Originally Posted by BoSox
it would be a boring world if we all agreed on everything. No worries.
Moses, when you get those sharp objections, just say that you had a very strong feeling like you were standing on the foul line late in the game with two shots, down by one and knowing you are going to win it. Just use the same stories that you tell us and you will never have to be concerned again.
Holy shit Batman! I wasn't paying close enough attention. Zee, if you count an (A) the same as a {T}, your insurance estimation is off right out of the starting gate. For insurance count purposes, add deficit, deduct surplus (A). To have a better idea of where you were in terms of taking or not taking even money, I'd have to know how many (A) were remaining in the deck, how much of the RC/TC is being attributed to (A), (along with a few other things) if it was for my own evil purposes. Rather than using a separate insurance count, the raw information from my primary count can be used to determine insurance count simply by using a different formula for calculation. From this primary count I can determine both RC/TC and IC, which are often very dissimilar to one another when you really study it! What you are doing is a ball park estimation to start with before you even factor in errors. With that being said and out of the way, we can now get back to rub and tug stories from the trenches.
Last edited by Tarzan; 06-26-2017 at 04:39 PM.
I use HiLo, ace reckoned, follow Dr. Wong and Don S and others advice. Yes, SOMETIMES, when it comes to insurance, the count may be off (I would not know if there are excess or depleted Aces) but NOT all the time. I feel that playing rated, my act demands far more and I cannot handle multiple counts or higher level counts.
I have been assured by my experience and those on another forum that simple HiLo works sufficiently so I stick with it.
Lots of presumption here. Never mentioned anything about being chatty (watching TV's hanging over tables, checking out babes etc.,).
i know my limits and I know that HiLo meets my income needs (It's recreational money I am interested in, does not pay bills) and add to that a fair amount of full time pros (mostly on the other forum) doing fine with HiLo and it's reason enough.
Moses, as you already know that I am a shoe player, and as such I think you need to realize that although we are both playing bj, we are in fact playing a completely different game with that single deck game of yours. I also need to tell you that I do not concern myself of what the casinos might do, as its out of my hands. My act which does work for me pretty well, and has been reliable up to a point is as far as I go, I will not concede not one more dime of EV. What has in fact changed for me is I feel if they throw me out so be it, it is not going to change my life in any way shape or form. That is why every situation is different for everyone, and they should make their own conclusions.
Simple hi lo is the best choice for you for shoe games, no doubt about it, but in double deck the ace side count is really easy to use and there is a decent gain. Often you will have a different insurance decision using the side count than you will without it. All you do is alphabetically side count aces (first one is A, second is B and so on and so forth) and then when you have to take insurance decide if the deck is ace rich or ace poor and adjust accordingly. You should see one ace per quarter deck. So if you are 3/4 of the way through one deck and you have seen four aces then you will know that the deck is ace poor by one ace and now you take your normal hi lo count and temporarily add +2 to it for insurance purposes. Of course you should practice this at home extensively before employing it in a casino. You can also bet more aggressively when the deck is ace rich and curtail your wagers a bit when the deck is ace poor as well as use this information to swing some close 11 double situations. So the hi lo index for hitting 11 v T or 9 is -4. But if you are at -3 and the deck is really ace rich then it might be more advantageous to just hit.
Interesting post. One must train diligently for their sport of choice. Very much like the Canadian Screwing team, which has provisions for both sprinting and long distance.
Now, Zee seems to have a bit of identity crisis as to which endeavour he should pursue, though he has indicated a preference for the sprint. As to Zee not trusting his tool(s), he has mentioned a preference for the sprint. Thus, his prior admission to use of performance enhancing drugs - likely of the blue variety.
I look forward to his next musical composition - Ode to Morning Glory.
Sorry Zee - could t resist, and I know you have a sense if humour.
I still play 75% DD but often the conditions for DD are not so good (3-4 other players at each of the 2-3 DD tables) and since I have driven far and there are 6 deck tables one can play heads up or with just one player, I hit those from time to time.
As for the other stuff, the big change as I moved from 65-66 to 68-69 years old is trust in my tool is quite low and embarassing. The drugs need prior planning and take away the spontaniety and thus not as appealing. The performance at the table is inversely proportional, it seems. I get better on the tables, worse on the beds.
Posting Permissions
-*-
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks