See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 13 of 16 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 157

Thread: Question re: 6-5 double deck

  1. #121


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Don and Gronbog, thanks for clarifying about ASC. I didn't think of that -- but that makes sense, you'd be dividing by decks remaining twice (using the method I wrote before).


    Tthree, the thing is, EITS or a PB (if they suspect you of counting), are NOT going to be comparing your play to HILO perfect play. They'll be looking to see if you raise/decrease your bet relative to the count -- not ramping with 100% correlation. Remember, they don't know what your CVCX sim showed, all they know is what you're betting and what the HILO count is. They don't care if you're overbetting your desired ramp or underbetting it from one round to the next. Your ramp might say to bet $200 at TC 4 and $150 at TC 3. If the TC is 4 and you bet $150 and next round it drops to TC 3 and you bet $200 -- all the EITS & PB is going to see is you're still increasing your bet with a + count.

    And it's silly to speculate how a HILO or HO2 counter would play, as if they are both playing side by side at the same table (why are you even playing with other people you know are counting...? NVM). HILO and HO2 are highly correlated.


    There is without a doubt (IMO) HO2 w/ ASC is superior to HILO, at least on paper. Yes, it's going to have a lower N0, higher SCORE, higher EV, etc. etc. I don't think anybody is arguing against that. It's the "everything else" that just isn't true.

    I'll upload a few graphs (10 maybe?) to show HILO vs HO2 w/ASC bet ramp side by side. Not sure how long it'll take. I'd rather not take a screen-shot, crop out the rest of my computer screen, upload to an image hosting service, then paste link here. If anyone has an easier solution, let me know.
    "Everyone wants to be rich, but nobody wants to work for it." -Ryan Howard [The Office]

  2. #122


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    "Everyone wants to be rich, but nobody wants to work for it." -Ryan Howard [The Office]

  3. #123


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    2mds3me.jpg6
    2q36qgm.jpg7
    2w2orqq.jpg8
    2pyqhye.jpg9
    29ze6me.jpg10

    Red is HO2 w/ ASC
    Blue is HILO
    "Everyone wants to be rich, but nobody wants to work for it." -Ryan Howard [The Office]

  4. #124


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by rollingstoned View Post
    red is ho2 w/ asc
    blue is hilo
    b u n k u m


  5. #125
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,245


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    You don't give any way to interpret those results. I don't know what the results represent or even which color represents which count. Why don't you explain what we are looking at.

    You still act like you are trying to fool the casino into thinking you aren't counting. They act because they must or their job is threatened. The trick is to make them comfortable not acting even though they suspect you aren't counting. When you use the system they are trained to catch counters with they must act or they could lose their job. If your system is strong enough to play with a small spread and does lots of things that look like they are bad moves then they can feel comfortable looking the other way. This is what I have been talking about. It is a given they have to act if you use Hilo unless you use costly techniques to camouflage what you do. The trouble is you are starting with a low EV and then have to spend much of it to be allowed to play. The you need to use a larger spread which messes with the tolerance issues. I don't understand why you can't understand that having a higher EV so spread needn't be as large while using a system that will do things that doesn't fit the template they are looking for while playing optimally. They most likely think you are counting but they aren't forced act. They can wait for someone else to act because they won't get in trouble for not taking acton. Usually that someone is someone you don't see much and has rank on the catchers. It is cumulative win that gets his attention.

    I was backed off from a place I had been crushing. My partner has been playing there with my direction since then. I told him about the only suit that had a hard on for me and my partner said the suit isn't a suit anymore. The suit is now a dealer. Everyone else had rolled out the red carpet for me and after I get backed off by the suit, the suit gets demoted to dealer. I don't think there is a cause and effect there but my partner thinks so. I figure I just went over their win tolerance threshold. The suits superior, that delivered the BO, said they knew I wasn't counting as they had reviewed my play several times over 2 years and found me not to be a counter but that my game was too strong. I know they can get in as much trouble for acting against the wrong non-counter as they can for not acting against a counter. Sometimes I brought some big players in to play at stakes they don't normally see at square games. You earned free play based on the play of your referrals. I earned max free play of over $1K on each of several different people where most referrals get you $25 to $50 free play. Maybe when I stopped bringing them because I was backed off they decided the cost of backing me off far exceeded the savings. After played less than an hour on his first visit one guy won $40K and was then told he had been betting way over table max. He had to bet less than half the stakes they let him start with. He ended up winning a good chunk of that $40K despite losing a lot more bets after he won the $40K than he won to win the $40K. Of course on future trips that I brought him with me they didn't mess with his bets and he lost as is expected.

  6. #126
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,245


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    What is represented on the x-axis and y-axis?

  7. #127


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Tthree View Post
    You don't give any way to interpret those results. I don't know what the results represent or even which color represents which count. Why don't you explain what we are looking at.
    In my post above, I wrote red is HO2 w/ ASC, blue is HILO. Each graph is one shoe. Number at bottom is how many cards have been used/seen. Number at left is money wagered (ie: 300 is a bet of 2x300). It's all play, 2x50 to 2x600 (1-12 spread).

    Quote Originally Posted by Tthree
    You still act like you are trying to fool the casino into thinking you aren't counting. They act because they must or their job is threatened. The trick is to make them comfortable not acting even though they suspect you aren't counting. When you use the system they are trained to catch counters with they must act or they could lose their job. If your system is strong enough to play with a small spread and does lots of things that look like they are bad moves then they can feel comfortable looking the other way. This is what I have been talking about. It is a given they have to act if you use Hilo unless you use costly techniques to camouflage what you do. The trouble is you are starting with a low EV and then have to spend much of it to be allowed to play. The you need to use a larger spread which messes with the tolerance issues. I don't understand why you can't understand that having a higher EV so spread needn't be as large while using a system that will do things that doesn't fit the template they are looking for while playing optimally. They most likely think you are counting but they aren't forced act. They can wait for someone else to act because they won't get in trouble for not taking acton. Usually that someone is someone you don't see much and has rank on the catchers. It is cumulative win that gets his attention.
    This would make sense if there was a huge difference between HILO and HO2. There is no huge difference.

    What you WANT is to bet big when the PB or EITS using HILO thinks the count is in the tank (but you actually have an advantage)....and bet small when they think the HILO count is through the roof (but there actually isn't an advantage). But this is not how it is. What you really have is HILO and HO2 are highly correlated. When HILO count is high, the HO2 count is also likely to be high. When one is low, the other is very likely to be low as well. You aren't tricking anyone by using HO2 if they are using HILO).

    I completely agree that you shouldn't be playing like a robot. I think we both agree there are ways to camouflage your play without really hurting your EV. But -- this hasn't a thing to do with which count system you use. You're insinuating because you use HO2 and an observer uses HILO, that your play is wildly different than what the observer would expect a HILO player to do. This is simply not true, given the high correlation between the two counts. Most of the time the play is going to be the same for the HILO player and the HO2 player.

    If anything, I'd think doing all them weird plays would cause even more suspicion. The PB and EITS are not truly educated in card-counting. To you, splitting 10's in a negative count might seem like good camouflage (despite the cost) and you'll be okay. But if they're already suspected you of counting, splitting 10's just screams card-counter. When I dealt blackjack, I don't know how many times I heard something like, "You have to call out 'Doubling down on hard 12!' because that's what card-counters do."

    But there is ONE THING they do understand about card counting -- raise your bet when the count is positive. Everything else is secondary.
    "Everyone wants to be rich, but nobody wants to work for it." -Ryan Howard [The Office]

  8. #128
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,245


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by RollingStoned View Post
    "You have to call out 'Doubling down on hard 12!' because that's what card-counters do."
    The one that told you that didn't know what they were talking about. There is an advantage play called shot taking. You can get away with it once per session. That is one call to the Floor. You do something nobody would do and hope it works out. If it doesn't you say that wasn't what you were trying to communicate and get the other result or a free roll. If the call out the play before dealing the card you have a hard time saying that wasn't what you were trying to do.

  9. #129


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Tthree, given how you talked so highly of HO2 (when it's not as great as you claim), I'm not sure how much I or others believe you about your secret count. I'm sure it's more accurate and the things you say are true, but not to the level you're saying or insinuating.

    Your claims are like saying the 2002 Honda Civic is an extremely slow car and awful for racing. But the 2004 Honda Civic has more HP, a bigger engine, more liters, bigger this and that, therefore it's an extremely fast car. But the 2010 Honda Civic, holy smokes, that thing is faster than a damn NASCAR! (Hint: It's ridiculous.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Tthree View Post
    The one that told you that didn't know what they were talking about. There is an advantage play called shot taking. You can get away with it once per session. That is one call to the Floor. You do something nobody would do and hope it works out. If it doesn't you say that wasn't what you were trying to communicate and get the other result or a free roll. If the call out the play before dealing the card you have a hard time saying that wasn't what you were trying to do.
    It wasn't "one" person that told me that. It was many. Yes I know what shot taking is.....I'm not sure if I'd call it advantage play, though. May as well complain about every meal because sometimes it'll be free.

    But it doesn't matter if the player is taking a shot or not. If the pit believes doubling a hard 12 is what card counters do....and you do it, trying to throw off the scent (because to you, no CC would ever do that), then you've inadvertently done something that may attract attention as a CC.

    I'm sure some personnel are educated, but many are not. Perhaps the count is screaming through the roof, you have a max bet out, and you hit 12v6. Many wouldn't see that and think "he's not counting because you don't hit 12v6 in a high count, you only do that at a true count of -5, and since the count is +14 with 2.5 decks remaining and the TC is....", but rather if they suspect you're counting, "there's a reason he musta done it, card counters know what the next card is". They don't know how counting works.

    Congrats, 1 of 10 shoes you found a case where HILO bet more while HO2 did not (first shoe). The other 9, the increase bets were very much correlated. Even the second one is correlated. The part you're referring to is about 3/4 of a deck of play.

    I'd think with how much different HO2 and HILO are (your claims), it would be immediately obvious the 2 players are frequently betting big or small into different situations. I could have made a mistake (but I dont think I made one), the graphs show the two players for the most part will be betting similarly. You insinuate the difference is black and white.
    Last edited by RS; 12-29-2016 at 07:10 PM.
    "Everyone wants to be rich, but nobody wants to work for it." -Ryan Howard [The Office]

  10. #130
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,245


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by RollingStoned View Post
    Tthree, given how you talked so highly of HO2 (when it's not as great as you claim), I'm not sure how much I or others believe you about your secret count. I'm sure it's more accurate and the things you say are true, but not to the level you're saying or insinuating.
    I put sim results up before but it usually cause more trouble than its worth. I said statistically it is a hair better, which it is, like 5%. n0 improves about the same. That means in the long run there is little difference. In the short run the ebb and flow of money is quite different. The ratio of maxbets to smaller advantage bets shifts toward the smaller advantage bets. You don't need to know a lot about longevity to know making a little more while betting less most of the time help you last longer. Having less frequent large swings due to fewer max bets makes you seem less a threat. Winning smaller wins but more frequently rather than bigger wins less frequently helps them see you as no threat to the days bottom line.
    Quote Originally Posted by RollingStoned View Post
    If the pit believes doubling a hard 12 is what card counters do...
    I laugh every time I read this. There is like 1 counter that gathers enough info to make an advantage play double on hard 12. He is usually swinging through the forest on a vine. I find that usually the employees don't understand why they do things. Just don't double a hard 12. You don't want to look like a counter. PM me what casino has such clueless employees. ROTFL
    Quote Originally Posted by RollingStoned View Post
    If the pit believes doubling a hard 12 is what card counters do....and you do it, trying to throw off the scent (because to you, no CC would ever do that), then you've inadvertently done something that may attract attention as a CC.
    I don't do much to throw them off the scent except make sure that is what optimal play with my count would do.
    Quote Originally Posted by RollingStoned View Post
    Congrats, 1 of 10 shoes you found a case where HILO bet more while HO2 did not (first shoe). The other 9, the increase bets were very much correlated. Even the second one is correlated. The part you're referring to is about 3/4 of a deck of play.
    Actually it looked to me like most of them but i only listed the first 2 shoes. Since the sampling was minuscule if all were one way or the other it is meaningless.
    Quote Originally Posted by RollingStoned View Post
    I could have made a mistake (but I dont think I made one), the graphs show the two players for the most part will be betting similarly. You insinuate the difference is black and white.
    I pointed out that the red line should pretty accurately show advantage and to look at how frequently the blue line was way off.

    Calling correlation as when both agreed there was an advantage at about the same amount divided by the total advantages identified by either count.
    Shoe 1: Hilo bet big into no advantage in two parts of a shoe the Hiopt2 flat bet. Hilo bet heavy for almost 2 decks in total were no advantage existed. Correlation near 0%.
    Shoe 2: Hilo under bet the advantage early and then bet big into a disadvantage again for almost a deck at deep pen again. Correlation 35%.
    Shoe 3: They bet pretty similarly but Hilo again was under betting and over betting. Correlation 50%.
    Shoe 4: Hilo bet into about 1/2 deck of no advantage early and over bet the advantage that came and went. Later it missed a big betting opportunity. Correlation 35%.
    Shoe 5: Hilo bet this shoe like only a rare advantage existed when in fact a large advantage occurred through most of the shoe. Hilo grossly under bet the advantage it recognized. Correlation 12%.
    Shoe 6: Hilo bet into a fictitious advantage for about a deck of betting but then both counts agreed in max bet for the rest of the shoe. Correlation 67%
    Shoe 7: Hilo over bet advantage and bet into no advantage through most of this shoe but for 1 deck out of the 2.5 decks Hilo made advantage bets Hiopt2 agreed there was an advantage situation. Correlation 35%.
    Shoe 8: Bet similarly. Correlation near 100%.
    Shoe 9: Bet similarly. Correlation near 100%
    Shoe 10: A blank graph.

    So 2 of 9 shoes were highly correlated. 1 was somewhat correlated. One was a little less correlated than that and 5 were poorly correlated. Like I said I felt your graphs confirmed poor correlation as 55.6% were poorly correlated and only 22.2% were highly correlated.
    Last edited by Three; 12-29-2016 at 11:34 PM.

Page 13 of 16 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-09-2016, 05:06 PM
  2. Ko Fan: Question on BJA2 Double Deck
    By Ko Fan in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-03-2003, 12:35 PM
  3. wwdotbj: BEAU RIVAGE, BILOXI . Double Deck Question.
    By wwdotbj in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-19-2002, 07:11 PM
  4. Joe Miner: Double deck heat question
    By Joe Miner in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-02-2002, 11:11 AM

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.