How good is your true count

[Freightman]

It's very early morning, I have a raspy throat, and I'm drinking tea with honey. I'm also thinking about a recent post that I found very interesting. That OP lamented the loss of a doubled 19 v 6 at true 11 with dealer scoring a 6 card 21.

OP was playing DD, with, for the sake of argument, exactly 52 cards remaining. So, RC 11=TC 11. He has the cards described above, increasing RC to 13 with 48 unknown cards remaining. Assume hi lo for convenience.

The dd originally started with 40 low cards, 40 high cards and 24 neutral. High cards remaining can range from 13 to 29 cards. Low cards remaining can range anywhere from 0 to 18 cards. Neutral cards can range from 0 to 35 cards, any combination which produces a monster true count, which is clearly deceiving in terms of playability. If you want to visualize the range, start with 13 high, 0 low, and 35 neutral, each increase of 1 in high cards increasing low card count by 1, decreasing neutral cards by 2.

Clearly, neutral density effects play and results. Food for thought - I'll finish my thoughts another time - I'm going back to bed. Oh, would be interested in tarzan t3 commentary.

[Three]

Neutral cards can range from 0 to 35 cards

Typo. You said correctly in the paragraphs opening sentence that you start with24 neutral cards in DD.

If you want to visualize the range, start with 13 high, 0 low, and 35 neutral,

Continuing typo: 19 high, 6 low, and 23 neutral, each increase of 1 in high cards increasing low card count by 1, decreasing neutral cards by 2.

[Three]

2.) Employ Sweet 16. Drop 12vs5,6. Add 13vs4, 14vs2,3.

Why in the world would someone playing DD drop these plays?

3.) Employ Fab 4. If Surrender is not an option, then use the hit/stand index for same. Make sure 14vs10 is included.

You should use a lot more surrender indices than 4. Lowering the variance on your top bets is quite valuable. You would surrender a lot of matchups when the count is in the stratosphere.

3.) Stop worrying. You will lose hands you should win and you will win hands you should've lost.

This is definitely true. You must think like a counter. A counter understands that he will hit his EV in the long run. On the way to the long run you will lose a lot of hands and win a lot of hands. Wins and losses will clump from time to time. Don't worry about losses clumping. Getting the number of properly made bets out when the count calls for it whether you win or lose is what gets you to the long run for the bet size. Winning and losing in the short run is just noise on your way to hitting EV.

[Three]

T3. It's a small trade-off. Everyone can see and most know this is not basic strategy. Few people can or will bother to add. It's not a problem until it's a problem. The latter has far less chance of drawing attention.

The key is point number 4.

4.) The key is finding the bet spread and amount that is profitable enough to keep you wanting to play and within casino tolerance that will allow you to be able to continue play.

They know you are counting but take action against you only if they must or risk getting in trouble with the casino or they don't like you. You act like you are trying to fool them into thinking you aren't counting. The trick is tasty within their comfort zone so as not to take action. That point at which they act varies by casino. Unless you play sweaty Reno single deck these index plays won't be sweated except by casinos you will never last no matter what. Figuring out how to win more with a more tolerated spread that may confuse them (give them a reason to look the other way) about your betting and playing decisions is more important than throwing away money on cover plays.

[Three]

Two points. 4 is far more accepted than 5 or 6. If two guys are playing. One is a counter breaking even. Another is a poppy losing thousands. He believes it's the counter fault for certain plays that are forcing his losing streak. He is wrong of course. But who does the casino eliminate.

Neither one. The casino knows if the ploppy wasn't blaming you he would be blaming the dealer or anything else to avoid the fact that he is a loser. Him blaming you makes the dealers job easier while simply shifty the constant blame that spews from the ploppies mouth whether heads up or with other players.

Could be why people fly halfway across the US only to get flat bet.

How will this make you play hands the way the ploppy wants? Your logic is not contiguous.

Generally speaking, confusing someone that has the authority to stop your play is far more detrimental than play consistency. They don't "have" to figure out what you are doing.

You totally missed the point. They know what you are doing. You aren't going to fool them. You can use expensive cover to allow them the freedom to look the other way or you can play optimally with a system that makes it look like you don't know what you are doing a lot of the time. You might notice in parentheses after confuse them I put (give them a reason to look the other way). This is because the purpose is not to confuse them but rather give them the leeway to look the other way because you are doing things that are costly in their eyes. Most suits could care less if you are a counter. They care a lot if you are counting in a way that will get them in trouble if they don't act. I have found they treat the players that do a lot of extra work to make sure they don't have to act with great respect and tolerance. They know what you are doing but they also know they won't get in trouble for not taking action against you. They respect that you will not threaten their job to get what you came for and treat you with the appropriate lack of response.

