Originally Posted by Third Eye
For the life of me I've never understood the desire to play a game where the optimal strategy is equivalent to minimizing loss. I guess if you're getting free drinks or some other comps then maybe there is a possibility of a net gain, but it's just not for me.
I'm by no means a player, but if you do basic strategy plus some form of basic running count, it amounts to a net positive (albeit very small), then like you said when you add in comps etc....
But that requires optimal strategy plus more
...if you can keep a running count and also insurance count then the net positive becomes a little bigger but to me it is still too small to mess with (as you suggest).
I think some people who are good at keeping the counts just try to grind out a living playing....(I know a guy who did for years) but to me it is a waste because it becomes a job with really long hours that is ultra repetitive. I guess the good thing is you have no boss except the pit boss...
So while I question the 'net less' aspect of your premise..(for those rare people who can do perfect strategy, AND keep 2 counts)..the net gain is way too minimal in terms of a % or $ per hour to bother with unless you are playing with a really big stack.
ANd that doesn't even factor in getting asked to leave once you start making money (which you WILL be asked to leave...and not politely).
Not to mention the margin for error is very slim...if you get distracted or make a mistake you ruin an hour worth of profit...