Poker Strategy

Many, if not most, poker games nowadays take place in a casino environment. Casino's offer games that feture a long-term house edge. The player can get lucky and win in the short run but there is always a mathematical built-in edge in every house game that guarenttes the house a profit in the long run, and the longer the player keeps playing, the more likely he is to catch up with the math and end up a loser.

Among the many house games, there are several poker based games. There is Pai Gow poker, three-card poker, Caribbean Stud and a variety of video poker games. When I play poker in Atlantic City casino's and get bored, I go and play a little house games. I know that -unlike poker- I am a guarneteed loser no matter what the outcome of that specific session. Still, i consider it the "cost of fun" factor which is a legitimate and worthwhile expense for every poker player and gambler.

I have tried in the past to "outlaw" house games (specifically blackjack and Pai Gow) and stick to poker exclusively where I consdider myself a favorite. However, my experience has proven it difficult to enforce this prohibition. Invariably I lately find myslef heading towards the blackjack table every now and then, especially in Tropicana where there are virutally no high limit games. If there is no 15-30-45 hi-lo game, then there really isn't anything of serious interest to me.

I don't really ancounter many poker players at the Blackjack table. In fact, just yerterday Dan from the Stud hi-lo game said that he lost thousands in Blackjack and he has quit playing it. He says that unless you count cards -like his friend does- it's not worth it. Still I do see many poker players engaged in slots and video poker games and it seems logical to me that they do that as a diversion from poker where they hope to make money by superior play. Certainly, I myself approach house games with such an attitude.

Of all the house games, I have found blackjack to be the best game and I therefore prefer blackjack over any other game. Blackjack is the only game where the house edge is reduced to less than half a percentage point if you follow basic strategy consistently, This means that if you sit down at a $25 table and play 60 hands an hour for the minimum bet, then you are losing ONLY $12.50 (2,500 x .0005 - 12.50). If you take tipping into account, then let's add another $8 per hour for the winning session, which amounts to an average $16 per hour expense to play Blackjack.

$16 an hour doesn't seem like much considering the hefty sums of money I typically carry around these days. However, let's be realistic. Most Poker experts say that one big bet per hour is the typical amount a winning poker player can expext to win in the long run. If you are playing 15-30 HE then you are not even making $15 an hour after deducting time and tips. Even if you are very good at poker and you think you are making two big bets an hour, you are still only averaging $45 in net income. That's $450 for a 10-hour session and this is an unrealistic expectation even for a winning player against the typical opposition.

Therefore, we must come up with a way to reduce the house edge in blackjack even further. Basically, I don't want to be a mathematical loser at this game at all. Card counting is certainly a viable strategy but that's too tedious for me. If I go to the blackjack table to relax, I don't want to have to pay attention to the cards that much. Also, if you are a counter, certan counting characteristics might give you away and you could get in trouble. You certainly don't want to be perceived as a counter even though the casino's in AC technically cannot bar you nowadays for counting.

I try to follow what I call "casual counting". With casual counting I don't keep an exact numeric count of the positive cards (2-6) and the negative cards (T-A). Instead I try to scan the table to see if there is an abundance of positive cards or negative cards. I will stick to my typical minimum bet until I see a deal that contains many small cards which I call a "positive deal". In a positive deal there are few aces and face cards and many small cards. Once a positive deal has occured, it's time to increase the bet. If the dealer now shows an ace and the current deal is positive again, then I will buy insurance.

The problem with casual counting is that it does not take deck penetration into account. Also it does not involve a careful analysis of ALL cards in the discard. It only involves an analysis of the last deal or two. However, here's why I consider it an effective strategy. I will give an example: You have just been placed into a vehicle on an interstate highway somewhere in the US. You have no knowledge about the terrain and you are blinfolded, so you don't know where you are or what comes next. You drive 100 feet and you feel that you're going uphill. What are the odds that you will be uphill MORE than downhill over the next 300 feet? I think the odds are unfavorable. Since you are not in a region that is known for big mountains, the logical rule applies: whatever goes up must go down! If you have been going up for the last 100 feet, chances are that you will soon start to go down and the longer you continue to go up, the bigger the odds that a decline is imminent.

The same applies with cards: You have no knowledge about the past and you don't know what's in store for the future. All you know is that the past deal was positive. This bit of information alone is sufficient to give you a mathematical reason to believe that the next deal will be one rich in high cards, which is favorable to the player. I don't care how small this mathematical chance is, it is there! And therefore, when we're dealing with small percentages anyway (like the .04% long term loss in basic strategy BJ) this small percentage makes a big difference.

What should you do after a positive deal? Increase your bet and make some minor adjustments to basic strategy.