> One minor thing I would like (I haven't
> found a way to do this although it might be
> hidden and I haven't seen it yet). flashcard
> drills. Any drills that require a count.
> What about a mode where the discard tray is
> shown, the running count is shown, and now I
> have to compute the TC and then make the
> right index play?
I had thought of this. Ran out of screen space. It's also getting close to playing the game itself with three different skills at once. I have always considered the game a combination drill.
> Also, maybe a "competition mode"
> where you play against the timer, but then
> your web site can be probed to upload your
> best times to compare with others. Nothing
> like more competition.
This I would like to do. The problem is that there are so many different options. You would have to set all of the options absolutely identically for the scores to match. But, I do like the idea and will add something like this. The tough part will be setting a set of options that everyone will like.
> I had thought of this. Ran out of screen
> space. It's also getting close to playing
> the game itself with three different skills
> at once. I have always considered the game a
> combination drill.
OK. reasonable thought IMHO. Another thought is that a student of mine was talking to me about card counting (He's been doing this for a couple of years, mainly on the west side of Mississippi, including Tunica, etc...) He gets into trouble in negative counts and was asking me what I did. I let him sit down in front of CVBJ on my laptop, and give the basic counting drill a whirl with both negative and positive bias shoes. He did the positive pretty well, but really fell apart when the counts went negative. The more negative, the worse he did.
On a whim, I had him quickly count from -0 to -30 by 2's, then from -1 to -31 by 2's. You probably would guess that the -1 to -31 slowed him _way_ down. I suggested he buy CVBJ and run the negative bias drills several times a day, but I had the following thought.
How about the counting drill with a single button that says "next"? IE this could be an option to the regular drill. Now rather than having a specific time interval between pairs of cards, you count as quickly as you can, and you can get a feel for how your speed is improving. The current drill forces you to set the timer at the speed that doesn't overwhelm you on the "hard" cases, even though you might recognize cancelling numbers much quicker...
I was thinking of a drill with far fewer self-cancelling cards, that might take you back and forth between two extremes, relatively quickly. Not sure whether it would be liked or not, but it might help if someone has problems counting down into large negative territory, or up into large positive territory. Most can handle 0-10 or even 0-20 easily, but beyond +20, or maybe below -10, things get harder. For a computer scientist, this is not as big a problem since I deal with such numbers all the time, with the kinds of things I do, but not everyone works with such index numbers regularly...
Also I found myself slowing down after hitting counts below -30, but then thought "who cares, I'm probably not going to play in such counts, I'm leaving anyway."
> This I would like to do. The problem is that
> there are so many different options. You
> would have to set all of the options
> absolutely identically for the scores to
> match. But, I do like the idea and will add
> something like this. The tough part will be
> setting a set of options that everyone will
> like.
Or, have a very large set of results, so that anyone can either (a) pick their favorite options and compare with people that used those same options or (b) pick the most popular options and compare against people that used those.
There are probably a few drills that everyone likes. IE I like the full-table drill because it minimizes mouse time. I used to practice on the hit-or-stand game and then get to the bonus round. I could consistently get about 24-25 flashcard drills in 20 seconds, but there were some that were always well over 30. I can't move my mouse that quickly.
This would be a neat form of playing the game with no chips involved, just egos.
> I almost always use pips for counting and
> hardly ever even think of looking at the
> index...How bout everyone else..am I the
> exception or the rule? SM
What do you do in the games where the dealer is a neatness freak (face-up) and neatly stacks the cards? I don't count until the second card comes out, so I guess you could note the first card as the second is on the way? Then what about the hand-held cases on an unexpected dealer 21 where everyone tosses in their cards?
I find the pips to be the "easiest" way to count 'em, but a lot of times I have to rely on the numbers. IE full table, 1st base gets 2nd card, you get distracted as barmaid asks about a drink, or friend walks up and asks something. When you look back, no pips on bottom cards, just numbers..
Maybe I've been much unluckier, or am not as good at counting, but it is tough to hide the numbers.
> He did the positive pretty well, but really
> fell apart when the counts went negative.
> The more negative, the worse he did.
Common. On very negative counts some people start adding instead of subtracting high cards. It is necessary to practice these in two level counts or even one level counts at a full table as the count can swing dramatically in one round.
> How about the counting drill with a single
> button that says "next"? IE this
> could be an option to the regular drill. Now
> rather than having a specific time interval
> between pairs of cards, you count as quickly
> as you can, and you can get a feel for how
> your speed is improving.
Set the Timer Mode to Count Down and a next button will appear on the lower left.
> I was thinking of a drill with far fewer
> self-cancelling cards, that might take you
> back and forth between two extremes,
> relatively quickly.
Yeh that sounds good. I could also force consecutive counts in the same direction. This will prevent you from easily catching up by cancelling consecutive pairs in a super fast drill.
> There are probably a few drills that
> everyone likes. IE I like the full-table
> drill because it minimizes mouse time. I
> used to practice on the hit-or-stand game
> and then get to the bonus round. I could
> consistently get about 24-25 flashcard
> drills in 20 seconds, but there were some
> that were always well over 30. I can't move
> my mouse that quickly.
There are keyboard options on most drills
> This would be a neat form of playing the
> game with no chips involved, just egos.
I'll definitely add some sort of scorekeeping on the 'Net. I have had requests for allowing multiple people to practice together over the 'Net. But, it's a lot of work and ultimately would probably not prove to be that popular as it is too slow for good practice.
> Common. On very negative counts some people
> start adding instead of subtracting high
> cards. It is necessary to practice these in
> two level counts or even one level counts at
> a full table as the count can swing
> dramatically in one round.
> Set the Timer Mode to Count Down and a next
> button will appear on the lower left.
Figured there must be a quick answer. Reminds me of my years of learning "vi". Every time I found something that I did with some frequency, but which took more than a couple of keystrokes, I suspected that there was a 1-keystroke way of doing it and off I went to search for it. And I often found it.
> Yeh that sounds good. I could also force
> consecutive counts in the same direction.
> This will prevent you from easily catching
> up by cancelling consecutive pairs in a
> super fast drill.
> There are keyboard options on most drills
I will poke around with that. I run this a lot on my laptop, and usually have a USB mouse plugged in. The "scratchpad" on every laptop I have used is nice as it is always there, but it is not very precise and often recognizes something as a "tap" when it isn't...
Preference would be some sort of EEG connection of course...
> I'll definitely add some sort of
> scorekeeping on the 'Net. I have had
> requests for allowing multiple people to
> practice together over the 'Net. But, it's a
> lot of work and ultimately would probably
> not prove to be that popular as it is too
> slow for good practice.
While playing last night I payed a bit of attention to how I was counting and I found that with most dealers I just scan the pips but every now and then I would look at the index...usually the cards on first base when the player takes a lot of hits and the cards start running into the shoe. 90% of the time or more I just scan pips..especially while wonging. SM
> What do you do in the games where the dealer
> is a neatness freak (face-up) and neatly
> stacks the cards? I don't count until the
> second card comes out, so I guess you could
> note the first card as the second is on the
> way? Then what about the hand-held cases on
> an unexpected dealer 21 where everyone
> tosses in their cards?
> I find the pips to be the
> "easiest" way to count 'em, but a
> lot of times I have to rely on the numbers.
> IE full table, 1st base gets 2nd card, you
> get distracted as barmaid asks about a
> drink, or friend walks up and asks
> something. When you look back, no pips on
> bottom cards, just numbers..
> Maybe I've been much unluckier, or am not as
> good at counting, but it is tough to hide
> the numbers.
Posting Permissions
-*-
Bookmarks