Why 9s aren't counted?

[Magnetic]

This is my first post here - and i am a casual Blackjack player. doing basic counting strategy. I play with my wife, and she does the hi-lo count (for betting), while i count 9-K versus 2-6 (for play adjustments).

For the hi-lo count....I have always wondered, how effective is it to replace the As with 9s, and do a side count of Aces instead.

my reasoning is, 9s still help with doubles, and still help bust most of the dealers hands....as well as making the dealers hands 1 pt less.

[ACFERRET]

you could do that, but it wont be the hilo count anymore, and you will have all different index numbers, and efect per count etc

[KronikBuddha]

Read The Theory of Blackjack by Peter Griffin.

[Magnetic]

you could do that, but it wont be the hilo count anymore, and you will have all different index numbers, and efect per count etc

yes, i forgot to mention i play on 6D shoe games - and not single/DD. so I'm not too concerned with index plays at really negative numbers. I focus pretty much on high counts & its easy to do adjustments.

i have lately thought that, if you have a high hi-lo count, but there are surplus of aces. you'll have an issue when doubling 11 and although having an ace on your hand is great, ...if the dealer has a hidden ace or open ace, its super problematic too. Perhaps worst, since at high counts i don't really want to pull cards anyway.

Aces also improve the dealers 2-2, 4-3, 5-2 combos as well

[Magnetic]

Read The Theory of Blackjack by Peter Griffin.

could you give me more info on what aspect of his book? I've read alot of online material...and the original 'beat the dealer' book.

[BJGenius007]

This is my first post here - and i am a casual Blackjack player. doing basic counting strategy. I play with my wife, and she does the hi-lo count (for betting), while i count 9-K versus 2-6 (for play adjustments).

For the hi-lo count....I have always wondered, how effective is it to replace the As with 9s, and do a side count of Aces instead.

my reasoning is, 9s still help with doubles, and still help bust most of the dealers hands....as well as making the dealers hands 1 pt less.

AO2 (Advanced Omega II) do count nine as high card.

[bigplayer]

The removal of 9's doesn't impact the player edge very much relative to the other cards when using a single level system like High-Low. To justify counting the 9 you have to use a bigger variety of weights so that the 9 is properly weighted (2 or 3 level system), but when you do count the 9 as a high card it hurts the insurance bet correlation of the count so many systems just ignore it. As mentioned above the 9 is counted as a high card by several systems.

Tradeoffs. Tradeoffs. Tradeoffs.

Many systems do not count the Ace at all because the Ace acts like a high card for betting purposes but a low card for playing purposes. (You have to keep track of Aces separately in those systems).

[mofungoo]

The count you described, 2-6 vs 9,10 with an ASC is the Revere Advanced +/- Count. It is similar to HiOpt1, and Revere's index numbers are practically the same as Hilo indices. I used this count when I started playing blackjack about 40 years ago. It works well against single and double deck games but Revere cautioned against using it for shoe games and recommended using Hilo for that. I quit using it after a few years and switched to Hilo for all game types, including single deck, to keep things simple.

[Magnetic]

...It works well against single and double deck games but Revere cautioned against using it for shoe games and recommended using Hilo for that. I quit using it after a few years and switched to Hilo for all game types, including single deck, to keep things simple.

can you explain the caution for Single deck, DD....versus shoe game. I have read this before too. At thie stage, I dislike the DD/single games because you can't wong in/out and high min costs.

[Magnetic]

The removal of 9's doesn't impact the player edge very much relative to the other cards when using a single level system like High-Low. To justify counting the 9 you have to use a bigger variety of weights so that the 9 is properly weighted (2 or 3 level system), but when you do count the 9 as a high card it hurts the insurance bet correlation of the count so many systems just ignore it. As mentioned above the 9 is counted as a high card by several systems.

Tradeoffs. Tradeoffs. Tradeoffs.

Many systems do not count the Ace at all because the Ace acts like a high card for betting purposes but a low card for playing purposes. (You have to keep track of Aces separately in those systems).

food for thought.

trade offs, more busting both ways.... versus bad insurance correlation, and 9s don't help splits and non 10/11 doubles.
aces bust the dealer less, but give us blackjack.

perhaps i should do regular hi-lo with a sidecount of 8-9s.

