See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 14

Thread: True Count of Running Count 21 Half Decks 6

  1. #1


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    True Count of Running Count 21 Half Decks 6

    Say you have a running count of 21 and to get the true count you must divide the running count by the number of half decks. In this case let's say there are 6 half decks remaining. What is the true count?

    In case this is not a clear problem, to use a whole number as the true count, first, choose the closest multiple of 6 to 21. In this case, that could be either 24 or 18.

    It would be easiest if the running count was a multiple of the remaining half decks outright. It would be easy to choose the multiple of the remaining half decks that was closest. Yet, there are two multiples of 6 within an equal distance of 21.

    What is the best decision or rather, what are the implications of either decision. FYI the true count would either be 4 or 3.

    6 = Remaining Half Decks

    21 = Running Count

    Your time is appreciated. Obviously, the true count you decide affects the plays where deviation may be necessary. Is there a rule of thumb to these situations?

  2. #2


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    a lot of index are floored .

  3. #3


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Or you can use 3.5
    . I do that myself . for betting i would use 2.5 if the true count is very close to the middle between 2 and 3 and for playing decisions i would usually floor it. You make sure you have a high enough bankroll , eg 1/3 or 1/4 kelly then you maybe slightly over bet by half a true count and not have a huge increase in risk .

  4. #4


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    AFAIK the conventional wisdom is to truncate so the answer would be 3 with your wacky half deck method of calculating the true count.

  5. #5


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by BlackJohn View Post
    Say you have a running count of 21 and to get the true count you must divide the running count by the number of half decks. In this case let's say there are 6 half decks remaining. What is the true count?
    What count / system are you using that converts TC like this? Did you maybe misunderstand the meaning of half deck estimation?

  6. #6


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Meistro123 View Post
    AFAIK the conventional wisdom is to truncate so the answer would be 3 with your wacky half deck method of calculating the true count.
    Quote Originally Posted by RCJH View Post
    What count / system are you using that converts TC like this? Did you maybe misunderstand the meaning of half deck estimation?
    What am I missing? Revere Point Count (to name the one I know of) uses half deck estimation / divisor. What's the wacky part? I probably missed something.

  7. #7


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by therefinery View Post
    What am I missing? Revere Point Count (to name the one I know of) uses half deck estimation / divisor. What's the wacky part? I probably missed something.
    Or maybe I read too much into it. The OP is a new counter, and I thought maybe he got half deck estimation confused with how to figure TC.

  8. #8


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by BlackJohn View Post
    Say you have a running count of 21 and to get the true count you must divide the running count by the number of half decks. In this case let's say there are 6 half decks remaining. What is the true count?<snip>
    BlackJohn,

    First, a little background information.

    The three methods used to convert fractional true counts (FTC's) into integer TC's are Flooring, Rounding, and Truncating.

    Flooring means "the TC is the largest integer that is less than or equal to the FTC". Thus, +3.5 floors to +3, and as another example, -2.9 floors to -3. When flooring, positive FTC's move towards 0, while negative FTC's move away from 0.

    Rounding means "if the fractional part of the FTC is 0.5 or more, increase the magnitude of the FTC by one; if not, don't. Then the TC is the integer part of the FTC with the same sign as the FTC." Thus, +3.5 rounds to +4, -2.9 rounds to -3, +1.3 rounds to +1, and -1.3 rounds to -1. To find the TC when rounding, if the fractional part of the FTC is ½ or more, move away from 0; if less than ½, move towards 0.

    Truncation means "the TC is the integer part of the FTC." In other words, just drop any fractional part. Thus, +3.5 truncates to +3, and -2.9 truncates to -2. When truncating, always move towards 0.

    To answer your question, you should use the same conversion method as was used to generate the indexes. For convenience, your betting schedule should also use the same conversion method.

    Now, if you don't know what conversion method was used in your case, post what system you are using and most likely someone here will be able to tell you.

    Hope this helps!

    Dog Hand

  9. #9


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Seriously, thank you for your feedback. My "wacky" half deck method is used with the UAPC. Before you post "don't", go post on another thread or do something else with your time please. As I've learnt, the manner in which Ken Uston generated his indices isn't widely popularized. So, thank you for any light you can shed.

  10. #10


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by BlackJohn View Post
    Seriously, thank you for your feedback. My "wacky" half deck method is used with the UAPC. Before you post "don't", go post on another thread or do something else with your time please. As I've learnt, the manner in which Ken Uston generated his indices isn't widely popularized. So, thank you for any light you can shed.
    Ascertaining the TC by dividing by number of half decks remaining is perfectly common. I've been doing it with the RPC for 44 years! Once you get your answer, follow Dog Hand's advice, above. Today, flooring has emerged as the methodology of choice. Your RC of +21 with six half decks left would floor to a TC of +3.

    Don

  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
    The most accurate decisions come from spreading the data out more. Level 2 counts already spread it out about twice as much by having count tags of 2. But dividing by the number of half decks remaining compresses data rather than speed it out. A level 1 count would spread out data as much as a level 2 count if it divided by the number of double decks expressed to half deck accuracy. This would narrow the bell curve SD for the actual compared to the average in each integer TC bin. So if 6 half decks remained you would divide by 1.5 double decks.

    To illustrate the point about integer TC accuracy consider the following with all divisors to half deck accuracy with TC floored:
    (RC, number of half decks remaining: TC divided by number of half decks, number of full decks, and number of double decks):

    8, 10 half decks remaining: 0, 1, 3
    8, 9 half decks remaining: 0, 1, 3
    8, 8 half decks remaining: 1, 2, 4
    8, 7 half decks remaining: 1, 2, 4
    8, 6 half decks remaining: 1, 2, 5
    8, 5 half decks remaining: 1, 3, 6
    8, 4 half decks remaining: 2, 4, 8
    8, 3 half decks remaining: 2, 5, 10
    8, 2 half decks remaining: 4, 8, 16

    Between 1 deck and 5 decks remaining:
    For the RC of 8 dividing by half decks remaining spreads the data across 3 integer TC bins for a range of 4 TC.
    For the RC of 8 dividing by full decks remaining expressed to half deck accuracy spreads the same data across 5 integer TC bins for a range of 7 TC.
    For the RC of 8 dividing by double decks remaining expressed to half deck accuracy spreads the data across 7 integer TC bins for a range of 13 TC.

    Now a sim can make half deck bins to get more bins in the same range and spread out data across more bins that way to get tighter bell curves but then you have to take the math to an additional decimal place. People tend to think in integers. So doing what you can to keep everything you need to calculate or memorize to integers is easier for most people.
    Last edited by Three; 02-15-2019 at 06:45 AM.

  12. #12


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    I would use half deck TC for betting, so 3.5, and floor for playing decisions always. Even if say, you're at 3.9, and the index is 4, you don't use the index

  13. #13
    Senior Member bigplayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    1,807


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    For insurance purposes 3.5. For everything else, 3. It depends on how your system was developed, but most systems are created using flooring which always rounds down. That means everything from 3.0 to 3.99 is counted as a 3 and everything from -0.01 to -1 counts as -1. If you want to use other methods (rounding or truncating) your system should be created using that method.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. True count vs Running count
    By zbest1966 in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-28-2018, 11:53 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-07-2014, 01:23 PM
  3. Converting KO Running Count to TKO True Count
    By MercySakesAlive in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-15-2014, 06:33 AM

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.