See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 38

Thread: Illustrious 18 indicies

  1. #1


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Illustrious 18 indicies

    Newbie here. I've been at this a couple months now, haven't played at all, just reading and studying. My main source material is/was Professional Blackjack. When I was making flashcards for the Illustrious 18, I pulled the indices from wizards of vegas. I've now got my copy of CVBJ and I was working on some of the flashcard drills. I now notice that the wizards of vegas and Professional Blackjack vary on a couple of the indices in the Illustrious 18, namely 12 v 5, 12 v 6, 13 v 2, and 13 v 3. They are all off by one from each other. I imagine the difference is very slight, but being new and wanting to do things as well as I can to start, which one of these sets of indices should I be using? Thanks for the help in advance.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Tarzan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Atlantic City
    Posts
    1,013


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Mine are
    12vs5,-1H
    12vs6,-1H
    13vs2,-2H
    13vs3,-3H
    In that ballpark is correct. Hi-Lo doesn't count critical key cards (7-9) for these hands so in the ballpark is the correct term. Pick one and go for it, you'll be close enough I would guess. They are all negative expectation hands in which you'd have a minimum bet out there when considering deviating from basic strategy anyway.

    I forgot to add that those are for S17.
    Last edited by Tarzan; 01-26-2016 at 09:41 PM.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Bodarc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    136 miles North of West
    Posts
    1,949


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Play within your bankroll, pick your games with care and learn everything you can about the game. The winning will come. It has to. It's in the cards. -- Bryce Carlson

  4. #4


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarzan View Post
    They are all negative expectation hands in which you'd have a minimum bet out there when considering deviating from basic strategy anyway.
    Usually, yes. If you're playing a deeply-enough dealt game, the TC can (and will) swing pretty hard at the end of the shoe. Not that the specific scenario shows up frequently, but.....I know I've saved more than a couple dollars by having a max bet out, felt getting plastered with paint, switching from an automatically waving off a 12v4 (or some other "automatic" hand with a max bet out), to hitting (or not doubling an automatic double).
    "Everyone wants to be rich, but nobody wants to work for it." -Ryan Howard [The Office]

  5. #5
    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 RollingStoned View Post
    Usually, yes. If you're playing a deeply-enough dealt game, the TC can (and will) swing pretty hard at the end of the shoe. Not that the specific scenario shows up frequently, but.....I know I've saved more than a couple dollars by having a max bet out, felt getting plastered with paint, switching from an automatically waving off a 12v4 (or some other "automatic" hand with a max bet out), to hitting (or not doubling an automatic double).
    This is a great point. The same sort of disassociation of bet and playing decision can be associated with using an ace neutral count. There are situations you will encounter where you know your betting true count is quite different than your playing TC. You may make a large bet knowing when you do that the playing count is a lot less and maybe even negative compared to the betting count. The converse is true as well, where you make small bets with a high playing count.

  6. #6


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Chief View Post
    Newbie here. I've been at this a couple months now, haven't played at all, just reading and studying. My main source material is/was Professional Blackjack. When I was making flashcards for the Illustrious 18, I pulled the indices from wizards of vegas. I've now got my copy of CVBJ and I was working on some of the flashcard drills. I now notice that the wizards of vegas and Professional Blackjack vary on a couple of the indices in the Illustrious 18, namely 12 v 5, 12 v 6, 13 v 2, and 13 v 3. They are all off by one from each other. I imagine the difference is very slight, but being new and wanting to do things as well as I can to start, which one of these sets of indices should I be using? Thanks for the help in advance.
    Chief, you can use either without fear of loss. You can actually mix and match from both lists to get the most easily memorized list. The "right" index for a play is hard to pin down, and a difference of 1 from each other won't have an effect out on the battlefield.
    Last edited by First Normal Form; 01-26-2016 at 08:29 AM. Reason: Loss of attitude
    Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.

  7. #7


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Sorry for all the answers you got below, none of which seem particularly helpful. The correct indices can be found on p. 213 of BJA3, for all numbers of decks and for S17 and H17. If you don't have access, please let me know.

    And, please don't get confused by all of the "fancy" answers. People here have a tendency not to answer the question being asked, but rather to try to show you how much they know about a topic you didn't ask about!

    The p. 213 numbers are floored. In the original study, Wong's indices were used, and they were rounded (or truncated -- I forget which), which caused some values to be "off" by one, for some of the negative values.

