What you say is true; not many people discuss the use of ASC for play variations. Therefore, we would already be two who doOriginally Posted by Ole
.
In "Enhanced CAC2," there is a very good explanation of how to take advantage of this.
Sincerely,
Cac
Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.
BJGenius007,
Carlson tells how to use the Ace side count for betting purposes only: he makes no mention of using it for playing decisions.
Also, this same information is in the original Pi Yee Press edition of BJFB.
Hope this helps!
Dog Hand
Hey Guys - I just wanted to report that CAC2 is the real deal. I’ve done a few sims in CVCX and I made a few simplifications to the system to suit my needs and abilities. First, in calculating the true count, I use whole deck resolution for estimating shoes and half deck for pitch. Secondly, I rounded CAC2 full indices very slightly. I’ve never not used rounded indices, having spent a bulk of my time on using KO preferred or Norm’s FELT. But this time I used more granular rounding, and have groups of indices in +2, +7, etc. Like Cac says above, there is a penalty in using whole deck resolution compared to the original half deck - however, with my rounded full indices and full deck resolution, it does edge out the original CAC2/R22 with half deck resolution.
But how does it compare with the other strategies with similar rounding, etc? Please see below for the SCORE comparisons. CAC2’s superiority carries through here as well.
CVCX Sims (Rounded Full Indices with Whole Deck Shoe Resolution etc.)
6D, S17 DAS RSA, 82%, 1-6, Play-All CAC2-Ultimate 25.07 Halves-CAC2 24.90 Zen-CAC2 24.21 FELT-CAC2 24.01
DD, S17 DAS RSA, 64%, 1-4, Play-All CAC2-Ultimate 45.75 Zen-CAC2 45.60 Halves-CAC2 45.44 FELT-CAC2 44.79
And I am making progress at increasing my speed and learning the indices. I’ve never learned such a large index set before having always done something close to the Catch 22 - but using CV index tests, it really accelerates your learning.
Wow, surprising! It never would have occurred to me to use a matrix of rounded indices or grouped indices in CAC2.
The mere fact of losing performance would have made me discard the idea. But, with this post, it's shown that sometimes
ideas need to be tested (simulated) before dismissing them.
Good job and thank you!
Sincerely,
Cac
Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.
I would like to see SCORE on RSA is not allowed. I never saw any casino let players re-split aces nowadays. I think casinos force people to stand on soft 2 is the worst thing ever happened to BJ players next to 6:5 Blackjack. In the old days, the most money I made is when I split aces, then double on the soft hands. In the lucky day, I can split three times and double and made 8X my max bets in one hand. But those days are gone.
I don't quite understand what you're referring to. In this particular case, "boneuphtoner" made a comparison of different systems with that particular rule. Evidently, where he plays, RSA is allowed.
For the case where RSA is not allowed, there is a comparative analysis at the beginning of this thread (6D,S17,DOA,DAS,SPA1,SPL3,NS,4.5/6).
Let's consider that RSA means that aces can be split more than once (SPA2 or SPA3). Not being allowed to split aces (SPA0) would indeed be horrible.
In that case, the basic strategy would be to double down on AAv6 and hit in all other cases.
Let's see the effect on BS for the different options:
Sincerely,Code:6D,S17,DOA,DAS,SPA1,SPL3,NS ==> BS-EV = -0.4022 6D,S17,DOA,DAS,SPA2,SPL3,NS ==> BS-EV = -0.3409 6D,S17,DOA,DAS,SPA3,SPL3,NS ==> BS-EV = -0.3326 6D,S17,DOA,DAS,SPA0,SPL3,NS ==> BS-EV = -0.5819
Cac
Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.
I mean in all casinos I visited in the past ten years, they allow me to split ace pair only once and I cannot split again if I got another ace. And for each ace after split, each hand can get only one card even it ends up with soft 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. I can only win that hand on dealer bust. That totally destroyed the value of players getting ace. When this rule was invented, it is the biggest nerf ever invented until the casinos invented 6:5 Blackjack. It is the reality of the current BJ condition. Those SCORES benefiting from unlimited ace actions are unrealistically high if re-split aces is not allowed and double after splitting ace is not allowed. To make comparison on different systems, I think you should use the most likely rule set.
Last edited by BJGenius007; 03-13-2024 at 08:52 AM.
RSA is not that unusual. Go to https://www.qfit.com/maps.shtml and scroll down. You will see the percentages at the bottom right of the various games in CBJN this month. Click on a state and then a number of decks and you will see the percentages for that combo.
"I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse
The general rule has always been SPA1, which means that aces can be split only once. Additionally, only one card can be received on each hand,
without the obvious possibility of doubling down. RSA (usually SPA3) exists in some casinos but functions like the previous one.
There is also another rule (HSA) that allows you to request more cards on each of the split aces always without the possibility of doubling down.
Perhaps you should read the document to see that that's actually what I do.I just to make comparison on different systems, you should use the most likely rules casinos set.
And as I said earlier, I wasn't the one who made the comparisons with RSA.
Sincerely,
Cac
Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.
Edit - sorry guys, I meant eliminating RSA, not DAS
Hey Guys - I haven’t had a chance to export the results yet, but getting rid of RSA doesn’t hurt my rounded CAC2 in the least in comparison to the other strategies like Halves, Zen, and FELT-F (all with similar rounding to be fair). But as I mentioned previously, I only rounded very slightly and have many more groups than I ever had - for example, for TC of 0-10, I have groups of 0, +2, +5, +7, and +10 - I never used a system with that kind of index granularity before. I hurt the performance of the system far more by deciding to use whole deck resolution for shoes - but I know my abilities. It took me using a full rounded index set to just barely overtake CAC2 with the standard R22 and half deck resolution.
Last edited by boneuphtoner; 03-13-2024 at 10:14 AM.
Posting Permissions
-*-
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks