See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 62

Thread: Don, would you suggest to round down deck estimation in single deck?

  1. #1


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Don, would you suggest to round down deck estimation in single deck?

    On page 200 of BJA3, note the text next to the pentagram: "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 when there are 8 cards(not equal or greater than 13 cards) being used?
    I always round up the remaining deck estimation to avoid overestimating the TC, so when 8 cards have been used, I would divide by 1 deck instead of 3/4 deck.
    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

  2. #2


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    San Jose Bella,

    If you combine your quoted text with the next paragraph from your picture, you can see that Don is rounding to the nearest quarter deck: 8 cards used counts as ¼ deck gone, so the TC denominator is ¾, while only 6 cards used counts as 0 decks gone, so the TC denominator stays at 1.

    Hope this helps!

    Dog Hand

  3. #3


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

    If you combine your quoted text with the next paragraph from your picture, you can see that Don is rounding to the nearest quarter deck: 8 cards used counts as ¼ deck gone, so the TC denominator is ¾, while only 6 cards used counts as 0 decks gone, so the TC denominator stays at 1.

    Hope this helps!

    Dog Hand
    Yes, if you're estimating, or rounding, you have to draw the line somewhere. What if 12 cards are seen? Would the OP still feel comfortable dividing by a full deck, when you're just one card away from a quarter of a deck's having been used?

    But, I understand the point that calling 8 cards a full quarter of a deck overestimates the TC, just as calling 12 cards zero decks would clearly underestimate it. There's no great answer to this, except, for those who are reasonably nimble with numbers, to calculate the count as precisely as possible, to the exact card. But, be careful, because, if you do this, then you have to generate your original indices this way as well.

    Don

  4. #4


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Wonder how important it is. Not being very quick or smart, when I play DD heads up, after one round, I don't up my $25 minimum bet at RC 1 or 2, waiting for RC3. In effect, I mostly bet intuitively because of inability to quickly divide by fractions. I still win but wonder at the price I may be paying.

    I suppose those of us with lesser mathematical skills probably occasionally over bet or under bet but it seems to even out.

  5. #5


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    Yes, if you're estimating, or rounding, you have to draw the line somewhere. What if 12 cards are seen?

    But, be careful, because, if you do this, then you have to generate your original indices this way as well.

    Don
    https://www.blackjackincolor.com/truecount4.htm
    In regard to true counting method, there are three contenders:
    Truncate vs Floor vs Round.
    and the unanimous decision goes to..(drumming)
    Floor.

    In regard to remaining deck(half deck) estimating method, there are two contenders:
    Rounding vs Round Up

    Rounding: 2.8 decks in the tray=3 decks as divisor
    Round Up: 2.8 decks in the tray=3.5 decks as divisor

    Why isn't there a unanimous decision for which method is greater? Just like floor is a superior true counting method.
    Surely, different indices should be generated according to the remaining deck estimating method being used.
    Don seems to suggest Rounding, while Three prefer to Round Up(round to a higher divisor).
    I understand that there should be only a neglegible tiny difference on performance for these two method, but one has to be superior than the other.

  6. #6


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    I have always practiced assuming that you should just round decks as accurately as possible, since the TC is already floored. When I'm right inbetween half decks for a decision, figured it can't hurt to put the TC between the resultant TC from dividing by each surrounding half deck.

  7. #7


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by CountinCanadian View Post
    I have always practiced assuming that you should just round decks as accurately as possible, since the TC is already floored. When I'm right inbetween half decks for a decision, figured it can't hurt to put the TC between the resultant TC from dividing by each surrounding half deck.
    I don't quite understand. When you're in between half decks for a deck estimation, which divisor would you use in the first place? TC is not already floored, it is floored after the division is done.
    I can visually estimate very accurately, but I prefer to make it half-deck to have an easier divisor to divide, thus avoiding mistakes.
    In six deck game, if your eyes tell you 2.75 decks in the discard tray, would you divide by 3 or 3.5 as the remaining decks?

  8. #8


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    https://youtu.be/VysO-kXscpI
    Starts at 3:55, Ben and Collin suggest to "be conservative, round down the decks in the discard tray(round up the decks remaining)".
    but they're talking about full deck estimation though, not half deck estimation.

  9. #9
    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
    Do it the way the sim does it which generates the data you base your bets and plays.

  10. #10


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Three View Post
    Do it the way the sim does it which generates the data you base your bets and plays.
    See post #6, I ask this question for research purposes. Which divisor is slightly superior? One method has to perform better than the other.

    Rounding: 2.8 decks in the tray=3 decks as divisor
    Indices are generated based on Rounding method.
    Round Up: 2.8 decks in the tray=3.5 decks as divisor
    Indices are generated based on Round up method.
    Last edited by San Jose Bella; 10-17-2018 at 01:12 PM.

  11. #11
    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
    Superior is usually a matter of opinion. To get a true comparison all this would have to be the same except for the one variable that would define the difference when it comes to RoR, EV, and optimal bets for the same BR and spread. You aren't going to be able to reduce the difference to just one variable. You will see both EV and RoR differences. But if you don't do it the way the sim does it you will be betting and playing sub optimally since the sim set up optimal play based on the sim data. I don't know that anyone ever thought it was worth delving into it. perhaps Don would know.

  12. #12


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by San Jose Bella View Post
    I don't quite understand. When you're in between half decks for a deck estimation, which divisor would you use in the first place? TC is not already floored, it is floored after the division is done.
    I can visually estimate very accurately, but I prefer to make it half-deck to have an easier divisor to divide, thus avoiding mistakes.
    In six deck game, if your eyes tell you 2.75 decks in the discard tray, would you divide by 3 or 3.5 as the remaining decks?
    What I meant is, say there's pretty much exactly 2.75 cards in the tray, you should know the TC based on BOTH divisors (3, and 3.5)

    Say RC = 27, then TC would be 9 and 7, respectively.

    In my mind, that's an 8.

    However, it's rare the the half-deck different divisor will produce a TC different by more than 1 so I doubt the increased accuracy of this method is more than negligible

  13. #13


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by CountinCanadian View Post
    What I meant is, say there's pretty much exactly 2.75 cards in the tray, you should know the TC based on BOTH divisors (3, and 3.5)

    Say RC = 27, then TC would be 9 and 7, respectively.

    In my mind, that's an 8.

    However, it's rare the the half-deck different divisor will produce a TC different by more than 1 so I doubt the increased accuracy of this method is more than negligible
    Additionally, when the count get above my max bet TC I don't even bother converting to the TC as long as it stays above it. No point unless you're faced with one of the rare index plays way up there. So a scenario like my example wouldn't even be necessary as most people have the max bet out well before +8

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Does Reko work best in single deck or 6 deck or doesn't matter.
    By San Jose Bella in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03-14-2018, 01:52 AM
  2. Deck Estimation standard in Double Deck
    By vhalen in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-22-2016, 09:10 AM
  3. MJ: TC Deck Estimation: 1/2 or 1/4?
    By MJ in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-14-2005, 08:03 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.