What is the index play logic for the following deviations?

**seriousplayer** · 10-20-2016, 07:06 AM

At True Count of 4 the index deviation say to stand on three card 16 vs 10, 15 vs 10 and True Count +10 for 14 vs 10. I am talking about in a six deck game S17, DAS game. But it seem like most of the time I do that play deviation at the True Count index the dealer have a 20. But when looking at the next card I would of bust when I hit those hands or I would receive a low card that would not beat the dealer's hand total. Because of this I am confused as to why I would stand on those hands. I do have situations where I make those index deviations at the index or greater the dealer have a stiff hand and busted.

**DSchles** · 10-20-2016, 09:50 AM

There are different ways to answer you, but the simplest one is: when you stand, you will win the hand more frequently than if you hit. Period. Part of the reason that is true is that your risk of breaking is too great at the higher counts. If you break, you're done. You have to remain in the hand to be able to win it.

Although you state, "most of the time the dealer has a 20," that is just selective memory and isn't true. 50% of the cards remaining are not tens! It just seems that way to you. It may be that 20 is the most frequent final total with a dealer 10 up (a plurality), but 20 is not a majority.

And so, you stand. :-)

Don

**seriousplayer** · 10-22-2016, 08:24 AM

How will an advance count help improve decisions with three card 16 vs 10, 15 vs 10 and 14 vs 10 when know the next card is a bust card after it was dealt out.

**ZenMaster_Flash** · 10-22-2016, 08:56 AM

Originally Posted by seriousplayer

"How will an advance count help improve decisions with three card
16 vs 10, 15 vs 10 and 14 vs 10 when know the next card is a bust card after it was dealt out."

There are (difficult) ADVANCED systems that alert you to the density of the "baby cards" that
are the only crucial cards available to make your stiff into a good hand.
Furthermore in many occasions with stiff hands and soft doubles the ranks in question may be
"Key Cards" meaning that their relative density, surplus or deficit, will enhance your winning
chances while reducing the dealer's winning chances.

I am trying to understand your statement:

"when know the next card is a bust card after it was dealt out."

It sounds like you imagine that if you hit those hands you simply lose.

**Three** · 10-22-2016, 09:10 AM

Originally Posted by seriousplayer

How will an advance count help improve decisions with three card 16 vs 10, 15 vs 10 and 14 vs 10 when know the next card is a bust card after it was dealt out.

Your question is a bit ridiculous. You can't think of things in retrospect. That is ploppy logic. To answer the question when the retrospect angle is removed:

Originally Posted by seriousplayer

How will an advance count help improve decisions with three card 16 vs 10, 15 vs 10 and 14 vs 10

What are the cards you want to draw in this situation? Generally a 4 or 5 and except for hitting a 16 also a 6. If the count counts 4 and 5 as more important low cards (higher tagged low cards) the decision to hit will be based on better information. The strength of a count doesn't determine whether it is strong for certain plays. The correlation of the count to the playing matchup EoR's does that. Every count will have certain matchups that it plays strong for and others it is weak for. So for the matchups you have chosen counting the 4 and 5 as twice the tags for the other low cards would help the group of matchups as a whole the most. Remember when you hit you want to make a strong hand that can beat the strong hand the dealer will most likely end up with if you don't bust.

**seriousplayer** · 10-22-2016, 09:24 AM

Originally Posted by Tthree

Your question is a bit ridiculous. You can't think of things in retrospect. That is ploppy logic. To answer the question when the retrospect angle is removed:

What are the cards you want to draw in this situation? Generally a 4 or 5 and except for hitting a 16 also a 6. If the count counts 4 and 5 as more important low cards (higher tagged low cards) the decision to hit will be based on better information. The strength of a count doesn't determine whether it is strong for certain plays. The correlation of the count to the playing matchup EoR's does that. Every count will have certain matchups that it plays strong for and others it is weak for. So for the matchups you have chosen counting the 4 and 5 as twice the tags for the other low cards would help the group of matchups as a whole the most. Remember when you hit you want to make a strong hand that can beat the strong hand the dealer will most likely end up with if you don't bust.

OK what is the expected value of each hand (16 vs 10, 15 vs 10, 14 vs 10)using Hi-Opt 2 compare to the expected value of Hi-lo?

I am expecting not to be much. Maybe .1 difference at best I am guessing.

**seriousplayer** · 10-22-2016, 07:44 PM

Originally Posted by seriousplayer

OK what is the expected value of each hand (16 vs 10, 15 vs 10, 14 vs 10)using Hi-Opt 2 compare to the expected value of Hi-lo?

I am expecting not to be much. Maybe .1 difference at best I am guessing.

