In a Gambling with an Edge podcast, two card counters—“Joe” and “Semi-Pro”—tell the story of a chop disagreement. I am only a listener to the podcast, with no inside knowledge, so my comments will undoubtedly misstate their positions. Pretend this discussion is based on a fictional incident. My points still apply. Part of the difficulty in running an AP team or real-world relationship is disagreements over money. To recap the fictional scenario: During her play, Semi-Pro had gone to a table where a gambler asked her to wait a few hands before joining. When the gambler’s lucky streak ended, he thanked Semi-Pro by toking her $25. The senior teammate Joe, a grizzled veteran of the EV wars, thinks that the green chip should be part of the team chop. [At that point Marlo Stanfield called in to the show to relate his experience as a rookie counter on Joe’s team: “I wanted it to be one way, but Joe told me it’s the other way.”]
Now comes Semi-Pro, giddy at $25 of UV (unexpected value) derived from her unique skills (the skills that cause gamblers—especially older males—to say, “So you’re telling me there’s a chance”), outside the scope of the team mandate to count cards. By her position, it was only incidental that the $25 even came in a casino, and the profit should accrue to her the same as if a flirtatious barista had given her a free latte at the coffee shop earlier in the day. That chip has nothing to do with the team chop.
Continue reading The Green Chip War