See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 14 to 26 of 46

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

  1. #14


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by jimmybond007 View Post
    I find that multipliers work very well for DD games. Midwest player listed some good values. I work my way up from .5--.6--.7--.8 etc from the top of the shoe. One common newbie folly is to not keeping mind that as you get very deep into DD games well into the last deck, very low RC will have a large TC max bets. I do believe quarter deck accuracy is well worth it in DD and the multiple method is a good way to achieve it.

    On 6D I worry less about the accurate TC early in the shoe. I simply keep the RC and as I enter into extreme positive or negative territory I will actively start calculating TC every hand. I think its a waste to worry about it when you are early in the shoe and the RC floats around the 0 point most of the time. Keep in mind that a good portion of 6D games are not what i would consider "deep" cut, with most of them ending well before the very accurate deck. estimation requirements start to really benefit. Multipliers work well for 6D as well IMO. Everyone will have a method that works best for them. If you are accurately estimate half decks in shoes then you are more than fine. Even just one deck accuracy is going to be more than plenty in most situations.
    For double deck deck please explain doing multiplication instead of division for getting true count. Thanks


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  2. #15


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by BJsushiguy View Post
    For double deck deck please explain doing multiplication instead of division for getting true count. Thanks


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Refer to the 7th post by midwest player for the values.

    For example when I play DD game and say .25 decks have been dealt and I have RC of 6. Multiply 6x0.6 which comes out 3.6. Mentally I don't think about the decimal so in my head I actually think "6x6=36" but I will always know the decimal needs to move left one number.

  3. #16
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Eastern U S A
    Posts
    6,830


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    What you need to know for SD / DD:

    convert to fractions of a deck remaining,
    interpolate the fraction, [meaning flip it]
    then multiply instead of dividing !

    e.g.:

    1/3 = 3/1 = 3
    ½ = 2/1 = 2
    ¼ = 4/1 = 4
    2/3 = 3/2 = 1.5

    2/5 = 5/2 = 2.5

  4. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    When you didvide by a fraction, it is mathematically equivalent to multiplying by the reciprocal of the fraction.
    Quote Originally Posted by ZenMaster_Flash View Post
    1/3 = 3/1 = 3
    ½ = 2/1 = 2
    ¼ = 4/1 = 4
    2/3 = 3/2 = 1.5
    2/5 = 5/2 = 2.5

  5. #18


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    You forgot step 6. Give up on the 6 or 8 deck shoe games and go find a 3/2 single deck game where you can track aces more easily.

    Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

  6. #19
    Senior Member Bubbles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    South West
    Posts
    957


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by ZenMaster_Flash View Post
    What you need to know for SD / DD:

    convert to fractions of a deck remaining,
    interpolate the fraction, [meaning flip it]
    then multiply instead of dividing !

    e.g.:

    1/3 = 3/1 = 3
    ½ = 2/1 = 2
    ¼ = 4/1 = 4
    2/3 = 3/2 = 1.5

    2/5 = 5/2 = 2.5
    I think you mean invert instead of interpolate. When you invert a fraction you flip it. i.e. The numerator becomes the denominator and vice versa. Interpolation is a way of approximating new data points within a discrete set of known data points. That's how I true count.

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

  7. #20


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Three View Post
    Griffin said you can lose most of your index play gain if you systematically apply the deviation too early. By dividing by a smaller number than decks remaining you would be causing what Griffin warned against to happen.
    That's exactly what I'm worried about, I don't want to divide by a smaller number than deck remaining, but most importantly, I want to make things easy.
    For me, it's easy to visualize quarter-deck, or more specifically, 4.4 decks in the discard tray, but it's hard and unnecessary to divide them, so I always divide by half deck(for shoe games).

    When there are exact 1.7 decks remaining, meaning 4.3 decks visible in the discard tray, two options:
    1. Always divide by 2 deck

    2. Always divide by 1.5 deck
    Which option generates more risk-adjusted EV over the long run?
    I used to always divide by 2(round up). If I divide by 1.5, the result would be closer to the actual deck remaining, but isn't that overestimating the TC, and cause the index play to be applied early?

  8. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by San Jose Bella View Post
    I used to always divide by 2(round up). If I divide by 1.5, the result would be closer to the actual deck remaining, but isn't that overestimating the TC, and cause the index play to be applied early?
    Yes.

    You don't have to do betting TC and playing TC the same way. Below is the TC for remaining decks estimates (1.5,1.7,2) as the RC increases:

    0: (0,0,0)
    1: (0,0,0)
    2: (1,1,1)
    3: (2,1,1)
    4: (2,2,2)
    5: (3,2,2)
    6: (4,3,3)
    7: (4,4,3)
    8: (5,4,4)
    9: (6,5,4)
    10: (6,5,5)
    11: (7,6,5)
    12: (8,7,6)
    13: (8,7,6)
    14: (9,8,7)
    15: (10,8,7)
    16: (10,9,8)
    17: (11,10,8)
    18: (12,10,9)
    19: (12,11,9)
    20: (13,11,10)
    21: (14,12,10)
    22: (14,12,11)

    For an ace reckoned count you are employing your index early with your biggest bets out when you use 1.5 for your playing count deck estimates. That is a double whammy by giving up percentage of index play gain when you have your biggest bets out.
    Last edited by Three; 10-05-2018 at 06:00 AM.

