Back to The Blackjack Page
The Blackjack Page Archive

Crowded Table...or Not?

People who are new to counting often wonder if there is any additional advantage to be gained by choosing a table based upon the number of players seated at it. The answer is an ambiguous "yes and no", which is why I decided to write this lesson. When it's finished, you'll be able to decide for yourself which are the best conditions for you and the game you're playing.

To kick it off, let me first dispell the myth that other players' actions can cause you to win or lose at Blackjack. Unlike baseball, football and cricket, Blackjack is not a team sport. Most "gamblers" (as opposed to non-gambling card counters like you and me) believe that success at Blackjack is dependent upon how others at the table play their hands; if they do it correctly, you'll win, but if they make mistakes you're doomed to lose. Of course, the people who believe this usually have, at best, a sketchy familiarity with the proper play for each hand, so their analysis is typically based upon what happened after the hand was played out. Most of us call that "Monday morning quarterbacking" and it serves no useful purpose whatsoever. It'd be great if the casinos would allow us to play each hand twice, but we both know that's never going to happen.

So, what about that player at third base who hits his 16 versus the dealer's 5 and takes what would have been the dealer's "bust" card? Sure, his action may have caused us to lose that hand and we'll all growl under our breath, but the reality is, we remember plays like that when we lose, but we conveniently forget when their stupid play causes us to win. "You saved the table", someone might remark. But most gamblers think it's their own smart play that wins hands; the losses come because of others' mistakes. The truth of the matter is that the play of others will help us just as much as it will hurt us, so in the long run it all balances out to no net effect at all. Consequently, we counters don't care how others play their hands, but we do grimace along with the gamblers at the table when a "mistake" is made, because we want to look like a gambler.

Okay, so now we know we don't have to base our table selection on the skill of the other players, which basically means we can do just as well at a $1 minimum table as we can at a $100 minimum table, if all other conditions are equal. But there are some advantages - and disadvantages - derived from playing at a full table. (Let's start at a full table and work our way down to playing one-on-one against the dealer.) First of all, if you're new to counting the cards, or if you're not yet counting, but only playing Basic Strategy, the one big advantage of playing at a full table is the fact that the game is slow. By "slow", I mean there will be far fewer hands dealt per hour - probably 40 or 50 - and that means it'll be easier for you new counters to keep track of the cards, calculate the True Count, size your bet, etc. For those of you who do not count, slow is good because the casino has an edge over you on every bet, so the less you bet, the less you'll ultimately lose.

Another advantage of playing at a full table, if you're a new counter, is that you'll hopefully "blend in" with the crowd, so to speak. New counters seem to feel that there's a big, red "C" on their forehead that tells the game supervisors (or, as we lovingly call them, the "pit critters" - PCs) you're a card counter, so blending in with a group of gamblers can help to relax you, if nothing else. Of course, you really don't have a C branded on you, but it does take a certain amount of experience to get over the feeling - usually two or three sessions will do it. Hopefully I don't have to tell you that if you're the only player at a $5 table betting with hundred-dollar chips, there's no amount of blending in that's going to keep you from being noticed. But, if you start with a $5-$60 bet spread as I recommend in my Blackjack School, then all should go well.

The disadvantages of playing at a full table are many. First of all, the game is slow. As an experienced counter who has gotten over the trauma of utilizing your skill in actual casino play, slow means you get fewer hands per hour and, while that's a good thing if you haven't got an edge over the casino, it's not good when you do have an edge. If you truly have a long-term edge at Blackjack, the more hands you play, the more $$$ you'll ultimately win. The primary way to get more hands per hour is to play at tables with fewer players, plain and simple. The other problem with crowded tables is that it's usually more difficult to spread to two hands of play, if that tactic is part of your plan. I don't go into playing multiple hands in my Blackjack School lessons, but it is a valid concept for a counter and crowded tables usually preclude doing so.

Okay, let's get into the advantages and disadvantages of playing at less-than-full tables, like those with 2 to 5 other players. Of course, any table with more than one player is going to be slower, but slower doesn't necessarily mean you'll make fewer $$$, even though we already know you'll get fewer hands per hour. Let me explain that. A perfect example is where you sit at a table that has one or two players who are making table-limit bets, while your top bet may be a third or half of that. I remember the first time I played at a riverboat casino in the Chicago area; it was a $25 minimum table, but even with a $400 bet, I was usually the "little guy" because there were people at the table routinely betting $750-$1000 per hand. Needless to say, the PCs weren't paying a whole lot of attention to me, so rather than slowly "parlaying" my bets up as the count rose, I felt comfortable in jumping my bet from, say, $100 to $400 because it made me look like I was getting caught up in the excitement of making larger and larger bets. Of course, the casinos love to see people over-betting their bankrolls and it's a valid point, so this will work only if your bankroll supports it. Otherwise, you'll end up losing, like most of the people I was playing with did that day. Me? I'm happy to report that the Blackjack gods were smiling on me that day, so I walked away with twice my normal expectation for a session. And the PCs didn't even blink.

Another advantage of playing at a table with 2 to 5 players (I'm counting you in that total) is the concept of "card eating". Obviously, as a counter you know when the deck is in your favor and when it isn't. Since I always counsel against playing with other counters at your table, let's assume that the four others seated with you are just typical gamblers. When the count drops you should leave, but with other players there, the count may rebound quickly because those other players are "eating" the bad cards. Naturally, those same players will also "eat" the cards when the count is in your favor, but you can counter that (no pun intended) somewhat by spreading to two hands, thereby "eating" more good cards. So, is this unfair to your table-mates; you leaving when the cards are bad and betting more hands when they're good? Not at all. If those other players aren't counting, then it's fair to say they'd play their hands the same way, whether you're there or not. Oh, some will moan about you "messing up the order of the cards" due to your switching from one hand to two, but you can always come back with: "The card order needs changing, the way I've been losing today."

Depending upon the type of game you're playing, the number of other players at the table with you can change the penetration you're receiving; both for the good and the bad. For example, most single-deck games with a full table of 6 or 7 players (it varies from casino to casino) will get one round of play, then a shuffle. Obviously, counting is all but useless in a situation like that, but what you need to check is how many rounds 3 or 4 players are dealt. Because penetration is so important in single-deck games, I wrote a lesson about it, which is entitled, "The 'Rule of' Rule", which is in the archives right here on this page. Some games, like double-deck and almost all "shoe" games use a shuffle card, which is inserted near the back of the pack to tell the dealer it's time to shuffle, so generally the number of players at the table won't affect the penetration very much. But for a game without a shuffle card, the number of players can make a significant difference, so it's something to keep in mind.

For me, the "ultimate" game is one with good rules and deep penetration that finds me alone at the table facing the fastest dealer in the casino. If you're a new counter (or a dealer), you probably don't believe me when I say there's not a dealer in the world who can deal faster than I can count, but it's true - as you'll find out when you have more experience. Anyway, the primary reason to play one-on-one with a dealer is to get more hands per hour; perhaps 200-250, versus the 40-50 you'll get at a full table. Unfortunately, it's not as simple as all that, however. Along with more hands comes the aspect of being more easily noticed by the PCs, plus you'll probably have to play all counts - plus and minus - when you're alone. One of the keys to winning at a multi-deck game with average penetration (about 65-70%) is leaving the table when the count drops to -1 or lower, as I preach in my lessons. To be successful at a "heads-up"game, you'll need good penetration, plus you should know the Basic Strategy variations down to about -4 or even lower, but even then your bankroll swings can be frightening because you're playing so many more hands per hour as compared to a full table. People who play single-player games at Internet casinos often feel the game is "rigged" because when they lose, they lose quickly, but what they're not used to is playing 200 or 300 hands per hour, which is a rate that can easily be achieved online.

So now you know what to look for and what to expect when you sit down at a Blackjack table, either alone or with other players. The important thing is that you have a plan in mind for how you'll play, given a certain situation. If you're uncomfortable playing one-on-one, then don't do it. But, as time goes on, keep one thought in mind, if you're counting: The more I play, the more I win.

I'll see you here next time.

ARCHIVE of BLACKJACK ARTICLES