Cacarulo: Insurance Indices for UBZII (C-D)

[Cacarulo]

Insurance indices for UBZII

Conditions

A = Ace 

T = Ten 

Z = 8,9 

M = 3,4,5,6 

L = 2,7

1D  = 26/52 (0.5/1) 

2D  = 52/104 (1/2) 

6D  = 234/312 (4.5/6) 

8D  = 312/416 (6/8)

IRC = -4*decks

           +-----+-----+-----+-----+ 

           | 1D  | 2D  | 6D  | 8D  | 

+----------+-----+-----+-----+-----+ 

| Generic  |  0  |  1  |  4  |  5  | 

|   A,A    | -4  | -3  |  2  |  3  | 

|   A,T    | -1  |  0  |  3  |  4  | 

|   A,Z    | -3  | -2  |  2  |  3  | 

|   A,L    | -2  | -1  |  3  |  4  | 

|   A,M    | -2  |  0  |  3  |  4  | 

|   T,T    |  1  |  2  |  4  |  5  | 

|   T,Z    |  0  |  1  |  4  |  5  | 

|   T,L    |  0  |  1  |  4  |  5  | 

|   T,M    |  1  |  2  |  4  |  5  | 

|   Z,Z    | -2  | -1  |  3  |  4  | 

|   Z,L    | -1  |  0  |  3  |  4  | 

|   Z,M    | -1  |  0  |  4  |  4  | 

|   L,L    | -1  |  1  |  4  |  4  | 

|   L,M    |  0  |  1  |  4  |  5  | 

|   M,M    |  1  |  2  |  5  |  5  | 

+----------+-----+-----+-----+-----+

Note: The indices were calculated by simulation.

Enjoy!
Cacarulo

[Don Schlesinger]

I don't think it will make a big difference, but I think that assuming only 50% pen for DD is a little severe.

I'd choose about 65%.

Don

[Cacarulo]

> I don't think it will make a big difference,
> but I think that assuming only 50% pen for
> DD is a little severe.

> I'd choose about 65%.

Ok. I will use that for the next calculations.

Sincerely,
Cacarulo

[Parker]

By using these, a player will be taking insurance significantly more ofen, I think - even perhaps occasionally (AA) with a minimum bet out.

Geez - more indices to learn. :-(

Would I be correct to learn the ones that deviate the most from the generic index first?

Definitely archive material - you won't find this anywhere else.

Thanks again!

[Don Schlesinger]

> Would I be correct to learn the ones that
> deviate the most from the generic index
> first?

You'd be correct to learn the ones that contribute the most to your advantage, and that's a function of many things, including, but certainly not limited to, the frequency of the play. You might be intrigued by the A-A index, but compared to the T-L holding, think of how much more frequently the latter is going to appear.

Don

[Cacarulo]

> By using these, a player will be taking
> insurance significantly more ofen, I think -
> even perhaps occasionally (AA) with a
> minimum bet out.

More often and more correctly!

> Geez - more indices to learn. :-(

That's the drawback

> Would I be correct to learn the ones that
> deviate the most from the generic index
> first?

Yes.

> Definitely archive material - you won't find
> this anywhere else.

> Thanks again!

You're welcome.

Sincerely,
Cacarulo

[Zenfighter]

> By using these, a player will be taking
> insurance significantly more ofen, I think -
> even perhaps occasionally (AA) with a
> minimum bet out.

> Geez - more indices to learn. :-(

> Would I be correct to learn the ones that
> deviate the most from the generic index
> first?

> Definitely archive material - you won't find
> this anywhere else.

> Thanks again!

In order to help Parker and other players not inclined to memorize the full 15 indexes,
I?ve extracted the probabilities of occurrence for 6dks and Cac?s original form to present the data

Dealer is showing an Ace

A,A (.0004037)
A,T (.0035234)
A,Z (.0017168)
A,L (.0017168)
A,M (.0035236)

T,T (.0072766)
T,Z (.0073532)
T,L (.0073532)
T,M (.0147064)

Z,Z (.0018000)
Z,L (.0036766)
Z,M (.0073532)

L,L (.0018000)
L,M (.0073532)

M,M (.0072766)

Taking here into consideration the frecuencies only, the 7 more importants to learn will be then:

1)T,M
2)T,Z
3)T,L
4)Z,M
5)L,M
6)T,T
7)M,M

That is, learn all the indexes with a T involved and 3 others with the M (3,4,5,6)

For an exactly order, as Don correctly pointed to Parker, there are other things to look for, before extracting definitive conclusions, but who among us, after looking at table 5.1 (page 70) from Don?s book isn?t impressed with the amount of work necessary to
mimic his work for this particular study? Certainly, yours truly is disabused of that notion.

Sincerely
Z

[Don Schlesinger]

Nice work!

As you can see, for SD, the A,A index is the farthest from the "generic" value, but also would be, in my view, the most useless to learn, simply because it rarely if ever comes up.

As is pointed out, there is a lot more that goes into the value of using an index than simply how far it strays from "normal," or zero; you have to contend with frequency of the holding, frequency of the count at which the play is made, correlation, and average bet size when the play is made.

Don

[Zenfighter]