This whole "Can you count cards at 2 tables simultaneously" discussion is so boring. I thought we were done with that. I've moved those posts here:
https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...ll=1#post78417
Anyway, getting back to the original post, it's a good question: If you show up 1 deck in to a 6-deck shoe, and then count 2 more decks (leaving 3 left to deal), do you have a valid count by simply pretending that you're only 2 decks in rather than 3?
There are two ways to argue this one:
You can say that, yes, this would be equivalent to having counted 2 out of 6 decks, and pretending the unseen first deck is at the end, and simply wont be dealt. Why? Because you could theoretically move that deck to the end instead of the beginning, and the other 5 decks would play out the same. The makeup of an unseen deck -- whether already dealt or yet to be dealt -- is unknown to you in the exact same way, and there is no difference in its potential makeup.
However, you can also say that perhaps you've robbed yourself of valuable information which can greatly skew your perceived edge during the decks you do count. For example, let's say the running hi-low count was -16 after that first deck. By showing up late and starting the count at zero, if the running count in deck #2 was +14, you would be pretty sure you have an edge going forward, when in reality you'd actually be more -EV than the average spot in blackjack! And this could really screw you if running count remains steady for 1.5 more decks, which would lead you to place large bets which wouldn't otherwise be justified at all. So you could easily have missed an importat
past event which would have great impact on the future events in that shoe, and you wouldn't know it.
But I'm with the first school of thought.
An unseen deck is an unseen deck. Since we will not be playing to the end of the shoe, it doesn't matter if we miss the deck at the beginning or the end -- we're still missing it. The count attempts to simply adjust to what we do know we've seen versus what we haven't seen, and then we draw conclusions regarding our EV and strategy from the combination of those two factors.
Here's an easier way to look at it:
Take a 6-deck shoe where they deal 4.5 decks, and has good rules. You would probably play this game a a card counter. Normally, this game would be dealing the first 4.5 decks, and then reshuffling to where we never get to see the final 1.5 decks.
Now take this exact same situation, except the casino announces that they will cut off the first 52 cards of the shoe, and then deal 4.5 decks, until they get to the final 26. Otherwise, it's the identical game.
Would you still play it?
Of course you would. Either way, they're dealing 4.5 decks.
The only issue with missing the first deck of a shoe is that the penetration is likely not to be good enough to justify counting/playing at that point.