament that is televised on the GSN network. This gave me a terrific chance to see if I could apply the principles from the various experts in this chapter. Since I had virtually no tournament experience, I was hardly the betting favorite in the eyes of the skilled tournament veterans. But I surprised everyone by beating a tough field in my first round and I eventually finished in fifth place overall.

     Almost as important as the money I won was the exhilarating atmosphere of close competition. Like most tournaments, my destiny came down to the final card. Unfortunately I lost out to the legendary Stanford Wong on the very last hand. Had the dealer not busted, I would have moved on to the final four and had a shot at becoming the 2005 World Champion of Blackjack and collecting its $250,000 prize.

     After getting over the disappointment of coming so close and still coming up short, I realized Allan Brown was right. There is a benefit in tournaments well beyond the monetary gain-they are just plain fun to play. And your pleasure can be greatly multiplied by mastering a few strategy tips. With a little practice, you might follow in the footsteps of Lucky Eddie Rhoades and return home from your next tournament with a million dollars in cold hard cash.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

      Many of you who are trying your luck in internet gambling are ignorant about applicability of Wire act to internet gambling. Here I am sharing some crucial information about this topic.

        The applicability of the Wire Act to Internet gambling is the subject of great confusion and debate. Even before gambling made its way to the Internet, it was unclear whether the Wire Act applies only to sports betting or to all gambling. Another issue is that the Wire Act covers "transmission of a wire communication." The law has not answered whether that applies to the Internet, and especially does not answer whether it covers a wireless connection to the Internet. Nevertheless, the federal government has rarely had trouble extending its jurisdiction, and even if the bettor maintains a wireless connection, almost all Internet communications are dependent on some form of wired communication for routing or other purposes.

        The Wire Act has been used to obtain a federal conviction in the case of Jay Cohen. Cohen was one of the operators of an offshore betting service, which was being charged with federal crimes for illegal gambling. Perhaps he thought that the law would vindicate him, but in any event, Cohen made the mistake of returning to the United States from the Caribbean. It was only when he arrived here that he could be arrested and prosecuted. He was convicted in 2000, and that conviction has been upheld.

      I have not been able to find any prosecution of bettors for Internet gambling. Many lawyers fed that the Wire Act does not cover individual bettors. I wouldn't go that far, because an individual bettor could theoretically be charged for aiding and abetting, or for conspiracy to engage in Internet betting. In fact, I know that some prosecutors in the U.S. Justice Department take that very position.

           Since the advent of Internet gambling, there has always been legislation pending in Congress to prohibit Internet casinos, or make them impossible to operate. I think I’ve at least a hundred articles in different publications about the possible passage of bills that would ban Internet casinos or discourage them into oblivion. The Kyle, Good latté, and Leach bills have not yet been passed because of competing legislative interests. I would predict that eventually a watered-down compromise version of one of these bills will pass, with enough loopholes and exemptions that will make enforcement, already a difficult undertaking, impossible.

      These bills get caught up in politics, with various competing special interests, including the gaming industry, banks, Native Americans, antigambling organizations, Internet corporations, and legislators who' don't understand the issues but are sensitive to the direction of political winds. It may well be that any legislation that gets passed is irrelevant.

      The biggest obstacle to the effectiveness of any legislation is enforcement. In the legal field, the key word is jurisdiction. First, the government needs physical jurisdiction over the person or company it seeks to regulate in any way.

      Obviously, it is difficult to arrest, or serve a summons on, a person or an entity that is not located in a given state, and is not even physically in this country. It's just as difficult to fine or jail a person or entity that has never physically been in this country. And even if the federal government, or a state government, won a case against such an entity, how could you get at their assets, which are similarly not even in this country? In addition, the government needs what lawyers call subject matter jurisdiction over a dispute. Basically, this means that there has to be a clear’ law in place to govern Internet gambling, and there has to be sufficient activity within the United States to govern a particular transaction.

      Obviously, the government cannot force people from other countries to submit to the law of the United States, to come to the United States to face trial, and so on.

