noobie, need some guidance!

[Three]

Three,
......... A good idea is to re_write your post #25,
........Remember that you are speaking to a 'newbie'.

Newbie translation. The simulator sees all TC +4 as the same and you bet by the average of all the situations that are TC +4 in the simulation. Most of those will not be early in the shoe. So the beginning of the shoe will be under-represented in the sims sample. Now you will see two kinds of situational distortion at TC +4. One is how deep you are in the shoe from floating advantage. As I explained in post #25 BJ rounds are not a one card event. At the same TC deep in the shoe the removal of one card has a bigger impact than the same card removed early in the shoe. The other is what fractional TC you are at. Since each TC is bet at its average, cusp counts can be at a larger or smaller advantage than the average. But that is not what you asked about. If you are there early in the shoe as stated that average is based more heavily on results late in the shoe where the same TC would have a slightly larger advantage. These effects all combine to make an early TC that is unusually high for that part of the shoe to be a bit weaker than its late in the shoe equivalent TC. You might show a bit of restraint early in the shoe and a bit more aggression late in the shoe for equivalent TCs.

All that said, the simulator makes bet recommendations based on the assumption that you will bet all situations with the same TC the same. the advice given may help knock those outlier advantages into a more appropriate bet size bin. But the stats the bet sizing is based on is for the outliers being included in the betting bin. Following the sim's strict TC bet recommendation won't hurt you. That is what the stats are that the sim based its bet recommendations on. If you don't understand what I am talking about you should just follow the sim recommendations.

I don't know if that was any better for a newbie to understand.

[ZenMaster_Flash]

I am sorry THREE, but your post actually was longer than the one that I felt needed a re-write.
Part of the problem is that the reader, perhaps un-schooled in mathematics, gets lost in the verbiage.
Try boiling it down to its essence. Perhaps 5 sentences will suffice.

Try composing a response that does NOT assume that the reader knows what you mean by ...
Just assuming that your reader barely made it out of a small town High School, no words like "cusp"
etc. Define your terms as you proceed. At least there is no mention of "skew", "kurtosis", etc

[ZenMaster_Flash]

"does it mean if the RC is +20 and with 5 deck left = TC +4? Same probabilty of winning the hand as 1 deck TC +4?"

The word "True" in True Count has been utilized to suggest that a +4 TC is a +4 T.C. and that is essentially true.
The True Count was originally referred to as "Count Per deck" which answers your question with a qualified YES.
Getting deeper into the game there are some minor issues, e.g. "floating advantage" etc. which come into play.
The pragmatic answer is Yes, it is the same!

[Three]

Just follow the sim. They are not equivalent but are treated as equivalent when sizing bets. The differences are enough to worry about if you understand how but are still not that significant because early large TCs are rare.

[gengagod]

Thanks Three, your #25 was easier to understand!
And ZenMaster, I am currently taking a Maths degree! But many thanks for both you and Threes guidance!