Opinion on "even money" and max bet BJ.

[Freightman]

If I were ever stupid enough to play SD in the first place, I can't imagine ever wanting anything else than to be in the fourth round of the deck with a RC of +4. Give it to me all day every day, and I'd own the world.

Don

Moses clearly has a different view of the game, and he seems to be successful with it. No question his methodologies differ from the standard accepted norms. Not up to you or I to criticize.

You're a smart guy, but you don't know everything.

[Freightman]

I love it. Moses doesn't even understand TC. He describes at least 20 cards removed from 52 so the TC is 4*52/32= 52/8= TC +6.5. Moses is telling The Expert a TC of +6 shouldn't be max bet. He thinks he has won an argument by making this point. LoL

Moses world is Bizarroland. Math doesn't apply. Go to a combinatorial analyzer and the advantage range is 3% to 8% or more. Why do you think you shouldn't be max betting this huge advantage? ROTFL

Should get interesting. 3, you're getting better, though, if you're going to call a guy a fucking idiot, then, just call him a fucking idiot. Still better than confusing the shit out of that newbie. Now Moses, just a simple kick in the nuts. I'd throw in a Paul Newman link from Butch Cassidy, except I seem to have a you tube connection oriblem from the coffee shop I'm in.

[Freightman]

Freighter. You are the DD expert IMO. But wouldn't being forced to always play two hands in DD equal the same number of rounds having the option in single deck.

I'm sure there are lots of dd players better than me. I was weaned in 6d shoe games with h17. I'd still start dd with 1 hand, unless I could play 2 hands at actual table min. My real expertise is shoe.

[Freightman]

Thanks Freighter. Hard work is part of being "all in."

Now in my scenario. 57% large remain. 43% small remain. Generally speaking, those 2-7s will have an imbalance. So the "value" is not always realistic because you might be betting into a deck rich 2-4s. Now, at 12 large removed 16 small removed you have a 60-40 advantage ratio. Therefore, you will likely have a far better deck composition. Here, Don maybe indeed own the world...if the dealer doesn't shuffle. Anyone ever stop to consider why the big difference between TC 3 and 5? After playing/recording thousands of hands on Verite and viewing hundreds of logs. This is it.

Hmmm doesn't this equate to intermediate surplus deficit arguments promulgated by others?

[ZeeBabar]

Moses, lots of double deck games out there with all of those rules, except surrender. Cut is usually shit, but the p,aces that I know don't seem to fuss about spread. As for Zee, he may well be on a
positive variance spree. Let him be happy, at least for a while.

I don't quite get it. I have the required BR (now $48k), I play with a reasonable ROR (max bet 2 x$150), play DD and 6 deck games with reasonable penn (70% and 1.2 deck cut off in 6 deck), H17, standard rules, no S. Because of better game selection, I am winnng more. I mostly follow optimal betting or close to it.

I don't know the why's and the mechanics but with the above, I am winning. I really don't get it as to why you feel it's just variance and I will lose? First 12 months, I won $19k playing part time. Second 12 months, I broke even (lost if you factor in expenses). Slow learner, it took me 2 years before I got better (thanks to this forum, CVCX etc.) but have been winning more consistently the past 18 months. I am increasing travel as I am semi retired, will retire entirely on September 1st.

I still do not have a clue what you are talking about when you get into bins and side counts and such but simple HiLo works for my needs. If I can get $20k a year playing 300 hours a year, I am fine.

[Freightman]

Should get interesting. 3, you're getting better, though, if you're going to call a guy a fucking idiot, then, just call him a fucking idiot. Still better than confusing the shit out of that newbie. Now Moses, just a simple kick in the nuts. I'd throw in a Paul Newman link from Butch Cassidy, except I seem to have a you tube connection oriblem from the coffee shop I'm in.

No silly. Think outside the box. It's a different formula. You can't figure it out?

3, Sd to dd

[DSchles]

"Don will not worry about the fact that 2% of the time you have TC +6 your advantage is much smaller. If he had a way to know that was the case he was facing at the moment he would only care about that. If not it all evens out in the long run. Your optimal bet is determined with the understanding that 2% of the time that is the case. It is figured into the variance for the bin which is factored into the sims optimal bet recommendation."

Yes, of course. And it isn't as if BJA3 doesn't also have SD charts for all to see the edges at various Hi-Lo true counts. (Although I must admit, these must be the least-often-looked-at charts in the whole book.)

Don

[Freightman]

Should get interesting. 3, you're getting better, though, if you're going to call a guy a fucking idiot, then, just call him a fucking idiot. Still better than confusing the shit out of that newbie. Now Moses, just a simple kick in the nuts. I'd throw in a Paul Newman link from Butch Cassidy, except I seem to have a you tube connection oriblem from the coffee shop I'm in.

I don't quite get it. I have the required BR (now $48k), I play with a reasonable ROR (max bet 2 x$150), play DD and 6 deck games with reasonable penn (70% and 1.2 deck cut off in 6 deck), H17, standard rules, no S. Because of better game selection, I am winnng more. I mostly follow optimal betting or close to it.

I don't know the why's and the mechanics but with the above, I am winning. I really don't get it as to why you feel it's just variance and I will lose? First 12 months, I won $19k playing part time. Second 12 months, I broke even (lost if you factor in expenses). Slow learner, it took me 2 years before I got better (thanks to this forum, CVCX etc.) but have been winning more consistently the past 18 months. I am increasing travel as I am semi retired, will retire entirely on September 1st.

I still do not have a clue what you are talking about when you get into bins and side counts and such but simple HiLo works for my needs. If I can get $20k a year playing 300 hours a year, I am fine.

Zee, you're actually a good guy. One of 2 scenarios describe you. The furst is that you're tugging everyone's joint, and that you're better than you claim. I don't believe that. I think you're almost as bad as most people think. You're playing a count system which is good enough to make money on, and with good judgeme t, a fair amount of money. I don't think you're good eniugh for that category. There seems to be a flood of leaks in your game. There's nothing that says you can't have a good 2 year run of positive variance.

I also think that theres lots if things that players don't take into account when trying to analyze your situation, and thus, miss out on what you're actually saying - And what happens to fit your situation.

In the final analysis, you only have 1 person (or 2) to satisfy.

[DSchles]

Well Don. You were my inspiration when it comes to insurance. Thorp was a single deck player and my inspiration for ratios. I just took it beyond 10s and to other columns. A pretty good one-two combo IMO. For the most part, it is simple formula's and some memory retention.

Not sure what you're referring to, but a perfect insurance count is simply counting tens as -2, all other as +1, and insuring when the RC is > 4 times the number of decks being shuffled, no?

Don

[BoSox]

I dunno Freighter. What is played offset what still remains is only the way I've seen the cards. What to do with this information is key. I prefer to know column balances. Generally speaking, 60% which runs about TC 5 cures alot of evils in regard to unbalanced deck distribution. This isn't to say it doesnt exist at 57% ot TC 4. You just have to look deeper. This is a more prudent approach as opposed to throwing money at it and hoping. In essence, this is what Zee is doing with HiLo. Thus his swings in emotion that you don't experience with Wong Halves.

Moses, I think this above quote stinks big time. Implying that players wait at a TC +4. Using your words:
" You just have to look deeper. This is a more prudent approach as opposed to throwing money at it and hoping." I really believe that you are not only leaving plenty of money on the table, but also making it much more difficult to hide your spread, which should be moving up much earlier.

[DSchles]

Don. I could be missing something. But 16 tens at -2 = -32. There are 36 other cards. Still, a helluva good idea. The Efficiency Calculator indicates IC 999.

No, the efficiency is 100%. Tens are -2. ALL OTHERS are -1. There is no reason at all to count aces separately for insurance! An ace is no different from a five. You take insurance at > 4 x the number of decks you're playing with. If you're exactly at the index (4 for single deck), then the bet is breakeven.

Don

[BoSox]

The good news is Zee got his answer from Don in this thread. Whether he does it or not is another story. It is simple and easy. But if he doesn't do it, why bring up the thread in the first place?

Over the years Zee has left behind Don's book while traveling at least once, he then asked questions continually for two years on green chip before replacing the book. Hopefully he now owns a copy.

[ZenMaster_Flash]

"Surrender, DAS, soft double, double any two cards is rare in pitch."

The vast majority of DD games permit DAS, soft double, DA2, but >95% are H17 games.
How can you not know that after all of these years? "Double any two" INCLUDES Soft Doubles