See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 11 of 72 FirstFirst ... 9101112132161 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 143 of 936

Thread: Adding AA78mTc side count to High Low

  1. #131
    Senior Member Tarzan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Atlantic City
    Posts
    1,013


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    If Gronbog can simulate T count, it's safe to say it's little he can't do. There was an immense amount of work on that project. Verifying the values being plugged was as difficult and detail-oriented as it gets, considerably more trouble than actually learning or performing the method, which is from a practical application standpoint the maximum gain and efficiency with the least amount of mental strain, arriving at near perfect play. That's what it takes to outperform HiOpt2ASC and anything short of that isn't going to cut it. I'm not saying what you're doing isn't good or effective, or discourage you in any way, and merely saying it's relatively certain it won't outperform HiOptASC, with this coming from someone who has intimate familiarity with what it takes to outperform HiOpt2ASC. Gronbog doing a simulation for you would give you a definitive answer on your enhancements compared to everything else, much better than just speculation.

    Most of your money made from card counting is derived from your bet spread and optimal betting. Everything after that is just gravy, slight gains that are tiny fractions of a percentage point, worth going for with some, not worth bothering with for others. The illustrious 18 was devised for maximum gain using the least effort, getting the most of it. The tiniest fraction of a percentage point is a lot if there's a large enough volume of money involved, though, so nothing wrong with trying to maximize your theoretical edge. You can run this out to its greatest extent even, with the most difficult composition dependent index possible for the least gain involved if you want to, where the difference in EV can be as little as .0001 between three possible playing decisions, to either hit, split, or double given the right deck composition, which will have virtually no impact on a simulation, but is still just a hell of a lot of fun if you are hardcore enough. Can you guess the hand?

  2. #132


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarzan View Post
    Can you guess the hand?
    4,4 v 6

  3. #133
    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 Tarzan View Post
    Can you guess the hand?
    I could be wrong, but I think it is pretty obvious it is either 4,4v5 or 4,4v6. the problem really only allows for possibilities of splitting fours or splitting fives. I think it is pretty same to eliminate splitting fives.

  4. #134


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarzan View Post
    If Gronbog can simulate T count, it's safe to say it's little he can't do. There was an immense amount of work on that project. Verifying the values being plugged was as difficult and detail-oriented as it gets, considerably more trouble than actually learning or performing the method, which is from a practical application standpoint the maximum gain and efficiency with the least amount of mental strain, arriving at near perfect play. That's what it takes to outperform HiOpt2ASC and anything short of that isn't going to cut it. I'm not saying what you're doing isn't good or effective, or discourage you in any way, and merely saying it's relatively certain it won't outperform HiOptASC, with this coming from someone who has intimate familiarity with what it takes to outperform HiOpt2ASC. Gronbog doing a simulation for you would give you a definitive answer on your enhancements compared to everything else, much better than just speculation.
    What you saying is true for single deck and double deck games. For shoe games 6-8 deck it is possible to outperform Hi-OPT II with ASC by further improving the betting. I know because I simulated with two dimensional count systems optimizing it for betting. But with single deck and double deck it is different you maybe really need to bring blackjack to near perfect play to outperform Hi-OPT II with ASC.

  5. #135


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by seriousplayer View Post
    Don't forget that Gronbog is a professional programmer, too. So writing a program to do complex simulation shouldn't be a problem for him.
    Yes. I said out of curiosity, however I should have said "professional curiosity" since I am a software engineer as well.

  6. #136


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Merry Xmas Blackjack Gurus! I have been reading this thread with interest as I have all of BJANALYSTS books and have tried to read them too. In his first book a table of critical running counts for KO was of most interest to me, a casual player. However, I think Daniel Dravot's Color of Blackjack and the warm line principle is a much simpler and more practical method of True counting the simple KO.

