The value of Index Plays increases as the extreme True Counts are approached.
While these situations are less common, your bets will be at or near your Max bet.
With Hi-Opt II I recommend that my students learn their indices up to +16 which
is the approximate equivalent to Hi-Lo +8.
Last week I had $500 bet and had to surrender a 13 vs. 10 followed by my LATER
splitting 9's vs Ace.
Last edited by ZenMaster_Flash; 12-21-2018 at 06:16 AM.
I saved $250 0n the surrender and made $1,000 on the split.
Those two hands resulted in my having a winning session.
Of course I was a bit lucky, as the ploppies say, but I didn't
bother to compute the actual equity gain involved. That I
teach to my students, primarily to dilute their remorse re:
"errors" in play, beginning with simple Basic Strategy miscues.
I met that snowman once. He reminded me of this snowman:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYJ_ezPsVYY
Help me get my brain around converting to true at a dd game, because in a six deck we don’t consider 5 decks remaining until I full deck has been played, that makes sense, but with DD game if we did that it wouldn’t work with it? Or you would be looking at having two decks remaining until a fool Decks comes out, and when you start getting in to the last deckYour tc starts getting larger then your RC right? Not that we would probably get that much Pen , but I’m struggling with making the conversion as a new AP I’ve only been using red seven unbalanced
This.
The fewer cards unseen the more precise you need to be with deck estimates. With 6 decks estimate remaining versus 5.5 deck estimate the TC calculation will be the same (Different for RC 11, 17, 22, 23, 27, 28, 29... Obviously only the first two are relevant due to RC frequency) well over 90% of the time. Further accuracy is not needed. By the time you get to 2.5 decks unseen making full deck estimates to half deck precision becomes necessary because the two are the same a little over 50% of the time for full deck accuracy (Different for RC 5, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18... RC frequency is far more ranging after 3.5 decks have been seen). If the RC is extreme you may want to use 3.5 deck estimate instead of 4 deck estimate when appropriate. By 1.5 decks unseen 1/4 deck estimation accuracy becomes necessary to keep the TC accuracy high. That pretty much contains all DD play. I hope you can see the concept from the info given. I tried to keep it brief but include enough that you can understand what causes the need for more accurate deck estimates at fewer cards unseen and when you might want to use finer deck estimations earlier in the deck than you usually would.
So if I have a quarter of a deck Remaining in a DD game of course they would be shuffling by this time but just for learning purposes and they running count was plus 1 the tc would be 4? If I had a half of a deck remaining Tc would be 2?Is that estimating 1/4 decks? And I think less than one deck Causing the TC to go higher than the RC is throwing me off also
Regarding 6d comments - Agree, or disagree depending on how you do things. For most players, I would agree.
I interpolate right from the start, or close, if you will, resolve by half decks.
There’s that thing on cvcx that allows you to calculate your optimal ramp, and also allows you to do so also by half true counts. You will notice differences in ramping by full versus half true counts.
As an example, the true 1 bucket gives your bet for everything from true 1.0 to true 1.99. Half true counts define from 1.0 to 1.49 and 1.5 to 1.99. RC divided by decks remaining (rounded up) gives you true count resolved by full decks. Now, double your RC, divide by half decks remaining anD voila - a higher degree of accuracy.
Work it through.
Bookmarks