See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Results 1 to 13 of 20

Thread: True Edge vs. True Count

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Thanks ZenMaster_Flash. I did see this posting, but my book of BBIBJ (copyright 2005) has tables that don't seem consistent with the tables he gives here (after multiplying the indices by 4). I think I'm missing a version!

  2. #2
    Senior Member bigplayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    1,807


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by spassky962000 View Post
    Thanks ZenMaster_Flash. I did see this posting, but my book of BBIBJ (copyright 2005) has tables that don't seem consistent with the tables he gives here (after multiplying the indices by 4). I think I'm missing a version!
    You should generate your own indexes if you have CV-Data, if you'll private message me with your e-mail address I'll send you a complete set from +15 to -10 using Count Per Deck for Zen (Multiple Deck) including indexes for both late and early surrender. Just multiplying the True Edge indexes by 4 is not going to be very accurate.

  3. #3


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Thanks again, bigplayer. Appreciate your help. I don't have CV-Data, just CV-Blackjack. I was unable to private message you. I think it is because I am still a "new member". I'll try again at some point in the future.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by spassky962000 View Post
    Thanks ZenMaster_Flash. I did see this posting, but my book of BBIBJ (copyright 2005) has tables that don't seem consistent with the tables he gives here (after multiplying the indices by 4). I think I'm missing a version!
    You are not working the problem the right way. Dividing the indices by 4 to get the quarter deck estimate fractional indices will show you why the 1/4 deck is weak without the fractional indices. With the approach you took (multiplying the 1/4 deck by 4) you are simply taking the error slot for integer indices in 1/4 deck and forcing it to show up in full deck estimates. By working the problem the other way and getting fractional indices you can see why 1/4 deck has such poor performance by comparison. That doesn't even factor in the deck estimation accuracy issues which may or may not factor in depending on your skill level for 1/4 deck estimates.

  5. #5


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Thank you Tthree! That makes sense, since I definitely am not that good at estimating the remaining number of decks.

Similar Threads

  1. Norm Wattenberger: True Count Compression and True Edge
    By Norm Wattenberger in forum Main Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-02-2005, 10:38 AM
  2. poboy: hi-lo lite, true edge and TC
    By poboy in forum Blackjack Beginners
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-11-2005, 04:49 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.