See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 46 of 46

Thread: Deck estimation, would you dvide by 2 or 1.5?

  1. #41


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Three View Post
    I don't see an explanation of how you do it. Perhaps a post # may help. I think the problem is we are defining what interpolating means in this case differently. I don't really care to get into this. If you like it then go with it. I thought I might be helping you. Either you don't want help or you and I are having a communication issue about what you mean by interpolating in this case. Do whatever you like.

    For others, trying to be "smarter" than the sim allows will hurt you with index plays. Griffin said that using your index early will cost you more than using it late. That is because of the TC frequency bell curve. The frequency of using it incorrectly 1 TC early (or any increment early) will be much higher than the frequency of using it 1 TC late (or the corresponding increment late). With diminishing frequencies as you get further from TC 0 you may eat up as much as several times the the increment of errant use on the plus EV side of the index. Griffin said you may use up all the gain from the index but back then things were mostly pitch games.
    In Post number 9, I explained how I make playing decisions. I explained it in another thread as well.

    I don't know what you mean when you say interpolate. When I use it, and how I use it, is how it is mathematically defined. Google defines it as, "insert (an intermediate value or term) into a series by estimating or calculating it from surrounding known values." Interpolation is rigorously examined in many maths classes and is a fundamental concept to any cartesian coordinate system. If you know the way a function behaves, in the case of true counts the slope is linear, then you can easily estimate a value in between two known values. Basically if I know the TC with a divisor of 1, and I know the TC with a divisor of 2, then I can easily estimate the TC at 1.5 even though I did not plug 1.5 directly into the function. Similarly I can find an estimate at any point in between 1 and 2, like at 1.25 and 1.75.

  2. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    13,810


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    You are using interpolation to get the TC. I thought you said you were interpolating index plays, which to me means your sim generates an index based on a specific granularity but instead of doing the index that way you decide you can do better than the sim by using a finer granularity. This can cause systematic use of the index before it is exceeded. A little tip for everyone. If you have such a close call that you need to use a finer granularity to decide it, the play has no significant EV to offer for all your trouble. Use some other criterion to decide how to play it. Like what generates the least heat. Or what is most likely to drive the ploppies off the high count that you are playing through. Or how to make sure the ploppies help you eat cards in the low count you are in. EV gain isn't just what the play itself generates. When the play generates almost no EV either way you play it, you can generate EV by other sources from affecting the environment you are playing in.

  3. #43


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Three View Post
    The TC conversion and deck estimate method they used had no possible way to get those TCs.
    https://www.blackjackincolor.com/truecount1.htm
    What method was used in this page to calculate the TC for single-deck?
    RC of 7 divide by three-quarter decks seems like the regular method, and the TC turns out to be 9.
    7/.75=9.33

  4. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    13,810


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by San Jose Bella View Post
    What method was used in this page to calculate the TC for single-deck?
    Single-deck, H17, 2 players, 4 rounds, Hi-Lo max indexes, trunc, quarter-deck
    Single-deck, H17, 4 players, 2 rounds, Hi-Lo max indexes, trunc, quarter-deck

  5. #45


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Three View Post
    Single-deck, H17, 2 players, 4 rounds, Hi-Lo max indexes, trunc, quarter-deck
    Single-deck, H17, 4 players, 2 rounds, Hi-Lo max indexes, trunc, quarter-deck
    I see, thank you.
    The key part is ROUNDING to the nearest quarter deck, not ROUND UP to the nearest quarter deck. so when 11 cards are gone, the divisor is 3/4, not 1.

    ???? PACM00 ?? Tapatalk??

  6. #46
    Senior Member Tarzan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Atlantic City
    Posts
    927


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Dog Hand View Post
    Tarzan,

    In January of 2017 I posted directions for creating an Excel spreadsheet to automate the comparison of two different counts: see my post in this thread

    https://www.blackjacktheforum.com/sh...lays-with-CVCX

    With a bit of tinkering, the spreadsheet can be expanded to compare numerous counting methods simultaneously.

    As I said in the post, if you'd like a copy of the Excel file, contact me.

    Hope this helps!

    Dog Hand
    That's a few years back when I was originally looking at that situation. I made lots of notes about it all and buried them off here someplace. It was an interesting comparison of Hi-Lo, HiOpt-2, and the various levels of T count in specific positive counts to compare how far off they could be from one another in the most extreme instances, the cause of this difference, and the impact if all were using the same bet spread. Perhaps it'd be interesting to go back and visit this sometime, I put minimal time into it since I was reviewing roughly 1000 pages a day of simulation data at the time.

    Pertaining to a complexity, there is the conservation of mental energy factor, especially if you are looking at a stream of five numbers and paying attention to a few other details along with it. For composition dependent play, there is no need to calculate any neutral to negative counts. There's nothing to calculate until you see cards in front of you. Quite often, there is even then little to calculate as you can often see from this stream of numbers that you are clearly on one side or the other of a very precise composition dependent index without having to break it down to the exact or do any math at all. For example, I have 8-0-10-12-9 @3.25, there is nothing to calculate, it is a negative count minimum bet. From there I get 12vs6, and without having to calculate the exact I can see that the optimal decision is to hit, all a matter of pattern recognition that corresponds to a chart for the hand to come up with damn near perfect play. I've gotten my balls broken at times about complexity, but there are certainly elements of simplicity and shortcuts that can be utilized that make what appears on the surface as exceedingly complex into something incredibly simple and a matter of following a procedure.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Similar Threads

  1. Deck Estimation standard in Double Deck
    By vhalen in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-22-2016, 09:10 AM
  2. Deck estimation.
    By Pacman in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 04-28-2014, 01:55 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.