[Three]

The "point" which you are missing is playing long term proactive as opposed to short term reactive.

Actually I explained exactly that. I guess you don't get it. They can find you tolerant with optimal play or they can find you tolerant with a weaker system while using costly cover. It is just a matter of how you make them comfortable letting you play. Both work but one lets you win more in a shorter period of time.

[Freightman]

Every small town I ever played in was a good ole boys network from the ploppies to the dealer to the pit. Again, we are still talking DD where 1 to 8 is considered maximum tolerance. Play short sessions, play nice with others, and there is enough money to be made without having to get too fancy.
.

I was playing a 50% cut double deck playing a fairly steady 1x25 to 2x200or 250, when I simply couldn't restrain myself with 2 final hand bets if 2x500. It surprised them since it wasn't expected. I neither expected nor received any repercussions.

[Freightman]

Freighter. You might been running a fever too.
Hope you get to feeling better. Get some damn rest. Those 5 hour work weeks can take a toll. Lol

Could have been 3 hours and 50 minutes this week, but some asshole wanted extra advice, and my work week was extended to 4 hours and 10 minutes. After that gruelling schedule, I went hope and took a nap.

[Freightman]

I get it. But evidently many don't. Someone was fretting over a play that occurs 1 in 27,600 hands.

Spend that time defining your bet spread within casino tolerance. I don't know what that is, as everyone is different. Not my circus. Not my monkey.

But I do know the answers can be defined on CV data. It takes a little work. But then you play with a "here is what I'm doing" as opposed to a "what the hell just happened" approach.

Sometimes, in the scheme of things when sharing a table, we make slightly less than optimal decisions, which, in the long run, don't make a hill of beans worth of difference. Other times, heads up, i simply do what I want. A caveat on the slightly less than optimal play - occurs only on minimum bets. A further caveat - those less than optimal plays are made, or not made, depending on overall rules, and deck pen, and the potential for capturing the difference.

A whale at one store, who normally plays heads up, expressed a desire to play with me, as my perfect play can be relied upon. I don't want to play with this valued whale, where the house bends over backwards to please them. Any arguments or disagreements would be settled in favour of this person. Further, my "perfect" play may not be considered perfect when deviations come into play - and I don't want yo puss them off. Better to resolve an issue before it becomes one. The individuals comments, would lead me to believe that their basic is impeccable.

[Freightman]

Two point Freighter. 1.) You were in a very high positive count for last bet? And how did you know? Experience!
2.) Key words last bet. Had you won both and stayed you may well have drawn attention to yourself.

It was an absolute fucking ace rich monster, capturing 2 snappers on the second last hand, winning and tying one on the last. Actually a pretty tolerant place, starting off with a min $25 after the shuffle.

[Tarzan]

Think of the brass tacks of A,8vs6, Freightman. The index is +1 to double, but you can have a Hi-Lo count +3, +4, and be in the zone to stand with surplus {6-9}. {6-9} removed has the opposite effect. Do you remember when I mentioned to you about "10-0-7 is a lot different than 3-0-0" or words to that effect? By the same token 3-10-0 is a lot different than 3-0-0. Which one of these looks better for doubling A,8vs6 with one deck and four (A) remaining, 3-0-0, 10-0-7, or 3-10-0? Of the three, each with an even distribution within groupings, 10-0-7 is the worst composition, in which you would stand. 3-0-0 you would double. The most favorable deck composition of the three is 3-10-0 for this hand and you would of course double. Sure, it's +1, RA+3, whatever your count determines, but when I get this hand what's going through my mind is not only the index, but also the ratios of groupings to one another, further thoughts such as "Gee, have I seen a lot of (2) come out of the deck? Is there a higher ratio of (6,7) to (8,9) in the remainder?"

What is the TC of my three primary counts depicted? Three different TC's! The lowest of which is of course 10-0-7. If it were 10-0-7-4r @1, the TC is +.6 using my count. The bottom line is that surplus middle cards in the remainder hurt you for this hand and deficit middle cards in the remainder help you for this hand in addition to the impact of low cards to high cards in the remainder.

[Stevie Wonder]

If my question came across as me fretting the hand, then that was mistaken. I'm fully confident it was the right play and fully understand no hand is a gimme. I just seeking out how I could find the outcome percentages if such thing existed.

[Stevie Wonder]

Sorry for the late reply Moses. Post surgery meds have me off my A game lol. Thank you for the breakdown. That was exactly what I was looking for. Greatly appreciate taking the time to help.