  7. #137


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Tidalu View Post
    Merry Xmas Blackjack Gurus! I have been reading this thread with interest as I have all of BJANALYSTS books and have tried to read them too. In his first book a table of critical running counts for KO was of most interest to me, a casual player. However, I think Daniel Dravot's Color of Blackjack and the warm line principle is a much simpler and more practical method of True counting the simple KO.
    I've done a few post regarding a practical method of True Counting the simple KO a year ago. I was able to get the SCORE closest to the True Counted version of KO. But I no longer a TKO users anymore. I converted over to a level 3 card counting system that I created for myself because I am sick of changing counts. I incorporated everything I learn and are still making improvement to the count.
    Last edited by seriousplayer; 12-27-2018 at 07:15 PM.

  8. #138


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarzan View Post
    At a glance, I can tell you are missing a few pieces of the puzzle for it to be possible for this to be on par with HiOpt2ASC, full indices. I believe it falls short, with a lot of work to do it. I'd have to look at it closer. I'm questioning ease of practical application for what you get out of it. Adding some things to Hi-Lo or KO will improve your performance in the very long run if you put in a lot of hours at the tables, but it's quite a stretch to say it's on par with, or make it on par with HiOpt2ASC, and outperforming HiOpt2ASC requires composition dependent perfect play, which is not what you've got there.
    The odds of this new counting system is better than HiOpt2ASC is the same as every house on the streets has the same size.

    HiOpt2ASC achieves its greatness by having different tags under different types of hands. This new system just optimizes for insurance, Lucky Lady bet and 12 v 2-6.

  9. #139


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by BJGenius007 View Post
    The odds of this new counting system is better than HiOpt2ASC is the same as every house on the streets has the same size.

    HiOpt2ASC achieves its greatness by having different tags under different types of hands. This new system just optimizes for insurance, Lucky Lady bet and 12 v 2-6.
    Actually not true. I just concentrated on insuracne and hard 12 v 2 througth 6 because the increase in CC was in the order of 20% to 30% for these plays and these plays are alll part of the Illustrious 18. And if LL is offered, using AA89mTc with KO or AA78mTc with HL is more than justified even if it could only be used for the LL bet. I showed in a previous thread on this post the huge players advantage that occurs as LL count increases past its critical break even value.

    But to get to the point, if you looked at some of my previous posts in this thread, I listed HL vs HL with AA78mTc all eighteen of the Illustrious 18. Actually AA78mTc helps with 12 out of the 18 Illustrious 18 including hit/stand on hard 15 and hard 16. And actually AA78mTc helps with more strategy changes if you go past the Illustrious 18 but I wanted to concentrate on only the most important to strategy changes not to confuse people.

    I saw a previous post that I will reply to next who offered to do sims on the HL with AA78mTc. If he could do sims that would be great. Look for my reply to that post.

  10. #140


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Gronbog View Post
    bjanalyst, I can modify my software to simulate your system. You're not a paying member so i can't PM you. Please post an email address where I can reach you to discuss the details.


    I will sign up as a paying member in the next week or so because I have a lot more to say and then I can say it on the PM forum.


    I emailed Norm at [email protected] about simulating HL with AA78mTc and he commented "CVData requires 16 licenses to run in development mode and around 350 files." So I just assumed that it was not possible to do a specialized simulation of HL with AA78mTc.


    Norm has my email address and contact information. I will email him to give you my contact information. You can then email Norm at [email protected] and ask him to refer to the email I sent to him and/or this post where I said he can give you my email address. Then you can contact me directly about simulations if you think you can do it.

    I actually use KO with AA89mTc because it is slightly more powerful, I believe, than HL with AA78mTc but most importantly KO with AA89mTc has an unbalance of 4 per deck so that true count calculations near a true count of 4 where your maximum bet out are very accurate since they are not affected in errors in estimated decks remaining anywhere as much as HL with AA78mTc is. I showed this also in a previous post.


    But I want to concentrate on simulation of HL with AA78mTc because, since it is balanced, the simulation should be somewhat easier and a simulation of HL with AA78mTc will prove my point for KO with AA89mTc as well. No need to simulate KO with AA89mTc which would be very difficult.