[Nikky_Flash]

perhaps i should do regular hi-lo with a sidecount of 8-9s.

Those neutral cards aren't so neutral sometimes..
Keeping track of middle cards is a great idea , A senior-member here named Tarzan has his own system that does just that -
ZenMaster_Flash has an excellent way of explaining what Tarzan's system is like, - here is a quote , do check out the thread , I link it at the bottom:

I will try to be brief. Tarzan is a real-life friend and A.P. colleague.

It appears that most of our members fail to understand that this is NOT

card-counting with many side-counts a la multi-parameter card counting.

The Tarzan Count has a foundation of continually updated RATIOS being

computed. In the strict sense of the term, only Aces are side-counted.

The other card ranks all fall into various "buckets" that start off "normal"

Visualize a "bar-graph" with just a few bars.

There are bars representing High, Low, and Middle cards.

The Ratio of Faces to Baby Cards is where your"Betting count" begins,

and is adjusted for surplus / deficit Aces. Then the middle cards are considered.

This is an adjusted True Count that is best termed a "Betting Count"

What, you say ? Middle Cards having to do with the Betting Correlation (B.C.) ?

Imagine if you can, playing at THREE different tables with matching Hi-Lo True Counts.

Table 1 has Middle Cards normally distributed.

Table 2 has a surplus of cards ranking 6,7,8,9.

Table 3 has a deficit of cards ranking 6,7,8,9.

Do you think that the B.C. is the same for these 3 sets of conditions at TC = 0 ? TC = +2 ? TC = -2

Let us know what you imagine the answers to be.

Back to the issue at hand ...

The virtually perfect P.E. of the Tarzan Count is owed to the fact that our standard card-counting indices

which we employ to violate Basic Strategy, is geared to little more than the Ten Density of undealt cards.

Look at a common hand like 12 vs. 6 You reflexively wave the hand off as your True Count is not negative.

However your winning chances are significantly enhanced by surplus Middle Cards. Indeed, the Middle Cards become

"Key Cards" as their scarcity or abundance works for you in TWO ways.

They enhance your chances when hitting and they simultaneously worsen the dealer's chances.

Here is another common hand 9 vs. 2

This time the count is more "plus" than is required in order to feel good about doubling.

But wait ! There is a strong deficit of Middle Cards. That weaken's your overall chances.

Even if the TC was a bit negative the double would be excellent with a surplus of Middle Cards.

I should enumerate just how many hands there are - stiff vs. stiff, Hard and Soft doubles and some splits

where these Precision Plays contribute to enhancing our e.v. and, importantly, reducing our variance !

I have witnessed Tarzan "in action" for perhaps 150+ hours in numerous venues over the last few years.

He spreads his bets very "politely" (as I like to put it) and plays marginal games with unappetizing penetration.

He almost never catches heat. he plays about 5 days weekly. His skills pay his bills.

Tarzan's virtues and strengths are high caliber, although his communication skills may not be the strongest.

I hope that the reader finds this post to be informative. Feedback is more than welcome.

Erratum:

It has come to my attention that I had misstated

something re: Surplus/Deficit Middle Cards.

Here is the correction:

The {6-9} deficit helps with 9 v. 2, whereas a surplus hurts you.

In TarzanSpeak we would note:

"6-0-6" = HIT . . . "0-6-0" = DOUBLE

"6-0-6" means that there is a steep SURPLUS of Middle Cards.

"0-6-0" means that there is a sparkling DEFICIT of Middle Cards.

Hope that makes sense , and here is the entire thread ,
http://www.blackjacktheforum.com/sho...y-glockenspiel

[Night_Rider]

Why not just keep a side count of Aces?

[mofungoo]

can you explain the caution for Single deck, DD....versus shoe game. I have read this before too. At thie stage, I dislike the DD/single games because you can't wong in/out and high min costs.

The issue is with the ace side count. For betting accuracy one must be able to estimate if there is a surplus or deficit of aces. This requires deck estimation to within 1/4 deck (13 cards), and the ability to adjust the count properly for the excess or fewer aces. With 6 or 8 decks this is difficult, and if errors are made, one's advantage is gone. It takes a lot of practice to reach the skill level that is required for the level of accuracy necessary.