Mr. Ed: Ace side count for Insurance

[Mr. Ed]

How do I use an Ace side-count for insurance?

How much more will I earn (from insurance) if I learn to side count aces?

I play an 8-deck shoe, and take insurance at TC>3 (I use Hi-Low). My betting ramp is 6@TC>3, 8@TC>4, 10@TC>5. I truncate to convert from RC to TC. (The rest of the ramp is 0@TC<-1, 1@>-1, 2@TC>1, 4@TC>2)

[Don Schlesinger]

The thought of side-counting 32 aces sends shivers down my spine. Forget it! It won't be worth nearly enough, and you'll run out of feet by the middle of the shoe. :-)

Don

[Magician]

> The thought of side-counting 32 aces sends
> shivers down my spine. Forget it! It won't
> be worth nearly enough, and you'll run out
> of feet by the middle of the shoe. :-)

> Don

What if he had a partner (with eight feet) do the side-counting?

Seriously, is there a good reference on how to add a side-count to hi-lo? It might be viable for four decks, no?

[Don Schlesinger]

> Seriously, is there a good reference on how
> to add a side-count to hi-lo? It might be
> viable for four decks, no?

Wong's "bible" edition of "Pro BJ," pp. 119-120. It's really very simple.

Hi-lo counts the ace as -1 when, in fact, for insurance purposes, it should count as +1, like all the other non-ten cards. So, when it's time to consider insurance, you decide whether or not you have the proper number of aces, or whether there is an excess or deficiency of aces. For each imbalance, you add or subtract TWO to or from the runnning count, since you are reversing the process of having counted what should have been a +1 as a -1.

You then compute the adjusted true count and take insurance at +3 or higher. But, for the next hand, you have to remember the PRE-adjusted RC, to pick up where you left off. SOOOOOO, be careful about that.

Better suggestion: fuhgeddaboudit! :-)

Don

[pat]

> Wong's "bible" edition of
> "Pro BJ," pp. 119-120. It's really
> very simple.

> Hi-lo counts the ace as -1 when, in fact,
> for insurance purposes, it should count as
> +1, like all the other non-ten cards. So,
> when it's time to consider insurance, you
> decide whether or not you have the proper
> number of aces, or whether there is an
> excess or deficiency of aces. For each
> imbalance, you add or subtract TWO to or
> from the runnning count, since you are
> reversing the process of having counted what
> should have been a +1 as a -1.

> You then compute the adjusted true count and
> take insurance at +3 or higher. But, for the
> next hand, you have to remember the
> PRE-adjusted RC, to pick up where you left
> off. SOOOOOO, be careful about that.

> Better suggestion: fuhgeddaboudit! :-)

> Don
why dont you teach a friend to use another count for perfect insurance.its pretty simple.i remember reading about it in million dollar blackjack.

[Mr. Ed]

Yuck! I worked out the numbers and a reasonable approximation is to take insurance if the TC EXCEEDS +3, instead of EQUALS or exceeds +3. That one extra card helps. It also helps that there's an extra Ace out of the shoe (i.e. the Dealer's) when the insurance opportunity is offered.

However, I was surprised to find out that Insurance can be profitable at a TC<-1, or unprofitable at a TC>+5, depending on what the mix of played cards is!

> Wong's "bible" edition of
> "Pro BJ," pp. 119-120. It's really
> very simple.

> Hi-lo counts the ace as -1 when, in fact,
> for insurance purposes, it should count as
> +1, like all the other non-ten cards. So,
> when it's time to consider insurance, you
> decide whether or not you have the proper
> number of aces, or whether there is an
> excess or deficiency of aces. For each
> imbalance, you add or subtract TWO to or
> from the runnning count, since you are
> reversing the process of having counted what
> should have been a +1 as a -1.

> You then compute the adjusted true count and
> take insurance at +3 or higher. But, for the
> next hand, you have to remember the
> PRE-adjusted RC, to pick up where you left
> off. SOOOOOO, be careful about that.

> Better suggestion: fuhgeddaboudit! :-)

> Don

[Don Schlesinger]

> Yuck! I worked out the numbers and a
> reasonable approximation is to take
> insurance if the TC EXCEEDS +3, instead of
> EQUALS or exceeds +3. That one extra card
> helps. It also helps that there's an extra
> Ace out of the shoe (i.e. the Dealer's) when
> the insurance opportunity is offered.

That one extra ace is already factored into the +3 index. When the index is calculated, the assumption is, of course, that the dealer's ace is already up there.

>However, I was surprised to find out that >Insurance can be profitable at a TC<-1, or >unprofitable at a TC>+5, depending on what the mix >of played cards is!

Well, that may be true, but the average counter isn't going to know that exact mix, is he?

Don

[Don Schlesinger]

> why dont you teach a friend to use another
> count for perfect insurance.its pretty
> simple.i remember reading about it in
> million dollar blackjack.

Fine. Then, just make sure that your friend is always by your side for the rest of the days that you play blackjack, everywhere you go. Don't leave home without him/her! :-)

My way works even when your friend is sick.

Don

[Adam N. Subtractum]

The amount of variance to Insurance indices, based on composition-dependancy, that you mention seems a bit exaggerated, how did you go about the calculations?

ANS

[Parker]

> Fine. Then, just make sure that your friend
> is always by your side for the rest of the
> days that you play blackjack, everywhere you
> go. Don't leave home without him/her! :-)

> My way works even when your friend is sick.

> Don

The "friend" just may get some silly idea that he/she is entitled to a portion of your winnings!

[Magician]

> Wong's "bible" edition of
> "Pro BJ," pp. 119-120. It's really
> very simple.

I only have the second edition (the one where he says to fuhgeddaboudit).

>

With the ace as +1, the count is now unbalanaced. Do I have to worry about this when I do the true count conversion?

How does the process differ when incorporating the ace side count for plays such as doubling eleven? Would I need to compute/memorise different index numbers?

> Better suggestion: fuhgeddaboudit! :-)

OK, OK, would switching to a level two count (Zen or RPC) be worth it, or should I forget about that too?

> Don

Thanks for the advice.

[methodman]

[Parker]

I only approved this because I know that you have been having difficulties posting.

Now try saying something. :-)