  9. #22


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Three View Post
    Yes.

    You don't have to do betting TC and playing TC the same way. Below is the TC for remaining decks estimates (1.5,1.7,2) as the RC increases:

    0: (0,0,0)
    1: (0,0,0)
    2: (1,1,1)
    3: (2,1,1)
    4: (2,2,2)
    5: (3,2,2)
    6: (4,3,3)
    7: (4,4,3)
    8: (5,4,4)
    9: (6,5,4)
    10: (6,5,5)
    11: (7,6,5)
    12: (8,7,6)
    13: (8,7,6)
    14: (9,8,7)
    15: (10,8,7)
    16: (10,9,8)
    17: (11,10,8)
    18: (12,10,9)
    19: (12,11,9)
    20: (13,11,10)
    21: (14,12,10)
    22: (14,12,11)

    For an ace reckoned count you are employing your index early with your biggest bets out when you use 1.5 for your playing count deck estimates. That is a double whammy by giving up percentage of index play gain when you have your biggest bets out.
    Thanks for the input. When there are 1.7 decks remaining, it seems 2 is a better divisor than 1.5.

    If 1.6 decks are remaining:
    (1.5,1.6,2.0)

    0: (0,0,0)
    1: (0,0,0)
    2: (1,1,1)
    3: (2,1,1)
    4: (2,2,2)
    5: (3,3,2)
    6: (4,3,3)
    7: (4,4,3)
    8: (5,5,4)
    9: (6,5,4)
    10: (6,6,5)
    11: (7,6,5)
    12: (8,7,6)
    13: (8,8,6)
    14: (9,8,7)
    15: (10,9,7)
    16: (10,10,8)
    17: (11,10,8)
    18: (12,11,9)
    19: (12,11,9)
    20: (13,12,10)
    21: (14,13,10)
    22: (14,13,11)

    If 1.6 decks are remaining, it seems 2 is STILL a better divisor than 1.5!
    Is index play applied early more harmful than index play applied late? or they are equally harmful?

  10. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by San Jose Bella View Post
    Is index play applied early more harmful than index play applied late? or they are equally harmful?
    When the RC is positive there will be a higher frequency of play at the next lower TC and a lower frequency of play at the next higher TC due to the shape of the TC frequency bell curve.

    https://www.blackjackincolor.com/truecount1.htm

    So doing the index play 1 TC early would have a higher frequency of mistakes than the small gain at the index. The gain difference will depend on the decimal index. If the decimal index almost makes the next highest TC the cost of using the lower index is even higher than just the cost of the increased frequency of error. Often you lose the gain at the index and the gain for a TC or two above the index. There usually isn't a lot of gain at the index. So employing the deviation at the next higher TC doesn't cost much.

    So to directly answer your questions:
    Quote Originally Posted by San Jose Bella View Post
    Is index play applied early more harmful than index play applied late?
    Yes.
    Quote Originally Posted by San Jose Bella View Post
    or they are equally harmful?
    No
    Last edited by Three; 10-05-2018 at 09:33 AM.

  11. #24


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    On page 200 of BJA3: "After the first hand is dealt to two players, on average, about eight cards will have been used. Since 13 cards constitute a quarter-deck, when we go to estimate the true count at the start of the second hand, we'll be dividing our running count by three-quarters."

    Why does the book suggest to divide by 3/4 deck when there are 8 cards(not equal or greater than 13 cards) being used?
    If I round up the remaining deck estimation to quarter-decks:
    When there are 40-52 cards left, I divide by 1 deck.
    When there are 27-39 cards left, I divide by 3/4 deck.
    WeChat Image_20181006001004.jpg

  12. #25


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    https://www.blackjackincolor.com/truecount1.htm
    In the Single-deck frequencies section, Why does it that "there are no rounds at TCs of 3, 7 and 9"?

    When running count is 7, remaining deck is three-quarters,
    7/.75
    ?9.33
    Floor the TC estimation to arrive at TC=9

  13. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by San Jose Bella View Post
    On page 200 of BJA3: "After the first hand is dealt to two players, on average, about eight cards will have been used. Since 13 cards constitute a quarter-deck, when we go to estimate the true count at the start of the second hand, we'll be dividing our running count by three-quarters."

    Why does the book suggest to divide by 3/4 deck when there are 8 cards(not equal or greater than 13 cards) being used?
    If I round up the remaining deck estimation to quarter-decks:
    When there are 40-52 cards left, I divide by 1 deck.
    When there are 27-39 cards left, I divide by 3/4 deck.
    WeChat Image_20181006001004.jpg
    Will leave that one to Don. I said to round to a higher divisor for betting decisions and a higher divisor for playing decisions. This is a betting decision. The most important thing is to do it the same way the sim that generated your ramp and your plays did it.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

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.