    Don

  8. #8
    Senior Member BigJer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    In your soul.
    Posts
    1,528


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    In the original study, Wong's indices were used, and they were rounded (or truncated -- I forget which), which caused some values to be "off" by one, for some of the negative values.

    Don
    Don,

    I think Wong says that his values are truncated: PBJ p.37, first full paragraph.
    My Ability in Blackjack is a Gift from God!!

  9. #9
    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 moses View Post
    This could be because not everything remains in correlation to SCORE from a Sim standpoint. For instance, 16 vs 9 is part of the Ill 18. However, always hitting or standing at plus 2,3,4, index doesn't change SCORE much in either direction. However, hitting on 13vs4, 14v2,3 at the correct indices generated instead of always standing will improve SCORE considerably.
    I think you are missing Don's point. It is clear Don wants a board with short threads and quick concise answers with few posts. Unfortunately that is rarely the result you get in a forum. Some like to give additional tips or help after they feel the question has been answered adequately (and sometimes before), as I believe posts #2 and 3 did here. Now if what you are looking for is a clear, concise and thorough answer to your question and only your question Don is among the best sources. When he says to read the part of his book it is very detailed and mostly easy to understand (take that with a grain of salt considering the source). If you want other tips that will help you learn and be a better player that are related (and often unrelated) to your question then some of the added comments Don is referring to will be of a great help to you. It would be nice if the first posts did answer the question throughly and accurately. In a perfect world...

  10. #10
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,570


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Tthree View Post
    I think you are missing Don's point.
    No. No I got the point. Don is a brilliant man. But that doesn't necessarily mean the posts leading up to his were made by idiots.

  11. #11
    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 BigJer View Post
    Don,

    I think Wong says that his values are truncated: PBJ p.37, first full paragraph.
    I was about to make the point that it is important to use the same rounding technique used to generate the indices or perhaps better stated to get indices that were generated using the same rounding technique you use. I guess you beat me to it without actually saying it completely, BigJer.

  12. #12


    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    "No. No I got the point. Don is a brilliant man. But that doesn't necessarily mean the posts leading up to his were made by idiots."

    They weren't made by idiots; they were made by people who know a great deal about the game and who, sometimes, simply can't help reminding us of this. If, in every question I ever answered, I quoted the 535 pages of content of my book, people would get bored -- and overwhelmed -- rather quickly. So, I make it a point to answer the question that is asked, without demonstrating to the OP that I am really capable of writing 24 more paragraphs on the subject.

    Yes, a forum should be for the EXCHANGE of ideas. If, after answering an OP's question, there is a request for clarification of the response or for further information, the OP should come back and say so. But, when a question asks why there is a difference of one for some of the I18 indices, it is patently absurd for there to be a DOZEN answers, ranging from a few, short lines, to the usual dissertations. I wish I could get all of you to understand that more isn't always better. You aren't Dickens, and you aren't get paid by the word. Stop taking yourselves so seriously, lighten up, and answer a complete newcomer's question accurately and succinctly.

    This board needs to stop being a catharsis for some of you. You simply show no restraint. Stop making the same points a million times. Answer questions as they are asked. 99.9% of readers who come here just don't care about the advanced concepts that are fostered. They have a place in the Advanced Forum, but they are grossly out of place everywhere else. You need to learn to distinguish between the two. When someone asks what the formula is for the acceleration of a falling body, you don't write five pages on the theory of relativity!!

    Don
    Last edited by DSchles; 01-26-2016 at 02:31 PM.

  13. #13
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,570


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    In the spirit of Don's diatribe to remain conscise and direct. We all need to take a STFU pill until OZ has spoken. Just Kidding.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. War blackjack indicies
    By Blackriver in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-30-2014, 06:43 AM
  2. Robbie: Indicies for beginners
    By Robbie in forum Blackjack Beginners
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-14-2005, 04:54 PM
  3. college kid: does BJ21.com's PBA program do indicies correctly? *NM*
    By college kid in forum Computing for Counters
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-18-2004, 09:53 PM
  4. Newbie: Software for generating indicies
    By Newbie in forum Software & Simulations
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-13-2004, 11:32 PM
  5. Steve Pietro: red 7's indicies?
    By Steve Pietro in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-03-2004, 11:37 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.