    Finally I had suggested just plugging in changes for insurance and hard 12 v 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 to make the changes easier. But actually AA78mTc with HL helps with 12 out of the illustrious 18. And it helps with stiautons outside the Illustrious 18 also but I do not want to drive you crazy.

    But if you can do your simulations using just the 12 of the Illustrious 18 improvements when AA78mTc is added to HL then that would be perfect.

    Here are the 12 of the Illustrious 18 that AA78mTc helps HL with.
    HL vs HL + k(AA78mTc) SORTED.jpg

    I am looking forward to hearing from you. Please contact me as soon as you get my contact info so we can discuss how to proceed. A simulation will make all who participated in this thread happy.

    Attached Files Attached Files

  11. #141
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,461
    Blog Entries
    59


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    My reply: "CVData requires 16 licenses to run in development mode and around 350 files" was in response to your request for the source code so that you could modify it. It simply isn't possible for you to modify it as you don't have the development licenses. It's fairly simple to mod CVData to sim this as it's close to something I simmed many years back. But, I was attacked for years after running that sim.
    Last edited by Norm; 12-28-2018 at 04:35 AM.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  12. #142


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    My reply: "CVData requires 16 licenses to run in development mode and around 350 files" was in response to your request for the source code so that you could modify it. It simply isn't possible for you to modify it as you don't have the development licenses. It's fairly simple to mod CVData to sim this as it's close to something I simmed many years back. But, I was attacked for years after running that sim.
    HI Norm

    Thanks for replying. I do not want to get you in trouble so if you think you could get in trouble for doing a simulation of HL with AA78mTc then don't. I was happy without sims. It was not my idea to do simulations. I was happy just presenting my results But many of the readers of this post are the ones who wanted the simulations as many will not accept my results without the sims.

    But I do thank you for your efforts. If you can do the sim without getting in trouble then great, but if you think you will get in trouble then don't. I do not want to put you on the spot.

    If you can sim it then Gronbog will not have to. If not then Gronbog said he would sim this if you can't so I told Gronbog to email you and you can then give him my email address.

    I deliberately chose to sim HL with AA78mTc to make your sim as simple as possible. I figured you already had HL sim software and I wanted to keep everything balanced to make the sim as simple as possible. I personally use KO with AA89mTc which is unbalanced and would probably be much more difficult to sim. Sim of HL with AA78mTc is enough to prove my point with the KO with AA89mTc also. I do not want to drive anyone crazy.

    So again thanks for your efforts and do what you think is best.


  13. #143


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by BoSox View Post
    Life is not fair. You are not the only one who makes bold statements around here without proven sims. But the other person cannot be bothered because no one else uses his system.
    It has been made abundantly clear to me that virtually all readers of this post want sims including DonSchl before they accept my results.

    Please do not get the idea that I am opposed to sims. I just did not think it was necessary and I do not have the software to do sims myself.

    So I would be very happy if someone could run sims to put this question on the validity and power of the HL with AA78mTc to bed. I suggested just using the 12 of the Illustrious 18 I listed in a previous thread so as to make simulation of HL with AA78mTc as simple as possible.

    There are more strategy changes using the HL with AA78mTc but I do not want to confuse the issue and the main gain will be from the 12 Illustrious 18 changes I mentioned above.

    Using the 12 Illustrious 18 is more than enough to prove or disprove HL with AA78mTc and I hope someone can do the sims.

    Thanks for your replies and interest.



Page 11 of 72 FirstFirst ... 9101112132161 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. High Edge Side Bets
    By knoxstrong in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 08-26-2021, 07:44 AM
  2. Adding AA78mTc to High Low
    By bjanalyst in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-27-2021, 05:21 AM
  3. Betting side bet lucky ladies on High Counts?
    By Tenlavuu in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-01-2018, 05:24 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.