I was referred to FELT count in another thread and started reading up on it. It appears to be more powerful than HiLo but everyone mentions it with 6 deck games. How does FELT perform in DD games and if you intend to mostly play DD games, are there any significant advantages to moving from H-1LO with I-18 ? Pros and cons?
"Don, I read somewhere that you jumped from Hi Lo after your first year some 30-plus years ago and added some indexes to the Ill 18 and never looked back."
Close, but chronology isn't quite right. I learned Hi-Lo about 40 years ago, in 1976. And yes, about a year later I switched to the RPC, but there was no such thing as the I18 then; the guy who invented that didn't get around to it until 1986 (!), so I learned a good 150 indices or so because there was no one to tell me that I didn't need to. :-)
Don
Still confused. Too old to figure it all out. My sense is that the answer to my question about FELT being significantly better than H1Lo in DD games is "Yes". If this is true, then I do not use I-18 with the FELT count. Norms book seems to suggest that there are fewer deviations from Bascic Strategy for the FELT count. Is this true?
A long time ago, before I was ready, I purchased BJ3 for $24.99 and since I was basically playing one type of game, and knew too little, the book was hard for me to follow. I used it but one day I left it in a motel but the motel owner claimed he never found it. I need to get BJ3 again and will do so if I can find it at a decent price.
In the great book, these are what I found. Is this what you are referring to? I plan on taking a break starting this weekend and start learning FELT.
Playing
True-counted strategies like FELT can more accurately determine playing variations. The fact that FELT is a level II strategy also improves accuracy. But to take advantage of this increased accuracy, playing indexes should be introduced. An index is the count at which we deviate from the normal Basic Strategy. There are two groups of indexes:
Group 1 (0) Surrender Double Stand 15v10 9v2 16vT 15vA 11vA 13v2 12v4 12v5 12v6
Group 2 (+6) Surrender Double Stand 15v9 9v7 15v10 14v10 8v5 12v2 8v6 12v3
Based on a 16.2% increase in win rate for full indices versus I18 and Fab4 to full indices for Hiopt2, how much extra did 16% of your winnings over the 39 years since you learned all the indices add up to? Do you think that dollar gain, which should be massive by now, was worth the day or so it took to learn all 150 indices? Granted RPC is an ace reckoned count so the gain would be less so perhaps you can say what the gain was and how much that added up to over your career. Would you gladly give all those profits back so you didn't have to spend the day or so it took to memorize the extra 130 indices? Hilo has a 10.1% increase in win rate for memorizing all the indices over I18 and Fab4. I expect RPC to be between Hilo's 10.1% increase in win rate and Hiopt2/ASC's 16.2% increase in win rate.Originally Posted by DSchles
BC is a relative comparison not an absolute. The amount of the difference isn't quantified by the difference in BC. You only show one to be better than the other concerning the correlation of count tags to betting EoR's. You are confusing betting correlation with betting accuracy. Betting accuracy is determined by the width of the bell curve of actual advantage or even better actual kelly bet for a deck composition for each betting bin. Most systems define betting bin by TC. If the bell curve is tight like in HIOPT2/ASC you are betting far more accurately than if the bell curve is wide like with Hilo. The differences in BC are trivial between the 2 but with more accurate betting you can bet more at the same risk of ruin because the difference between your advantage estimate for the entire betting bin and the actual advantage determined by the actual deck composition when each specific bet is made tends to be less. A way to understand it is perfect betting would bet every hand by the exact deck compositions advantage and variance. A counting system averages groups of deck compositions together and bets them all the same based on the groups average advantage and variance. In a balanced linear system these are usually TC's or TC groups. Each system makes its own built in betting errors when compared to the optimal bet based on the specific deck composition. The tighter the bell curve of actual advantage is around a betting bins advantage estimate the less severe and possibly less frequent the built in betting errors. Betting accuracy relates to this and can be seen in the optimal ramp each system bets using the same BR, RoR, spread etc. Don defined a similar idea as SCORE with is inversely proportional to n0.
You still speak in terms of BC and PE, an out-of-date concept. What matters is SCORE, and how much more per hour one approach earns in relation to the other.
"Sessions" are defined in different ways by different players. If a session is an hour, then anyone claiming to win 80%-90% of his sessions is simply lying. No reasonable definition of "session" would have you winning more than, say, 60% of them.
Don
thanks Moses. I had two good sessions after some 10 disastrous sessions when I was thinking of changing to FELT. I don't get to play BJ for a week, will read Norm's book and figure out whether I should or should not change counts. I still don't know how much of a difference it will make
He told me that about 1 of my complex linear ideas where you add an optimal multiple of the balanced ace side count to get a combined betting count rather than adjusting the main count by a straight ace side count adjustment. Then he saw what that .005 increase in BC actually did to sim results. BC is a relative measure. BC can't be used to quantify differences.
i will tell you this Zee,it is gonna take quite a bit more work for a bit of gain. I am learning FELT for sp21 as well . That's reason for the switch ,otherwise i would have stay with HiLo. I would just keep track of any 5s came out on the first 2 rounds ,if not ,don't ramp your bet so fast . After the first 12-15 cards just play it as normal Hi Lo. You can make up for its slight lost of power by Wonging out ,Play a bit longer or spread a bit higher ,play a bit faster(more important). When you do the switch you will have a good 200-300 hours of down time which is also a price to pay.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks