I’ve been involved in all the casino games for many years and I had made a lot of money through this and now I am going to tell you the way to maximize profit.

      At the end of the day, the more time dealers spend shuffling, the less time casinos are foisting their advantage over the masses. Thankfully, this creates natural sorts of checks and balances. A cut-card close to the bottom attracts players like you and me, while a cut-card too far forward means fewer hands dealt per hour. So, for the casinos, it all comes down to a balancing act, which is all fine and good except for one thing: with regard to penetration levels, most casinos are penny-wise and dollar foolish.

           These days, most houses have more action than they know what to do with. Yet their fear of advantage players forces that cut card farther and farther forward. Poor penetration levels are responsible for so much loss in earnings-all in an effort to thwart the tiniest fraction of the blackjack-playing population. It just doesn't make sense. Over the course of a year, the revenue lost due to time wasted shuffling will without a doubt far surpass what walks out the door in the pockets of advantage players-guaranteed. Yet poor penetration levels are everywhere.

Back Counting

      This approach involves keeping track of the cards from behind a table, and then entering into a game or winging-in (named after legendary blackjack expert Stanford Wong) only when having an advantage. Just as when sitting at a table, wagers are made according to a predetermined betting scale and appropriate strategy variations are made when necessary. The big difference between back counting and a play-all approach is that you may be playing only a few select hands per shoe, and then moving on if the count suddenly goes negative. This style of play avoids any interface when the player is at a disadvantage.

     The results of "The World's Greatest Blackjack Simulation," performed by Don Schlesinger and John Auston, and contained in Schlesinger's Blackjack Attack, clearly show how back counting for shoe games is far superior to that of the more traditional play-all approach. In many instances, win rates of between one and a half to two units per hour for play-all become win rates in excess of two units per hour using this method of play. A wonderful tactic, this back-counting approach, isn't it?

       Now for the bad news-and unfortunately it relates to this recurring requirement of having to appear likes just another gambler. One downside to back counting is how obvious it appears to any floor person watching you-and they will be watching if you're seen for some time lingering behind a table and then jumping into the game for a hand or two before moving on. To back count successfully you must obviously keep an accurate count.

      So that means laying eyes on every card dealt. Then, of course, there has to be an empty spot at the table that stays  empty until you're ready to occupy it. Finding an empty spot, or any playable spot, may be less likely these days with casino gambling as popular as it is. The $50 or $100 tables in the baccarat pit are an option, but how many times can one really stand around there jumping into one of only four games operating? Not to mention the fact that many back pit blackjack tables are often "no mid-shoe entry." And back counting the packed nickel and dime tables often just isn't viable. That really leaves only those $25 tables that aren't crowded-which, given the current conditions, isn't always a reality either. So how do I back count then, with its being a rather obvious method and one not well suited for crowded conditions and casinos that don't allow mid-shoe entry?