I don't want you to think I never get any heat. There are a few casinos in this town I won't set foot in. But I've got an excellent rating at most of the places that matter. You can't fool everybody…

This is a crude approach to opposition betting but it illustrates the basic camouflage techniques. Without an enormous spread like the one this player employs, you could not win much money with such a drastic betting style.

The opposition bettor wins money by getting away with a large spread. Over any extended period of play, his betting looks foolish from a card counter's perspective. I think it's important to remember that there is not one method of opposition betting—it's a camouflage technique that can be used any number of ways.

Ralph Strieker, an East coast old-timer affectionately known for many years as the "Silver Fox," developed another highly effective opposition betting technique. Strieker bases his betting approach on the fact that in multi-deck games, neither the house nor the player has any significant edge for most of the game. The player then may take advantage, in the form of camouflage bet-sizing, during these long periods of play when there is no significant advantage for either side. As a counter, you can make the majority of your changes in bet size appear to be either haphazard or based on some non-counting progression-type system. Strieker reports that he and his students have had phenomenal success in the 6-deck Atlantic City games using a progression-type system through "neutral" counts, yet actually spreading from 1 to 10 when the edge was heavily tilted one way or the other.

Many years ago, I tested this approach in Nevada, I tried my own method, using the Zen Count. At all negative counts, I bet one nickel. Any time my advantage was between -1/2% to +1/2%, I alternated my bets.

First I bet a nickel, then I bet a quarter capped with a nickel, then a nickel, and so on. I did this regardless of whether the running count was rising or falling. When my advantage was greater than +1/2%, I bet two quarters capped with a nickel.

The advantage from betting in this manner is close to what my advantage would be if I simply jumped my bets from $5 to $55 without any camouflage. Yet, when I tried this betting technique in three Vegas casinos, my high bets never raised an eyebrow. By the time I'd made my first high bet, I was halfway into the shoe and had been alternating high-low, high-low for quite a few hands. It looks like a worthless progression because it is one—when my advantage hit a full 1%, I followed my low $5 bet with a $55 high bet that was simply one chip higher than my normal $30 high. I let that ride until the count went down to neutral, then went back to my alternating bets. More recently, I've tested similar betting strategies at much higher stakes.

There are as many approaches to opposition betting as there are progression systems. I won't recommend any one approach because I feel it's important that you never look like you're playing "by the book." How much of a spread you can get away with when you're using this approach is limited by your personal bankroll, the house table limits, your creativity, your guts, your act…

• Blackjack – Opposition Betting 6 (0)
• Blackjack – Opposition Betting 4 (0)
• Blackjack – Opposition Betting 3 (0)