You cannot practically use opposition betting tactics in one or two-deck games. In my experience, all too often the count changed too radically or the dealer shuffled when I made my camouflage bet. In games of four or more decks, opposition betting takes advantage of a factor that would ordinarily make counting ineffective-the slow volatility of the edge-and players with big enough bankrolls to play house limits will often find multi-deck games more profitable than single-deck games.

One drawback to opposition betting is that you’ll suffer big bankroll fluctuations. It takes a healthy bankroll to use any large spread because of the size of your high bets, and you cannot use opposition betting tactics with a small spread. Your camouflage bets will nullify profit potential.

Many players use the terms “hot” or “cold” shoe. Too often, players misuse these slang terms because they don’t understand how counting works. bet on football

for his opponent to be off balance. The opponent is confident during the master’s waiting period because the master’s false attacks are so impotent. When the opponent loses his balance, as he will, even his perspective is unstable. He does not see the master’s actual attack.
And isn’t this how a pool hustler works? And a professional poker player? And a chess master? Card counting is a science. Beating the casinos at blackjack is an art.

• Blackjack – Opposition Betting 5 (0)
• Blackjack – Opposition Betting 4 (0)
• Blackjack – Opposition Betting 3 (0)

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)

About the only time I might be suspected of counting is when I make my jump from a nickel to a couple hundred bucks. Before and after that, I usually raise and lower my bets in reverse.
A lot of times I'll jump my bets around according to whether I'm winning or losing. Often, I mix up my colors and have reds, greens and black in the same stack. It drives dealers nuts.

Part of my method is to look like I just don't have much of a method. Sometimes I bet high off the top of the shoe. For the most part, I play nickels with low counts and greens and blacks with high counts. When I make my big jump, I wait until the time seems right for it. If the count is high and I've only got a nickel riding on the bet, I'm likely to split fours or fives, or maybe stand on a twelve against a ten. After a play like that, dealers love to see you start playing with real money. You see, they know I've got the greens and blacks. I'm sitting there with half a rack of them in front of me. I don't make foolish plays when I'm betting high, though.

I've watched dozens of counters get 86'd. Most of them are young. They always spread from one to four. They're so easy to spot it's laughable. Sometimes I think my best camouflage is that I'm old and bald. My second best camouflage might be that I've got a lot of money. Counters look hungry. There's probably not much a young guy can do about this. But still, he can change his one-to-four spread to something that looks less intelligent. All the books say spread from 1 to 4 or 1 to 8. There's not a pit boss in Vegas who hasn't read most of these books. When you play like the books say, you're advertising your smarts.

One time I was sitting with two counters for about half an hour. During the course of that half hour, I'd placed bets as low as a nickel and as high as seven or eight hundred bucks. They were both spreading quarters from one-to-four. They keep nudging each other when I'd make a stupid play. Once I insured my natural at a low count. I had two nickels on the table. Then the true count went up to about +9 or +10 real fast. I hit my four-card sixteen against the dealer's five and busted. I guess these guys got brave then because both of them raised their next bets to eight chips. Frankly, I was having a hard time not laughing, myself. Their bets had been so identical since they'd sat down, they were like the Bobbsey Twins.

The pit boss jumped in at that point. He went through the discards and politely told these two guys to hit the road. They were upset. One of them remarked that it should be illegal for casinos to only deal to stupid players. The remark was directed at me. They ended up getting barred.

• Blackjack – Opposition Betting 6 (0)
• Blackjack – Opposition Betting 5 (0)
• Blackjack – Opposition Betting 3 (0)

The purpose of opposition betting is to get a large spread. The following is an explanation of how one Vegas pro gets away with it; I've changed enough details to protect his identity:

I've been playing blackjack for thirty years. For about the first twenty, I didn't know anything about counting. At one point, I tried to read Thorp's book but the system was beyond me. Revere's book became my bible because his point count system was powerful and so much easier. I still use it. By the time I'd started counting, I was well known in the casinos as a high roller. I was comped most everywhere and still am. My basic method of camouflage, once I'd started counting, was simply to keep playing as much as possible the way I'd always played.

I buy in at the craps table and usually spend my first ten or fifteen minutes playing craps for nickels. I'll often get a whole rack of chips—half quarters, half nickels. I never hide chips, or pocket chips, or try to look like I'm losing. I never did that before I was a counter, so why should I start now? Whether you're counting or not, sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. When I lose a lot, I sulk around. I make a lot of noise about it when I win big. The only time I pocket chips is when I cash out. I'll go south with one or two blacks, and play them or cash them out later.

When I hit the blackjack tables, I start betting with nickels—two or three at a time. If the count starts going down, I'll bet even bigger—four or five nickels. If it keeps going down, I might push six to eight of them out there. As the count goes up, I use the reverse strategy. I'll go down to a single nickel and keep betting this way until my edge is up around 2%. Sometimes I'll go through a couple of shoes till I get a count like this.

