Illustrious 18 indicies

[BigJer]

"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

Thank Don.

simply can't help reminding us of this.

Lest I forget:

My ability in blackjack is a gift from God!!

[moses]

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.

Ever listen to golfers talk about all the different ways to hit a little white ball into a hole? OR watch a Fishermans TV show on how to fish? I'm just saying by comparision this is direct and conscise. lol

[Freightman]

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 quickl

Don
You're getting rusty. Think I spotted another goof a week or 2 ago in BJA 3.

[MJGolf]

Actually my version has only 533 enumerated pages, so Don was being MORE concise in his actual book.....................

[Jabberwocky]

Has someone come up with an Illustrious 18 for Spanish 21?

[Gronbog]

If you're using Katarina Walker's HiLo system, it's on page 91 of my copy of her book (2008). Most of those with their own counts have developed indices for them, but I haven't seen any of them limit the number to 18.

[Three]

but I haven't seen any of them limit the number to 18.

My thought as well. I18 is a moot point for SP21. All indices for the count I am most familiar with gains EV quickly after being exceeded with the exception of many soft doubles. This generalization may miss a few oddballs but I can't think of any without parsing through the graphical representation for each matchup and each number of cards that could comprise the hand. I know I have a few more RA indices but they are because of where the decimal index play falls causes the integer index to have little gain for the index's TC.

[Bodarc]

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!!

Amen!!

[moses]

Amen!!

Hold on there Brotha Bodarc. Before the choir goes into a rendition of O Happy Day, a case could be made for the annointed ones being too tight lipped. For instance, we have the Ill 18 and yet 28 listed selections of counts from which to choose.

Now the Ill 18 is a little overstated because the splitting of 10s vs 5,6 definately boosts SCORE but will get you booted somewhere else. For someone practicing with flash cards I don't think suggesting adding 13 vs 4 and 14 vs 2,3 is bad advice and easy to do.

Picking from 28 systems is like the NCAA basketball tourney. Hence, we want just one winner and many of those don't stand a chance of being the best in any game. Considered BC and PE are rendered as virtually useless, setting the qualifying bar at 980 BC along with 550 PE eliminates a good bit of the field. Also, a Level 4 count does make the game rocket science.

So in the spirit of too much vs too little, I'm all for a happy medium and simplicity that works. Then...and only then will Don S have "washed the sins away...O Happy DAAAAy."

[DSchles]

"You're getting rusty. Think I spotted another goof a week or 2 ago in BJA 3."

I'm all ears.

Don

[AndretheGiant]

amen!!

oh happy day

[Freightman]

"You're getting rusty. Think I spotted another goof a week or 2 ago in BJA 3."

I'm all ears.

Don

I'll look for it - not spelling, but grammatics - in Floating advantage section, if Im correct.

[Chief]

Well, I seem to have stirred up some pent up conversation... Thanks everyone for info. Hopefully whatever question two is doesn't cause quite as much controversy.