M.: Don: Full Deck - Half Deck TC

[M.]

am i correct in saying that calculating the True Count every 1/2D would be easier that every 1D due to the fact that with 1/2D you are always dividing by a whole number and with 1D you still have to set the half-deck line except you, for example, divide by 5.5 instead of 11. can you clear this up for me.

also, which indices are more accurate for setting the TC@1/2D: the ones for full deck or quarter deck???

thanks so much.

[Don Schlesinger]

> am i correct in saying that calculating the
> True Count every 1/2D would be easier that
> every 1D due to the fact that with 1/2D you
> are always dividing by a whole number and
> with 1D you still have to set the half-deck
> line except you, for example, divide by 5.5
> instead of 11. can you clear this up for me.

I can't tell you what's going to be easier for you. I've used the RPC for 25+ years, dividing by half decks and, therefore, whole numbers. It's a snap for me. For those using whole decks, but half-deck precision, you do, indeed, have to divide by mixed numbers, such 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, etc.

There are mental shortcuts to the above, including using multipliers (0.4 for 2.5 or 2 for 0.5, in SD or DD), but they're not precise for some of the other fractions.

Bottom line: to me, whole numbers are easier, but they may be harder for some, because the numbers can get larger (starting at 16 in 8-deck!).

> also, which indices are more accurate for
> setting the TC@1/2D: the ones for full deck
> or quarter deck???

I'm sorry, but I don't understand the question. Are you saying that you generated full-deck indices and quarter-deck indices and now want to know which more closely resemble half-deck indices? I would think 90+% of them would be the same, no matter what method was used.

Don

[M.]

that's exactly what i meant...
cheers to you!