Sometimes it happens right away. But when it does go up that high, I'll raise my bet from a single nickel to a stack of quarters in one jump. I'll just throw eight of 'em on the table like that. By this time, I'm already pegged as a non-counter because of all my stupid bets before. And if they don't have me pegged this way, they will soon. My strategy with the quarters is pretty much the same as my nickel strategy. If the count goes up, I just let my stack of quarters ride. While the count is this high, I make sure I've got a couple hundred bucks on the table. It's important to me not to raise my bet if the count goes up even higher. You see, I start raising it when the count's coming back down.

Dealers always change colors on you when you bet stacks of chips. If I win with eight quarters, he'll pay me off with a couple of blacks. The next stack of chips I push out there will have those blacks on the bottom. They think they're jacking up my bets by coloring me up! By the time my edge is down to 1% or so, I'll be making bets of $500 to $600. I'd say my average high bet is about $250 to $350. My average low bet is probably about $15 to $20.

• Blackjack – Opposition Betting 6 (0)
• Blackjack – Opposition Betting 5 (0)
• Blackjack – Opposition Betting 4 (0)

My trip was a total disaster. I couldn't have asked for better conditions, but within about 3 hours, I'd lost just about my whole playing bankroll. I was spreading quarters from one-to-four and lost $2,500. Looking back on it, the majority of my losing bets were high ($100) bets, so I guess I really only lost about 25 big bets, rather than 100 small bets. Still, I don't see how this could have happened. What's worse, almost the entire loss occurred in my last half-hour of play against the same dealer.

He was dealing out about 3 decks and every shoe the count kept climbing. By the time he'd shuffle, the running count would be between +15 and +20! Somehow, I just kept losing. After three shoes like this, I was broke. I use the Hi-Lo count, so I figure that by the time he shuffled, my advantage was somewhere between 7% and 10%! It seems to me the only hand I ever played at a disadvantage was the first round after the shuffle. Then the count would go up, and it would just keep going higher. How could I lose with such hot decks?
He could lose because this player had one glaring misconception about card counting.

The reason that you bet bigger when the count is high is because your count indicates that the remaining cards contain a disproportionate number of tens and aces. You place a big bet because the odds are in your favor that these high cards will be dealt. As these cards come out of the deck, you make your money. You will be dealt more naturals; your doubling down and pair-splitting will pay off more; the dealer will bust his stiffs more frequently. You don't bet big simply because the count is high, you bet big because the count should come down.

If the count doesn't come down then it must mean that those excess high cards in the deck did not come out. If the count continues to climb, then not only are the excess high cards not being dealt, but a disproportionate number of low cards continue to be dealt, much to your disadvantage.

If the dealer shuffles when the count is +15 to +20, then this means that all of those high cards are clumped together in the undealt portion of the shoe. If this happened three shoes in a row, then contrary to what this player's count indicated, he never played with an advantage over the house. When the count stays high, your high bets are all for naught.
When your count goes up in a single-deck game, it is far more likely to come down than in a multi-deck game. It is this volatility that makes the one-deck games so profitable. Ideally, you make small bets while the count is rising, and large bets while it is coming back down.

Had this player been in a shoe game in which the count kept going down to about -15 to -20 prior to every shuffle, then more than likely, ironic as it may seem, he probably would have won more money than he would have lost, since this situation would indicate that all the excess low cards were clumped in the undealt portion of the shoe. Such dumpings of cards often occur purely through chance. If the dealer were purposely clumping high cards, then cutting them out of play through sleight of hand, this would be cheating.

DEFINITION
Opposition betting is sizing your bets so that it looks like you're raising your bets when the count is going down and lowering them when the count is going up.

• Blackjack – Opposition Betting 6 (0)
• Blackjack – Opposition Betting 5 (0)
• Blackjack – Opposition Betting 4 (0)

Opposition betting is a multi-deck betting strategy. It's especially effective where pit bosses are liable to be watching your betting patterns. To beat multi-deck blackjack games, you must understand what you are up against. I'll be honest with you. These games are tough to beat. Many players fail to comprehend two basic facts of the multi-deck challenge.

Fact 1: You cannot soundly beat multi-deck games with a flat bet or even a small spread, regardless of your system. To get a significant edge in a multi-deck game usually requires a spread of 1 to 8 units or more. The only exception to this rule would be for a table-hopper who plays only when the count is favorable. In essence, this would not be flat-betting but using a spread in which the minimum bet is zero units. You should view table-hopping the same way because it's necessary to spend time watching, counting, and waiting until you can place your bets. Table-hopping is a camouflage technique that makes you appear to be a small-spread or flat-bettor.

Fact 2: Multi-deck games are less vulnerable to traditional count strategies because the shifts in advantage are less volatile. Many players fail to grasp this because they do not understand how card counting works. This is an actual letter I received from a player many years ago:

On my recent trip to Vegas I played exclusively in 4-deck games. I prefer the 4-deck games because the count doesn't jump around so much. When a shoe goes hot, it often stays that way for a long time, so I can continue to bet high for many hands in a row. In single-deck, it seems like I'll get one or two high bets then the count drops, and in no time at all they're shuffling again. In a shoe game, if the count drops real low, I leave the table and find a better game.

• Blackjack – Opposition Betting 6 (0)
• Blackjack – Opposition Betting 5 (0)
• Blackjack – Opposition Betting 4 (0)