Jackie Chiles: Key card concept

[Jackie Chiles]

Don and everybody:

I recently started thinking about the "key card" notion and its applicability to single and double deck games. I understand the logic behind this, but I have not been able to find a full work up with a set of playing indices using this approach for my system - I use the Hi Opt I with a side count of aces. (It is worth mentioning that this counting system does have a variation which obviously follows the key card math: playing a hard 14 consisting of two 7's against a 10 upcard in single and double deck games.) I would like to fully explore this idea, but my research has come to a dead end. Any help would be appreciated.

Jackie Chiles

[Zenfighter]

SD key cards

 

 

 

16 vs. T	kc = 6 

 

15 vs. 9	kc = 7 

 

14 vs. T	kc = 7 

 

13 vs. T	kc = 8 kc2 = 7 

 

12 vs. T	kc = 9 kc2 = 8 and kc3 = 7 

 

Theoretically you could raise your playing efficiency (Hiopt1) to a monster .87 while keeping a separate count of 7s, 8s, 9s
and aces. ?Someone? told me the task isn?t beyond a motivated player. I have no real motives to think it can?t be done.

Hope this helps, a little.

Zenfighter

[Jackie Chiles]

> SD key cards
>
> 16 vs. T kc = 6
> 15 vs. 9 kc = 7
> 14 vs. T kc = 7
> 13 vs. T kc = 8 kc2 = 7
> 12 vs. T kc = 9 kc2 = 8 and kc3 = 7
>
> Theoretically you could raise your playing
> efficiency (Hiopt1) to a monster .87 while
> keeping a separate count of 7s, 8s, 9s
>
> and aces. ?Someone? told me the task
> isn?t beyond a motivated player. I have no
> real motives to think it can?t be done.
> Hope this helps, a little.
> Zenfighter
>
>

Zenfighter:

Thanks for the information. The idea of keeping a separate side count of the 7's, 8's and 9's together is exactly what I am aiming to do. Knowing the key cards for the various situations is the first step, of course. I am searching for somebody out there who has taken this information and computed playing indices with it. After years of play, I have no trouble at all with keeping a side count of aces. I would not even attempt to keep yet another side count in a shoe game, but I think I could handle one more side count in a single or double deck game. It's worth a try. I just need to find out exactly how to adjust the playing indices for the counting system I use. Again, thanks.

Jackie Chiles

[Don Schlesinger]

> SD key cards

> 16 vs. T kc = 6
> 15 vs. 9 kc = 7

Have I misunderstood something, or did you mean the key cards above to be 5 and 6, respectively?

Don

[Zenfighter]

Have I misunderstood something, or did you mean the key cards above to be 5 and 6, respectively?

1) 16 vs. T

Note here that the 6 (and not the 5) is the key card. Obviously five is important for your 21, but the rule ?stand when there are more sixes than fives remaining, hit otherwise,? (TOB) is more than 60% efficient (out performs both the Ten count and the Hiopt1). Here we have a much better indicator of the correct play than the count itself.

2) 15 vs. 9

Here there is some space for discrepancies. The 5s and 6s are important for the player striving for a pat hand. The problem here is the duality of choices, that is, if you knew a 5 or 6 were coming off the top you would hit. Right? The problem is that if you knew the dealer has a 6 underneath (hole card) you would stand.
As you can see, here the 7s are the only cards without double thoughts, given that the action for both cases is the same, that is, stand. This seems to be a sufficient condition to label a card as a key one.

Do we agree here, Don?

Zenfighter

[Don Schlesinger]

I see the logic.

> Do we agree here, Don?

Yes, sure. Thanks for the explanation.

Don

[Zenfighter]

SD laboratory example.

T, 5 vs. 9

1) Remaining subset (13 cards): 2,3,4,5,6,7,7,7,7,8,9,T, T

Hilo TC = -3/(13/52) = -12

Action? Hit. Right? Wrong

h = -.441841
s = -.301865

2) Remaining subset (13cards): 2,3,4,5,6,6,6,6,7,8,9,T, T

Hilo TC = -6/(13/52) = - 24

Action? Hit. Yes, exactly.

h = -.04955338
s = -.46 2704

Thus, as a paradox, the player should stand on the first given example.

?Casey? would stand. For mere mortals the hand call for a hit. :-)

Zenfighter

[The Prince]

I have a pretty good idea who this "someone" is. This same someone also said a motivated player, using the Gordon strategy, could track 6's, 7's, 8's, 9's, and Aces and raise PE to .922%. You think this can be done? On BJ Math Abdul Jalib actually wrote a whole text laying out the playing strategy with multi-parameter playing indexes and everything. He said some of the indexes seemed erroneous, though, and would have to be figured out on one's own. Have you seen this publication, and, if so, is it a reliable guide to the above mentioned playing strategy?

The Prince

[Zenfighter]

All in all, we?re dealing here with a very difficult stuff. My advice for a ?motivated? pitch game?s player is to go very slowly. That is, first to incorporate the ace and second the 7. Once these two side counts seem to run ?smoothly? at the tables, then and only then you can dream with incorporating another one. But, caveat emptor, a somehow risky move, like is to add complexity.

Have you seen this publication, and, if so, is it a reliable guide to the above mentioned playing strategy?

One thing is a published strategy and another quite different is a tested one. So don?t swallow all on print, unless their validity has been confirmed by other sources. Not the case with this arcane stuff.

Sincerely

Zenfighter