Out of curiosity I did my own simulation for the expected value of 16 vs 10, 15 vs 10, 14 vs 10 using Hi-OPT 2 comparing the expected value of Hi-lo. As expected the EV gain for an advanced count for 16 vs 10 and 15 vs 10 is only .00044 and .003931, respectively. Not much of a gain.

Hi-opt 2

16 vs 10 Stand at TC >= 0 the EV is -.270091
15 vs 10 Stand at TC >= 6 the EV is -.275157
14 vs 10 Stand at TC >= 14 the EV is -.283972

Hi-lo

16 vs 10 Stand at TC >= 0 the EV is -.270531
15 vs 10 Stand at TC >= 4 the EV is -.279088
14 vs 10 Hit not deviation for Hi-lo.

Difference

16 vs 10 difference is .00044
15 vs 10 difference is .003931

**Three** · 10-22-2016, 08:17 PM

Originally Posted by seriousplayer

Hi-opt 2

16 vs 10 Stand at TC >= 0 the EV is -.270091
15 vs 10 Stand at TC >= 6 the EV is -.275157
14 vs 10 Stand at TC >= 14 the EV is -.283972

Hi-lo

16 vs 10 Stand at TC >= 0 the EV is -.270531
15 vs 10 Stand at TC >= 4 the EV is -.279088
15 vs 10 Hit not deviation for Hi-lo.

Difference

16 vs 10 difference is .00044
15 vs 10 difference is .003931

I think you meant 14vT nota second 15vT under Hilo.
So Hilo always hits 14vT. The EV for that is -0.466307 (difference of 0.182335) as is indicated by the link below:
http://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/1/

Your EV's are way off. Look at the hilo EV's per matchup for each TC:
https://www.card-counting.com/cvcxonlineviewer3.htm
15vT never has an EV higher than -0.42 at any TC between -6 and +14 inclusive for hilo whether you hit or stand yet you state an EV for Hilo of -.279088 which is considerably higher EV. Either you aren't saying what you mean or you messed things up pretty bad.

**seriousplayer** · 10-22-2016, 08:28 PM

Originally Posted by Tthree

I think you meant 14vT nota second 15vT under Hilo.
So Hilo always hits 14vT. The EV for that is -0.466307 (difference of 0.182335) as is indicated by the link below:
http://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/1/

Your EV's are way off. Look at the hilo EV's per matchup for each TC:
https://www.card-counting.com/cvcxonlineviewer3.htm
15vT never has an EV higher than -0.42 at any TC between -6 and +14 inclusive for hilo whether you hit or stand yet you state an EV for Hilo of -.279088 which is considerably higher EV. Either you aren't saying what you mean or you messed things up pretty bad.

My EV is for the index plays which I generate from CVDATA using RA indices. Attached them as an image.

**Three** · 10-22-2016, 08:48 PM

If they are right you would never surrender any of these hands because you need an EV lower than -0.5 to make surrender a better play. 16vT which is a basic strategy surrender never has an EV worse than -0.33 for any TC according to your charts.

**seriousplayer** · 10-22-2016, 08:50 PM

Originally Posted by Tthree

If they are right you would never surrender any of these hands because you need an EV lower than -0.5 to make surrender a better play. 16vT which is a basic strategy surrender never has an EV worse than -0.33 for any TC according to your charts.

You can't surrender because it is a three or more card total.

**Three** · 10-22-2016, 08:58 PM

Originally Posted by seriousplayer

You can't surrender because it is a three card total.

I think you missed my point. It is a hand you would normally surrender based on its EV but your EV's in your charts never come close to the surrender threshold at any TC. Obviously your EV's are wrong. There is never much gained from these deviations using hilo. I doubt there is much gained using Hiopt2. Of course that is for flat betting. We ramp our bets and when the rare deviation occurs for 15vT we have max bet out. That makes the gain per use more significant than they are for a flat bettor due to the size of the bets when the deviation is made compared to the size of the bets when the deviation is not made. Bet size frequency works in an opposing fashion.

**seriousplayer** · 10-22-2016, 09:21 PM

Originally Posted by Tthree

I think you missed my point. It is a hand you would normally surrender based on its EV but your EV's in your charts never come close to the surrender threshold at any TC. Obviously your EV's are wrong. There is never much gained from these deviations using hilo. I doubt there is much gained using Hiopt2. Of course that is for flat betting. We ramp our bets and when the rare deviation occurs for 15vT we have max bet out. That makes the gain per use more significant than they are for a flat bettor due to the size of the bets when the deviation is made compared to the size of the bets when the deviation is not made. Bet size frequency works in an opposing fashion.

Ok if my simulations are wrong that I invite someone in this forum to check them.