     However, the regulatory power of the U.S. government is so great that it is the major force behind the decisions of MasterCard and Visa to restrict the use of their cards and accounts for Internet gambling. Similarly, domestic companies that finance Internet Gambling, develop software, and advertise Internet gambling, as well as, Internet service providers and land-based gambling corporations that might diversify onto the Internet, are all vulnerable to governmental regulation and "persuasion", to keep them from becoming involved with Internet casinos.

  

 

To follow the rules is the good quality to have while playing any game if you don’t know the rules and regulation of the game you wont be able to play the game. It’s the basic step for learning the game. I am going to share importance of rules in casino

Most rules, to be sure, affect card counters differently than they affect basic strategy players. The house edge off the top, however, is always an important consideration, as that's what you're working to overcome. For instance, insurance has no value to a basic strategy player, since correct basic strategy is to never take insurance. If a casino disallows insurance, however, this hurts card counters, since they profit from their selective insurance bets. Likewise, the surrender option has little value to basic strategy players-less than one-tenth of 1 % increase in expectation. For a card counter, however, surrender is, like insurance, very valuable.

In order to figure out the starting advantage of a game, you should begin by defining a benchmark game-Le., a set of standard rules, which you can then add to or subtract from. Most authors define this benchmark game as Vegas Strip rules:

1. Dealer stands on soft 17.
2. You may double down on any 2 original cards.
3. You may not double down after splitting a pair.
4. You may split any pair.
5. You may re split any pair accept aces.
6. Split aces receive only one card each.
7. No surrender.
8. Dealer either receives a hole card, or the player's original bet only is lost if the player doubles down or splits a pair and the dealer gets a blackjack (and the extra amount bet is returned to the player).
9. Insurance is allowed up to one-half the player's bet, and pays 2 to 1.
10. Player blackjack is paid 3 to 2.

The effect of any other rules must be accounted for in determining your starting advantage. The chart below shows how these rules affect the game.

Most of these rule effects have been calculated by using data from Peter Griffin's Theory of Blackjack. Note that the last five rules show effects of 00.00% for basic strategy players. Also, when it comes to the "bonus" rules, such as 6,7,8 suited or 7,7,7 pays 2 to 1, the general rule is to never change your basic strategy to try for a bonus payout.

In some cases, when a specific dollar amount is awarded for the bonus hand, the value is dependent on the player's bet size. For instance, if 6, 7,8 suited pays a $100 bonus, then the percentage will be quite different for a player who has a $2 bet and a player who has a $200 bet. The first player would receive a 50 to 1 payout on his hand, while the second player would receive only an extra half-bet. The $2 bettor would likely be right to hit his hand against any dealer up card, if his hand contained two of the needed suited cards. The $200 bettor would usually be in error if he hit the hand in violation of his basic/count strategy.

The best source book for determining the value of weird bonuses, and how to adjust your strategy when appropriate, is Stanford Wong's Basic Blackjack. All players who! Travel frequently to foreign countries, where some of the more unusual roles are in play, should have this book in their libraries; it defines the esoteric rules at work around the world, and provides the strategies for playing them.

Returning to the chart, note tile huge negative effect of "BJ Pays 6 to 5," a rule now common in many Las Vegas single-deck games. This rule is a killer, and it's worse yet when BJ pays 1 to 1 (even money), as is standard in all "Super Fun 21" ga"mes. All those other "good" rules that the "Super Fun" game allows do mot make up for this single punitive one. Serious card counters should stick with the traditional "BJ Pays 3 to 2" games.

 SHUFFLE TRACKIN

A talented card counter who thinks he can track shuffles just because he can count cards is like a little league pitcher who thinks that because he can see the strike zone, he can throw strikes.

For most counters, as for most little league pitchers, there is a rude awakening once the game starts. Neither the shuffle tracker, nor the pitcher, however, will ever know if he can be successful unless he practices, drills, and practices some more. If you've got the talent, it will surface. If not. .. hey, try bowling.  I have known many highly skilled counters, including professionals, who acknowledge that they simply can't track shuffles, despite a thorough understanding of the mathematics and principles involved. Many have given it up because, "When I try to cut to the high-card slug, the high cards often just aren't there." So, before you waste six months studying charts and theory, let's find out if you even have a chance at succeeding as a tracker.
 
