Different index numbers

[blueman]

I first signed up with BJA, (sorry if it's bad to use that name on this site, let me know if other training sites should not be talked about on other training sites, to me it seems fine)

Ok, so I know there has been threads about this, but I never really remember a clear cut answer. Why are some numbers different in Wong's book than in the BJA strategy? It's math, there should be only one answer...

8 v 6, 5, 4 bja says double @2,4,6
Wong says to double @1,3,5
Which is correct?

This is for Hi Lo.

99 v 7 split @6 says wong. Correct?

99 v A split @2 (s17) @3 (h17) says wong. Correct?

Stand, instead of split, 88 v 10 @6 says wong. Correct? (Obv unless you can surrender)

[ZenMaster_Flash]

99 v 7 split @6 says wong. Correct?

+6 Hi-Lo looks way too high (to me).

99 v A split @2 (s17) @3 (h17) says wong. Correct?

These look (to me) to be low (by one) for both.

Stand, instead of split, 88 v 10 @6 says wong. Correct?

YES.

Question for Blueman: Are you Risk Averse ?

Risk-Aversion comes into play with doubles, and to a lesser degree, splits.

[Three]

BJA usually refers to DonS's book "Blackjack Attack". Please only use it for that to avoid confusion.

Indices depend on your method of TC conversion. I believe Wong used truncating. That makes the TC 0 bin twice as large as any other in terms of range, -0.999999 to +0.999999. BJA, DonS's book does not use truncating for Hilo indices. What method is used by BJ Apprentice?

[blueman]

99 v 7 split @6 says wong. Correct?

+6 Hi-Lo looks way too high (to me).

99 v A split @2 (s17) @3 (h17) says wong. Correct?

These look (to me) to be low (by one) for both.

Stand, instead of split, 88 v 10 @6 says wong. Correct?

YES.

Question for Blueman: Are you Risk Averse ?

Risk-Aversion comes into play with doubles, and to a lesser degree, splits.

So you would split 9s v 7 at a lower true count? And split 9s v A at a higher count? (Than stated above)

If the situations becomes positive ev, as soon as it becomes available I'm taking it. Higher risk means higher rewards. I am not held back by bankrolls restrictions. I play with 0% ROR.*

As far as true count goes, I calculate to what the true count really is; running +10 out of 3 decks is a true count of 3.3 to me.

[Three]

As far as true count goes, I calculate to what the true count really is; running +10 out of 3 decks is a true count of 3.3 to me.

If indices are derived for rounding TC +2.5 is TC +3 for index play purposes assuming indices are integer indices. The TC +3 bin is TC +2.5 to 3.49999. You need to know the method of deriving the TC for your indices and use the same method when deriving your TC including rounding method (Truncating, flooring or rounding). If you don't you decisions will be inaccurate.

[Freightman]

So you would split 9s v 7 at a lower true count? And split 9s v A at a higher count? (Than stated above)

If the situations becomes positive ev, as soon as it becomes available I'm taking it. Higher risk means higher rewards. I am not held back by bankrolls restrictions. I play with 0% ROR.*

As far as true count goes, I calculate to what the true count really is; running +10 out of 3 decks is a true count of 3.3 to me.

Blueballs
You've declared your extraordinary depth, experience, and zeal for hi stakes play. It would behoove you to review Professional Blackjack by Stanford Wong. The hi Lo index tables start somewhere around page 250. Studying and learning these tables would add depth to your self declared extraordinary Arsenal.

[Freightman]

Blueballs
You've declared your extraordinary depth, experience, and zeal for hi stakes play. It would behoove you to review Professional Blackjack by Stanford Wong. The hi Lo index tables start somewhere around page 250. Studying and learning these tables would add depth to your self declared extraordinary Arsenal.

Sorry about the blue balls reference - something to do with auto correct?

[Bodarc]

Sorry about the blue balls reference - something to do with auto correct?

I like a quick thinker!

[Freightman]

I like a quick thinker!

Reminds me of this book - 90 days in the saddle - written by - sure you can figure it out

[Freightman]

Hmmm. Freighter's word puzzle jokes are difficult. Is there a time limit on this answer? Like in Jeopardy? Of course, there is that scene in Blazing Saddles!

And, for my 3rd unhelpful post in this thread - simply assuming, of course, the rank of Colonel followed by the faux pas above.

[ZenMaster_Flash]

.
.
.
HINT: "9 Days in the Saddle"

Think about the effect on your derriere.

[Freightman]

.
.
.
HINT: "9 Days in the Saddle"

Think about the effect on your derriere.

Alright, alright - the answer is Colonel Blueballs

[ZenMaster_Flash]

.
.

Try Again

Here is a hint. It is a rhyming pun, e.g.

The Sadistic Russian Assassin ... "I KutChaKokoff"