greenback: Converting to True Count

[greenback]

How much more betting and playing accuracy is available for someone using the number of half-decks remaining when converting to True Count as compared to simply using the number of full-decks remaining? Of course, as the shoe gets down to the last deck or two, an accurate determination of the remaining decks becomes even more important to the TC. But, has there been any study how much $ per hour (or SCORE) can be gained by use of a more precise (perhaps even quarter-deck) estimation of the DR.

[Don Schlesinger]

We've discussed this topic extensively on these pages for the past few months. Try to look around a little.

Do you mean using number of half-decks left to reckon the TC, or do you mean using full decks, but to half-deck precision, which isn't the same thing?

Don

[greenback]

> We've discussed this topic extensively on
> these pages for the past few months. Try to
> look around a little.

> Do you mean using number of half-decks left
> to reckon the TC, or do you mean using full
> decks, but to half-deck precision, which
> isn't the same thing?

> Don

I mean using the true number of half-decks left to reckon the TC. I've seen sims on this site that seem to suggest that a more precise estimation of the decks remaining does not result in more money taken at the table. This is counter-intuitive. I'm wondering if I'm wasting my time by trying to be more precise in my discard-estimating skills. If so, I will just estimate the number of full-decks remaining to calculate my True Count.

[Don Schlesinger]

> I mean using the true number of half-decks
> left to reckon the TC.

Actually, I don't think you do. Suppose 3.5 decks remain. Do you divide by 7 or by 3.5, or by 3 or 4? if by 3 or 4, then you're dividing by full decks, with one-deck precision. If by 3.5, then you're dividing by FULL decks, but with half-deck precision 9which is fine). If by 7, then you're dividing by half decks, which isn't so fine, especially for level-one counts, which Norm has explained several times on these pages.

> I've seen sims on
> this site that seem to suggest that a more
> precise estimation of the decks remaining
> does not result in more money taken at the
> table.

Again, you're confusing whether you use 7, above, or 3.5. 3.5 will NOT do any harm and can only do good (albeit not a helluva lot). 7 can do harm, under certain conditions.

> This is counter-intuitive.

See above.

> I'm
> wondering if I'm wasting my time by trying
> to be more precise in my discard-estimating
> skills. If so, I will just estimate the
> number of full-decks remaining to calculate
> my True Count.

Use full decks with half-deck precision, if oyu're using a level one count. If level two, you may use either the above, or number of half decks remaining.

Don