 When I initially published the Shuffle Tracking Series ten years ago, I really did believe that shuffle machines might take over. As it turned out, some casinos use shuffle machines, primarily as a time-saving device, but Vegas (and Nevada in general) remains a shuffle tracker's paradise, and most other states that offer blackjack also continue to offer hand-shuffled games. What the casinos learned from my Shuffle Tracking Series was that doesn't matter that their shuffles are not impenetrable-most advantage players simply can't track shuffles.

Many can count cards, but virtually none of them can track shuffles for beans. Most of the big teams tried it for a while ... and quit. Most casino game protection personnel are not even looking for shuffle trackers today. Many believe the skill itself to be more mythical than real-and they're not that far off.  The Necessary Tools  Let's begin with the equipment you need to begin. If getting all of this stuff sounds like too much of a chore, give it up now. Shuffle tracking is an advanced skill and you'll never learn to do it by thinking about it, reading about it, or dreaming about it. It takes work.  Here's what you need to start:  -12 decks of casino playing cards (16 if you play in 8-deckers) -

One dealing shoe -One discard tray -A couple of plastic cut cards (you can substitute the jokers for these) - Wide felt-tip permanent markers in at least 2 different colors -Notebook for record keeping  Other useful items:  -Casino (or poker) chips in various colors -Dealer's chip tray (float) -Regulation blackjack layout -Cocktail waitress (hey, for distraction!)  Here are some exercises developed by Radar O'Reilly (Blackjack Forum s Atlantic City reporter), one of the most talented trackers I know:  Exercise #1: Cutting a Standing Stack  In all of my examples, I will use six decks of cards. If you typically play in eight-deck games, then you should adjust these exercises to suit the extra decks.

If you go back and forth between six and eight decks you must practice and drill for both.  After removing the jokers, thoroughly shuffle the six decks together. You must do this because you will likely be able to see "lines" between the individual decks if you just stack them out of the boxes one atop the next. Thoroughly shuffle the decks, and then stack them into the discard tray face up. The order of the cards is of no importance.  

Now, using a felt-tip permanent marker, number the faces of the cards from I to 312, turning them face down onto the table as you number them. When finished, you should have a facedown stack of all six decks, with the top card numbered 312 on the face, and the bottom card numbered 1. Set this stack into the discard tray face down.  Now try to slide the plastic cut card into the stack exactly two decks up from the bottom. If you do this correctly, the card below the cut card should have the number 104 written on the face, and the card above should be number 105. Try it! How closely can you cut to exactly two decks up from the bottom? .

SHUFFLE TRACKIN

 

Once you've played through this segment, you will have taken most of the gain you are going to get from that shoe. Because of this, some trackers prefer shallow penetration.

 However, multiple-deck shuffles today are complex compared to the shuffles of ten years ago, and if you're struggling just to keep the running count, don't even dream about shuffle tracking. Shuffle tracking is an advanced card-counting strategy, and as such, it is more difficult than traditional counting. If you can't estimate deck segments in a discard tray just by looking at it, you will not be able to track segments. 
 
Ten years ago, I published the first fairly comprehensive explanation of shuffle tracking ever to appear in print as a three-part Shuffle Tracking Series in Blackjack Forum magazine. (An edited version of this series, consisting primarily of Parts I and II, was published in the 1998 edition of Black belt in Blackjack.)
 
Back in the mid-1990s, I was much more of the opinion that any competent card counter could learn to track shuffles, provided he practiced. Today, I know that's not true. Based on my experience with training players to track shuffles, it is my belief that most people do not have the visual acuity necessary to pull it off. I also believe that most of those who have learned to track shuffles successfully have combined a sharper-than-average eye with obsessive practice, far beyond that required to be a successful card counter.
 
In 2003, I published a book on shuffle tracking that went far beyond the material I published back in the '90s, called The Blackjack Shuffle Tracker's Cookbook. If you are interested in obtaining this report, see the information pages in the back of this book. As I do not believe most players can learn to track shuffles, you can save yourself a lot of time and effort by first testing yourself to see if you've got what it takes.
 
