Which two cards would you choose to side count? Is that worth?
Im currently side counting aces and 8s. When that gets to be as easy as hi/lo i intend to side count 7s as well. I should stress that the hard part is being able to use the data for real time decision making. The counting part itself can become very easy with enough practice.
Peter Griffin gave the efficiencies of each rank for playing optimally in ToBJ pg 57.
In it, 6's and 7's both have relatively high efficiencies when tracking each rank alone. For games where playing efficiency is greatly considered to derive an edge (think 1D & 2D,) side counting these ranks is important. (Some would say paramount!)
Aces seem to offer little efficiency here. What is surprising is the overall efficiency of the 4 and 5. The 5, if I remember, had the highest efficiency. This rank can help you determine when a proper hit/stand for hard 16 is given. I would assume that is where a point of efficiency is found!
Edit: overall, personally, I use HOII with ASC. Adding a 7SC would help my game.
Last edited by lij45o6; 10-26-2018 at 05:58 PM.
Aces are important to side count when it comes to getting better results on doubles. If you can win a higher percentage of doubles with big bets out it has a big impact on volatility. A side count of aces properly applied to doubles can increase your doubling efficiency with your biggest bets out. You both get better correlation to the double and win a higher percentage of your doubles. For ace reckoned counts you don't know if the monster count is a result of a lot larger surplus of aces or a lot larger surplus of T's. That 11 double may be a negative EV double. Or that negative EV double may actually have a lot of EV. Getting it right will have you doing much better on your doubles with big bets out because you eliminate negative EV doubles while adding positive EV doubles that you would have missed. The net result is cutting into big bet downswings in favor of big bet upswings. You may double more or less frequently but you will win a higher percentage of your big bet doubles.
How many times are you in a monster count where you keep catching an ace on your doubled 11. Maybe that is happening because there are so many aces in the unplayed high cards that the double wasn't even close to being a plus EV double when the ace density is factored in. The side count will have you not double the negative EV doubles that the main count alone say are plus EV, and you will make plus EV doubles that the main count alone says are minus EV. This cuts negative volatility and increases positive volatility. Variance is blind to the difference since it squares everything making positive and negative variance look the same. So statistically you may not see a difference or much of one but when playing you will definitely notice the affect of winning more big bet doubles while losing less big bet doubles. When you stack volatility in your favor it really helps you win consistently.
I side count aces primarily for betting correlation as i'm using an ace neutral count. However the ace side count does come in handy for a few other key decisions.
The main ones where i see the most benefit are:
Insurance
Doubling 10 vs 10
Soft doubles (the higher up ones)
Splitting 9s vs 7
16 vs 10 is such a common situation it would be good to have a side count just for that.
Possibly keeping track of 6s vs 5s would be a good barometer for that purpose? Doable in SD or DD games. And its in the pitch games where the playing efficiency improvements shine brightest.
BS is practically a coin flip for 16vT. If BS were to stand the deviation to hit would be practically worthless to a card counter. It only makes the I18 because that coin barely favor the poor decision for a counter where he has a minimum bet out. For counter's BS for 16vT is not even close. You stand because all your larger bets are stand bets with only minimum bets being hits. One who wongs out is gone before hitting has any real difference in EV versus standing. If you don't play TC -3 or less there is almost no penalty for always standing. At TC -1 16vT is virtually a coin flip. Not much of any EV gained for hitting at TC -2. The counter catchers have playing this hand differently often as a top tell for counters. The index is 0 and it is a very common matchup. If you want to survive scrutiny that will result in a computer review if you are red flagged, either always stand or make the index -3 or less. This way you consistently stand with rare exception at almost no cost in EV. Unless you are playing pitch games, you should try to avoid playing at TC -3 or less as much as is practical anyway.
16 v T has the highest average gain in expectation (95/1000 at n = 20 per Griffin on pg 30 of ToBJ) excluding, of course, insurance.
The EOR for 5 in 16 vs T is around -2.56, compared to a T of 1.11. Next to the 4 (-1.73), it seems to be *the* key card for that hand match-up. I wonder what the return for side counting 5's could be if implementing a 5SC for 1/2D games? Could also help with the issue of scrutiny from counter catchers; since 16 v T is a "literal coin-flip", the massive swings in expectation could help for cover. No?
*EOR data from D10, pg 515 is BJA 3rd Ed.*
Since the 5 seems to be a key card, and the frequency of 16 v T hands occurring, it seems this may be a good addition. I say may, due to the cost-benfit analysis needed to be done to see if using extra "FLOPS" in your brain would warrant whatever +EV one could gain.
Last edited by lij45o6; 10-26-2018 at 08:25 PM. Reason: Some errors, corrected.
yes, him, too....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xlkTHmJNMU
Bookmarks