Ok, so a couple things about the card counting section.

It says players can get between a .5 and 1.5 edge. With current rules and situations 1.0% is about the best you can hope for long-term. The days of over 1% are pretty much gone. It takes a huge spread to get above 1.0% and that is going to mean, you can't just sit and play that game, you have to move around ALOT, even more than I do, which will bring the whole hourly rate down. It is about finding a compromise.

100 rounds per hour. All the books and software like to use 100 rounds per hour as the standard measure. It is pretty hard to average that. I don't average 100 rounds per hour. If you take a shoe game, which most games outside Vegas are, (in Vegas it is about 50%), with 3,4,5 people playing, and an average dealer you are going to get 60ish hands if you sit there for an hour. If the game has side bets which more and more do now, it goes even lower due to extra time paying off those side bets. The one saving grace is if you can find a heads up game with a decent dealer, you can rack up 150-200 rounds per hour. That helps bring the average up, but most of your play will not be heads up, so it's averages, and it's hard to average 100 rounds per hour.

Play all vs jumping in and out of better situations. The article also assumes play all, which means you sit at the same table and play for the hour, or many hours. Play all means that in addition to the good positive (+EV) counts that you seek, you have to sit through not only neutral counts, but some pretty negative (very -EV) counts to get there. Play all requires a much bigger spread than jumping from opportunity to opportunity. Bigger than the 1-7 ($25-$175) spread mentioned for a shoe game. And a bigger spread means you will draw more attention and get noticed and more backoffs, barrings etc.

So do you use a bigger spread and play all, allowing for more rounds per hour, or do you use a smaller spread drawing less attention, while jumping around (out of the worse counts), which will result in fewer rounds per hour played. One way that works in your favor less attention and all works against you in rounds per hour and vice versa. You have to find some sort of compromise, based on your individual situation, like number of games available to you and how frequently you play. Obviously for me it is hit and run, move around a lot.

70% penetration mentioned. 70% is not good for a shoe game. For me 70% is absolute bare minimum. The bottom I will accept. and I will only play that if there are some other favorable condition. Some favorable rule like S17, or maybe a heads up game or game with 1 other player allowing for more rounds per hour. 70% at a full table is just not worth it. Now 75% is average for shoe games. And I know that doesn't seem like much but it makes a huge difference in hourly rate. 80% plus is really the target.

Let's compare. If you are playing a 6 deck game with 2 other people, the difference between 80% pen and 75% (most common) is an increase of about 30% in win rate. A $60 an hour game goes to better than $75-$80. And it works the other way as well. You drop to 70% and that $60/hour game goes to $40. Big difference in fairly small penetration levels.

So it is all about finding the compromise positions. You look for the better games that you can beat with smaller spreads, which draw less heat and attention. But, you can't sit there and play all, as that works against, you bringing down advantage. You move around avoiding the worst -EV rounds, but that brings total rounds played down. You find the compromise position that works for you. But you can forget about 1.5-2% advantages from card counting, while sitting at one table playing all. Those days are gone.

For me:, I play a little higher stakes and spread than mentioned, better penetration than mentioned, but fewer rounds per hour (about 80) with the hit and run style. Compromise position that allows for longevity by creating fewer situations where someone has to answer for you.