MikeP: First post and question

[MikeP]

Hi Don,

I thoroughly enjoyed BJA3. Thanks. I started playing last summer and although I haven?t back-counted, I?ve read the back-counting article about 10 times! It really helped me prepare mentally for the game and the crazy fluctuations.

I?ve been rereading chapter 7 and I have a question related to it.

Suppose my system calls for betting $75 at a running count of -5. Instead, I bet $100. Is the cost of over betting (just for this hand) the difference between what I bet, $100, and what I should have bet, $75, multiplied by the disadvantage that corresponds to the -5 count?

I think I understand that if I did this consistently as part of an overall strategy, then a simulation would be necessary and the frequency of the count would matter. At the moment, I?m more interested in how to calculate the cost of a spontaneous play.

Hope I?m making sense. If not, I?m sure you?ll straighten me out! Thanks.

[Don Schlesinger]

> Hi Don,

> I thoroughly enjoyed BJA3. Thanks.

Happy to hear that. Welcome to the site!

>I started playing
> last summer and although I haven?t back-counted, I?ve
> read the back-counting article about 10 times! It
> really helped me prepare mentally for the game and the
> crazy fluctuations.

You say that now, but just wait! :-)

> I?ve been rereading chapter 7 and I have a question
> related to it.

> Suppose my system calls for betting $75 at a running
> count of -5. Instead, I bet $100. Is the cost of over
> betting (just for this hand) the difference between
> what I bet, $100, and what I should have bet, $75,
> multiplied by the disadvantage that corresponds to the
> -5 count?

Yes.

> I think I understand that if I did this consistently
> as part of an overall strategy, then a simulation
> would be necessary and the frequency of the count
> would matter. At the moment, I?m more interested in
> how to calculate the cost of a spontaneous play.

Understood.

> Hope I?m making sense. If not, I?m sure you?ll
> straighten me out! Thanks.

That's why there are two Tables (7.2 and 7.3) on pages 98 and 99. The first is the conditional cost of the play to the basic strategist, and that is similar to your question above. It assumes you have the hand in front of you for the one play. The second is the absolute penalty as if you declared to make the "wrong" play -- or, in this case, make the right play but bet the wrong amount -- which is a similar concept, every single time that the situation arose, for an hour.

Clear?

Don

[MikeP]

> You say that now, but just wait! :-)

Really? You mean I haven't seen it all, yet? :-)

Yes, your explanation is clear. Thanks. I looked in the wrong place for your reply, so I just read it now. I'll probably be back with some more questions as I'm rereading the book. Thanks for being available.