No bust strategy in Positive counts!?

[RoadWarrior]

This is the main reason I believe that RW is just trolling. This statement was designed to incite responses from the members and we know that he has no basis for making this statement because he has no sim results.

Stealth provided what is probably the best intelligent answer to why this sim is unnecessary. The threshold at which to stand on hard hands as the true count rises has already been determined for each match up by simulation. Different researchers using different software have all come up with comparable results. It is clear and intuitively obvious that there is a different threshold for each hand because the risk of busting and the chance of beating the dealer if you do not bust change with each hand total and dealer up card combination. I'm certain that RW understands this.

By proposing a strategy which stands on all stiff hard hands at TC >= 1, RW is asserting that the index for standing on all hard hands is the same and that the index is +1. This is clearly ridiculous and he knows it. Run a sim for amusement purposes if you like. Perhaps the result will serve to put this to rest.

That's the problem! I believe there is a conspiracy going on and casinos are responsible! I need a private computer programmer to run a simulation for me not using CVDATA or any blackjack software already out there! Although short term data, I'm doing amazing better using my strategy on casino verite!! Maybe I will try at home also as I don't trust verite either! Basic strategy in negative counts and no bust strategy in positive counts! Do the normal doubles and splits in positive counts as index says and never surrender!

[Norm]

So, this conspiracy between casinos, a dozen or so professors, all BJ software developers, and innumerable APs has been going on for four decades. I'm impressed.

[Freightman]

So, this conspiracy between casinos, a dozen or so professors, all BJ software developers, and innumerable APs has been going on for four decades. I'm impressed.

Commonality is required to further conspiracy. Hmmmm. Post nasal drip?

[moses]

Conspiracy seems like a strong word. I wouldn't put anything past Norm. Jk. But why would a guy connected with the mob spend his time making spelling and grammar corrections on a forum website?

[Freightman]

Conspiracy seems like a strong word. I wouldn't put anything past Norm. Jk. But why would a guy connected with the mob spend his time making spelling and grammar corrections on a forum website?

Obviously due to his association with The Tiger Lily.

https://youtu.be/7LzNXF_FAh8

[RoadWarrior]

Great analogy, except in this case I'm working on my jumpshot through his question. He said +1, so it's a true counted system, so I assumed HiLo for the sim. I was going to use a generous game because of how ridiculous the idea is, say S17 DAS Sr. Something like that. Then I'd post the big negative number.

First of all! The number wont negative. Index plays is not worth much anyway! If I count and stand on everything 12-16 I bet you I still have edge! The question is, is it bigger or smaller than regular average edge of 1.5%!! I think with no bust strategy in positive counts I have at least 3-5% average edge over the standard 1.5%!

If I remember correct, one of bigplayer from MIT use only basic strategy! and made more than everyone who use index numbers!! Check this!!!

http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/...nterviewJC.htm

[moses]

Are you doing this with HiLo?

[RoadWarrior]

Are you doing this with HiLo?

Yesmoses!

[BakaFortuna]

Why hasn't this thread ended up in the voodoo forum?

[moses]

Yesmoses!

Wouldn't it make more sense to include the 7 and 9?

[Freightman]

Wouldn't it make more sense to include the 7 and 9?

That way. He can lose 10% less.
Oops, no count debate comments

[Norm]

Why hasn't this thread ended up in the voodoo forum?

Thread moved

[moses]

Freighter. What was that thing you did with the 9 again? Im working on something.