Changing starting bets for cover?
  • Do you think that it would be a good cover to change what you start betting with the first deal of the cards? Say one round your unit will be $10 so you will start with $10 and the next round your unit will be $25 so you will start with a $25 unit. Than on the second round you could go up to $50 or down to $10 if you started with a $25 unit depending upon if the count was negative or positive. If you started with $10 you could go up to $20 or $25 depending upon the count. If you start every deal with the same starting bet and only start to move your bet up and down with the count doesn't it become to obvious. Will changing the starting bet make a difference in the eyes of the pit?
  • LTC

    What you are doing is something that many of us do, but generally only those who are betting at a higher level need or can really afford much of this for cover. Knowing where you play though, it might be helpful but if you are playing the same casinos every week, you will eventually run into problems with or without cover.

    If your usual unit is $10, the only times I would start off the next shuffle with a larger bet are those times when you have won the previous hand with a larger bet. So, if you won the previous hand with a bet between $25-$50 and now the dealer shuffles, starting the next shoe at $25 would look normal, and going down from there if you lose, would also look normal. Should you win, even with a negative count, if worried about heat you might keep the quarter out there.
    When you have lost the hand before the shuffle, you will be reducing your bet after a loss, which also is common, so just start off with $10.

    The question arises though concerning the cost of this to a red chip player?
    If you were someone in Reno for the weekend, with your bet spread, I would say do not use any cover that costs you EV because you can not afford it. As a regular in that area, you might be buying some time and the cost may be worth it.

    ihate17
  • I play it exactly Ihate described. It works great.

    The KO book talks about "opposition betting" where you can vary your bets within a range of say 1-5 in a random fashion with counts moderately + or - with little change in EV.

    The most important time to bet the min (or wong out) or the max is in the extremely low or high counts. What you do in the middle makes little difference and lends itself well to cover play, especially off the top of the show.

    Has anyone studied the effects of streak betting? Let's say I range $25-$125 these days. A cover play off the top might be $50-$75. If I win I let it ride until it loses for negative counts, or increase if the count is going up. If I lose and the count is negative, right back down to $25. This is the same thing Ihate described.

    What is the effect of that on EV? It is the most sensible way to play I think.
  • If somebody changes there bets of the start of the deck and wins I say theres nothing I can do about it. Look the player bets big of the top of the deck sometimes. If your big bet is always in the middle of the deck I think that a smart pit crew would figer that out.
  • learningtocount said:
    Do you think that it would be a good cover to change what you start betting with the first deal of the cards? Say one round your unit will be $10 so you will start with $10 and the next round your unit will be $25 so you will start with a $25 unit. Than on the second round you could go up to $50 or down to $10 if you started with a $25 unit depending upon if the count was negative or positive. If you started with $10 you could go up to $20 or $25 depending upon the count. If you start every deal with the same starting bet and only start to move your bet up and down with the count doesn't it become to obvious. Will changing the starting bet make a difference in the eyes of the pit?


    Sorry to say but is sounds like a terrible joke this issue about using cover when your base unit is $5 or $10. The more cover you use the more you put your bankroll in jeopardy. If you don’t bet big when you have edge you cannot win in this game. You may as well not play at all.

    First, you must have a bankroll large enough to hold the ROR down and you must bet your edge. Else, why play?

    The games those days are so bad especially the single decks that is almost not worth playing at all. Forget about cover when you play with $5 chips. You either bet the spread and take the risk to be barred or walk away and not play at all. If you get barred at single deck clubs than move to double decks casinos. When you get barred there move on and play back counting without cover in 6 deck shoes. Play only positive slugs and use big denomination chips. But just worrying about using cover and f*****g around with $5 chips up and down is not worth the time and effort. The $5 tables will be crowded and you cannot get an edge big enough to protect your little bank.
  • The rules for this single deck game where the best I could find for my area. They where double any first two cards, no double after a split, blackjack pays 3 to 2, split aces once, split any other pair to make up to 4 hands, dealer hits soft 17. For a single deck game these are really liberal rules. A lot of single deck will stiff you with 6 to 5 blackjack payouts or will limit doubling to 10-11 only.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!