Isee that the last few cards of a multiple deck can
be slightly more favorable for both betting and playing
variations than the corresponding residue from a single
deck. Hoiver, it must be kept in mind that such situations
are averaged over the entire deck when assessing overall
favorability. An interesting consequence of this is
that even if one had the time to count down an infinite
deck, it would do no good since the slightly spicier
situations at the end would still average out to zero.
When i recall that the basic multiple deck games are
inherently less advantageous, the necessity of a very
wide betting range must be recognized.
Absolute efficiencies of card counting systems will
decrease mildly, perhaps by three per cent for four
decks. Since this decrease will generally be uniform
over most aspects of the games, relative standings
of different systems should not differ appreciably
from those quoted.
players are tougher, and if you've really established
a poker bankroll and it has been shrinking, one or
two bad sessions at the new higher limit could wipe
you out. Many players have a hard time resisting the
"get it back in a hurry" attitude that one
often sees in craps or blackjack players, but it's
a bad mistake.
seen losing players move up because they claim they
are playing too loosely at the lower limit and they
know the higher limit will keep them in line. There's
just enough truth in this line of thinking to make
it dangerous. You shouldn't have to rely on game size
to make you play well. If you have so little self
control that you can't keep yourself from playing
weak starting hands unless you are playing for uncomfortably
high stakes, some other kind of error will almost
certainly doom you in the bigger game.