I do believe that any competent card counter who either has or is able to develop the visual acuity to pass three fairly straightforward tests described in the Cookbook can learn to track shuffles successfully. I will provide the tests here so that you can save your time and money if you find that your eyes just aren't sharp enough. Do realize that no one that I've ever met can pass these tests right from the start. Dedicated players who drill themselves on these tests relentlessly do get better with time, so don't be discouraged if your first efforts fail.
 
Visual acuity is not based on your intelligence, nor is it a function of memory. You do not need particularly sharp eyesight to be a talented  card counter, but you do need this innate talent to be a successful shuffle tracker.
 
For example, a card counter using a balanced count, such as the Hi-Lo or the Zen Count, needs to be able to estimate the number of remaining decks in order to adjust his running count to his true count (or true edge). This is generally done by estimating the number of decks already in the discard tray in order to figure out the number of decks still in the shoe. Regardless of the count system you use, if in a 6-deck game you estimate that 3 1/2 decks are in the discard tray, so that 2 1/2 decks must remain in the shoe, it will make very little difference to your true count estimate if 3 3/4 decks are in the discard tray, leaving 2 1/4 decks in the shoe. In fact, most card counters round off to the nearest 1/2-deck when making true-count adjustments anyway, and extensive computer simulations have shown that this rounding off makes very little difference.
 
If a shuffle tracker, on the other hand, regularly makes 1/4-deck errors he's unlikely to be playing with any advantage at all. Card counting is very crude compared to shuffle tracking, and crude "ballpark" estimates are not serious errors for card counters. But if you want to track shuffles, you must be far more precise.
 

Now a days casino are very popular in young ages but most of them do not know about the right strategy of games here So I gave you some tips for making winning on casino. Firstly increasing your bets based upon the feeling that you are due to win is foolish gambling. Unless you are card counting, you have no idea whether or not your chances of winning the next hand are good or bad. It is better to bet objectively based upon a predetermined pattern of bets (i.e. progressions) than bet subjectively based upon feelings.

Such predetermined betting is called betting progressions. You progress your bet to a higher level depending upon whether you won or lost the previous hand.

Let's eliminate once and for all those progressions that have you increase your bet size following a lose. These so called Martingale progressions are guaranteed to doom the player. So never increase your bet size following a loss in the hopes of catching up.

This leaves us with the following recommended money management scheme for the recreational player, namely the win progression. Here, bets are increased only after a hand is won. Once a losing hand occurs, the bet size is reduced to the minimum bet.

There are several win progressions that I can recommend. The simplest is a two level betting progression where the smaller bet is made following a loss and the larger bet is made following a win. For example, the small bet could be $5, the large bet, $10 or $15. Make your first bet $5, and if you win the hand, make your next bet $10, or $15. Continue to make your maximum bet until you lose. When a loss occurs, make your next bet $5.

A second win progression which I've used and taught for years is a simple 1, 2, 3, 5 back to 1 progression (this is the one my wife uses). For a $5 player, the betting levels are $5, 10, 15, and 25. Here a player starts with a $5 bet and progresses to the next bet level when a hand is won. As soon as a hand loses, the next bet is the basic $5 minimum bet. If the player is fortunate enough to win four hands in a row, I recommend that the profits be locked up and the progression restarted at the minimum $5 level.

If betting 5 units (or $25 for the $5 player) is too steep for your blood, then modify the progression to 1, 2, 3 back to 1. And for the very conservative player, I would suggest 1, 1, 2, 2 back to 1 (win two consecutive hands at 1 unit before you progress to 2 units). The point is to get in the habit of increasing your bets only following a win, never after a loss. And as soon as you lose a hand, revert back to the minimum one unit bet.

A suggested session bankroll for the above win progression is 20 times the minimum bet. To be safe, the player's total bankroll should be 100 times the minimum bet.

In technical terms, a win progression increases the variance a player can expect during any particular playing session. This means a player can win a lot more and likewise lose a lot more than the player who makes only the same bet size.