See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 21

Thread: Ace side w/HiLo?

  1. #1


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Ace side w/HiLo?

    How can I use this information to better help my game? ! I can keep track of the aces fine but how do I now use this information for insurance and betting! Thanks!!

  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
    Useful for insurance, the Ace is already figured into your betting and High-Low has pretty high betting correlation as it is. It may be useful for a few play deviations if you have multi-parameter indexes but if you're going to go to the effort of an Ace side count you'd be better off using a count designed for that.

  3. #3


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    What about just insurance playing? How would use the information? If I insure +3 regular way, what about now knowing how many ace come out?

  4. #4
    Senior Member bigplayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    1,807


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    If you don't know how to use the info why are you worried about it? There are multi-parameter tables which tell you how to handle excess or deficient Aces for certain decisions.

  5. #5


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    I agree with big player. There's no sense in counting the ace and then side counting it as well. I'm sure you'd get more gain from using an ace-neutral count, or side-counting another card with an ace-rendered count.
    The Cash Cow.

  6. #6


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by moo321 View Post
    I agree with big player. There's no sense in counting the ace and then side counting it as well. I'm sure you'd get more gain from using an ace-neutral count, or side-counting another card with an ace-rendered count.
    If you use Hi-Lo and can side count one card, better side count 7. It is useful information when you have 12, 13 or 14.

  7. #7


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    i like that side count 7, as insurance decision comes up less often . Don s said for every excess ace add +2 to the rc ,then convert and use the info for better insurance decision. i wouldn't bother using that for 6 decks though(lots of effort for minimal gain)
    Last edited by stopgambling; 12-07-2014 at 03:32 PM.

  8. #8
    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 stopgambling View Post
    Don s said for every excess ace add
    Each excess ace SEEN add

  9. #9
    Senior Member Nikky_Flash's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    2nd Level
    Posts
    609


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    if using a side count for 7 /guessing i would put back the value seen (I use felt) when hitting 12, 13 and 14 , and a decision change on 12 vs 4-6 ? how would the decision change work ? any pointers ? thanks
    Last edited by Nikky_Flash; 12-08-2014 at 01:52 PM.

  10. #10


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Ace side count in Hi/Lo is mostly only useful in handheld games, and I have found that there are so few aces in handheld games that it is hard NOT to keep track of them. So it is kind of a mute point. With that said I'm not a big fan of multi-parameter counts. There is very little gain for the much more work. Multi-parameter counters will have you believe that what they are doing is so super better, but I've always found that to just be an elitist attitude that doesn't stand up to the math.

  11. #11
    Senior Member Nikky_Flash's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    2nd Level
    Posts
    609


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by LVBJ View Post
    Ace side count in Hi/Lo is mostly only useful in handheld games, and I have found that there are so few aces in handheld games that it is hard NOT to keep track of them. So it is kind of a mute point. With that said I'm not a big fan of multi-parameter counts. There is very little gain for the much more work. Multi-parameter counters will have you believe that what they are doing is so super better, but I've always found that to just be an elitist attitude that doesn't stand up to the math.
    cool... I saw your post on the other thread in a similar "keep it simple + get the money " fashion ... makes sense ...thanks

  12. #12
    Senior Member Tarzan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Atlantic City
    Posts
    1,013


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Using Hi-Lo the insurance bet is often horribly inaccurate even with an Ace side count or factoring in Aces. Sure, it's a little help, add deficit/subtract surplus Aces but what you are doing is taking into account these four cards per deck and ignoring 12 others per deck. This inaccuracy is due to the basic fundamentals of insurance betting, the number of {T} by volume compared to all other cards in the deck other than {T}. With insurance betting an (A) is the same as a (7) is the same as a (2) is the same as a (5). You are factoring in the (A) but ignoring (7-9) completely, which just happen to be "cards other than (T)". This is to say that if you had TC+3 or +4 and took insurance confidently having factored in those two surplus (A) you could still be way off the mark due to a surplus of (7-9) in the remainder of the deck. By the same token when using HI-Lo you could have a TC+1 and due to deficit (7-9) in the remainder the deck composition would warrant taking the insurance. By adding (7-9) you dilute the concentration of {T} by volume and by taking away (7-9) you increase the concentration of {T} by volume.

    Let's look at an example of this and see how this stands up to the math. There is one deck remaining, exactly 52 cards. Eight more {2-5} are in the discard than {6-9}, four more {T} are in the discard than {6-9}, there are four (A) in the remainder.

    Hi-Lo player / Elitist Asshole / House edge on insurance bet
    TC+5, take insurance / Insurance Count 0, no insurance / 7.7%

    Another example off in the opposite direction as follows:
    One deck remains, exactly 52 cards. Two more {T} are in the discard than {2-5}, ten more {6-9} are in the discard than {2-5}, four (A) in the remainder of the deck.

    Hi-Lo player / Elitist Asshole / House Edge on insurance bet
    TC0, no insurance / IC+6, take insurance / -3.84%

    These calculations assume an even distribution within the {6-9} grouping, meaning that in the first example one (6) has been played and in the second example two (6) have been played to come up with the Hi-Lo players TC. Perfect insurance betting means factoring in all cards other than {T}. Factoring in (A) to your insurance bet is a slight help but by no means accurate if you are completely ignoring the (7-9). Surplus (7-9) dilute the {T} in the remainder and deficit (7-9) further concentrate the {T} in the remainder. I employ perfect insurance betting without a separate Insurance Count with a simple formula derived from my main count. As soon as I see an (A) upcard I immediately do a separate calculation for the insurance count using the information provided by my running count.

    In the first example the Hi-Lo player is taking insurance when the house edge is 7.7% on the insurance bet and in the second example the Hi-Lo player is not taking the insurance when there is a 3.84% player edge on the insurance bet. You don't have to do what I do to have perfect insurance betting correlation though. James Grosjean suggests using a separate insurance count in addition to whatever count you use in Beyond Counting (in the part where he hasn't gone beyond counting yet) and lays out a simple insurance count. If this is a hassle and you have a partner, you could train them to do the insurance count while you focus on your count, I would think.
    Last edited by Tarzan; 12-17-2014 at 09:37 AM.

  13. #13
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    883


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarzan View Post

    Let's look at an example of this and see how this stands up to the math. There is one deck remaining, exactly 52 cards. Eight more {2-5} are in the discard than {6-9}, four more {T} are in the discard than {6-9}, there are four (A) in the remainder.

    Hi-Lo player / Elitist Asshole / House edge on insurance bet
    TC+5, take insurance / Insurance Count 0, no insurance / 7.7%

    Another example off in the opposite direction as follows:
    One deck remains, exactly 52 cards. Two more {T} are in the discard than {2-5}, ten more {6-9} are in the discard than {2-5}, four (A) in the remainder of the deck.

    Hi-Lo player / Elitist Asshole / House Edge on insurance bet
    TC0, no insurance / IC+6, take insurance / -3.84%

    These calculations assume an even distribution within the {6-9} grouping, meaning that in the first example one (6) has been played and in the second example two (6) have been played to come up with the Hi-Lo players TC. Perfect insurance betting means factoring in all cards other than {T}. Factoring in (A) to your insurance bet is a slight help but by no means accurate if you are completely ignoring the (7-9). Surplus (7-9) dilute the {T} in the remainder and deficit (7-9) further concentrate the {T} in the remainder. I employ perfect insurance betting without a separate Insurance Count with a simple formula derived from my main count. As soon as I see an (A) upcard I immediately do a separate calculation for the insurance count using the information provided by my running count.

    In the first example the Hi-Lo player is taking insurance when the house edge is 7.7% on the insurance bet and in the second example the Hi-Lo player is not taking the insurance when there is a 3.84% player edge on the insurance bet. You don't have to do what I do to have perfect insurance betting correlation though. James Grosjean suggests using a separate insurance count in addition to whatever count you use in Beyond Counting (in the part where he hasn't gone beyond counting yet) and lays out a simple insurance count. If this is a hassle and you have a partner, you could train them to do the insurance count while you focus on your count, I would think.
    I did an experiment at the house today where I used a single deck of cards with the 2 examples and the discard information you provided above. I took the recommended cards out of the deck and put them in a fake discard tray. Since there were 4 aces remaining in the deck I kept the dealer up card as the constant controlled variable, an ACE.

    In the first experiment I simulated and dealt out 2 player hands with the dealer hand showing the Ace (the constant). Only 10 total hands per example, No washing of the deck was done, each separate deal consisted of about 7 riffle shuffles with several cuts, a few more riffles and then a final cut on the deck to get randomization of the deck, player cards and the dealer hole card were plugged back into the deck at random spots after checking for the dealer Blackjack before the next deal.

    *Eight more {2-5} are in the discard than {6-9}, four more {T} are in the discard than {6-9}, there are four (A) in the remainder.

    The dealer hole card at 2 player hands with this scenario
    1. 8
    2. A
    3. BJ
    4. 9
    5. BJ
    6. 4
    7. A
    8. 2
    9. BJ
    10. 5

    * Two more {T} are in the discard than {2-5}, ten more {6-9} are in the discard than {2-5}, four (A) in the remainder of the deck.

    The dealer hole card at 2 player hands with this scenario

    1. BJ
    2. BJ
    3. BJ
    4. 6
    5. 3
    6. 5
    7. A
    8. BJ
    9. 2
    10. 2

    In the second experiment with only 1 player hand (heads up), only 10 hands per with the dealer ACE as the constant.

    *Eight more {2-5} are in the discard than {6-9}, four more {T} are in the discard than {6-9}, there are four (A) in the remainder.

    Dealer hole card results with 1 player hand

    1. 6
    2. BJ
    3. 7
    4. BJ
    5. 7
    6. BJ
    7. 4
    8. A
    9. 4
    10. 7

    * Two more {T} are in the discard than {2-5}, ten more {6-9} are in the discard than {2-5}, four (A) in the remainder of the deck.

    Dealer hole card results with 1 player hand

    1. 4
    2. 9
    3. 3
    4. 3
    5. BJ
    6. 5
    7. BJ
    8. 6
    9. 5
    10. BJ

    Out of 40 total hands even though it is short-term the method of:
    One deck remains, exactly 52 cards. Two more {T} are in the discard than {2-5}, ten more {6-9} are in the discard than {2-5}, four (A) in the remainder of the deck.
    Hi-Lo player / Elitist Asshole / House Edge on insurance bet
    TC0, no insurance / IC+6, take insurance / -3.84%


    At 2 player hands produced 1 more BJ. The results I got for heads up play against a dealer Ace for both sets of rules was even, even though 40 hands may not be enough hands to show a definitive result.
    Last edited by Blitzkrieg; 12-17-2014 at 12:38 PM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. HiLo and betting
    By blackjacktim in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 03-02-2014, 05:17 PM
  2. HILO COUNTING VS HILO ll with ACE sidecounting
    By chang04133 in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-06-2013, 08:59 AM
  3. V-man: What is HiLo Lite?
    By V-man in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-29-2003, 03:21 PM
  4. nerodog: HiLo w/ Ace Side Count for SD
    By nerodog in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-26-2002, 03:30 PM
  5. Artguy: Does KO ko HiLo
    By Artguy in forum Main Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-20-2002, 07:19 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.