Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: An alternative to computing true count

  1. #1


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    An alternative to computing true count

    Blackjack counting methodology dictates making betting and play decisions by calculating true count and and comparing TC to the appropriate index. There is another way to perform this comparison that has some advantages.

    From algebra we know that the expression
    if true count >= index
    which is the same as
    if (running count divided by number of decks remaining) >= index
    is equivalent to (by multiplying both sides of the expression by number of decks remaining)
    if running count >= (index multiplied by number of decks remaining)
    Let's define running index (or RI) as index multiplied by the number of decks remaining. Comparing RC to RI will always give the same result as comparing TC to the index.

    Here are some of the advantages of RI over TC:
    1. Multiplication is much quicker and less error prone than division, especially when the number of decks is not an integer. Moreover, the difference is more pronounced when the number of decks is expressed in smaller units such as quarter decks. Speed is of the essence, not only to conserve mental energy but to enable smooth play without giving a tell (to borrow a poker term) by taking time to calculate TC.

    Try doing the math for a case where the running count is 11, the index is 3, and there are 3.5 decks remaining. Using TC you divide 3.5 into 11, getting a true count of 3.14 (or approximated as 3+) which is greater than the index. Using RI, you muliply 3 x 3.5 getting 10.5, and running count is greater than the running index giving the same decision result. Try simple and more complicated cases and I believe you will find the RI is never slower than TC.

    2. If you are playing at a table where there are multiple players and are not playing first base, RI has an advantage over TC in that you can calculate the RI as soon as you identify the relevant index for your first decision. Unless the players drawing cards ahead of you take enough cards to change the number of decks or fraction thereof, the RI remains constant as players take cards, while the running count may change. You have already done the math to calculate RI, so when it is your turn all you have to do is the comparison of the current RC to RI.

    True count may have an advantage over running index when you have to make multiple decisions in the same hand and the running count doesn't change enough to have to recalculate TC, but these situations are relatively rare.

    The RI can help to quantify situations that experienced players know instinctively whether to calculate accurately or to approximate, such as whether to insure. If you have an 8 deck shoe with a 2 deck cut, the running index for insuring (assuming the index is 3) varies linearly from 24 at the start of the shoe to 6 at the end of the shoe, and is easily recalculated as the shoe progresses.

    Thoughts?

  2. #2


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    If it aint broke don't fix it.

  3. #3


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Meistro123 View Post
    If it aint broke don't fix it.
    We should encourage people who joined in 2011 and only spoke up five times.

  4. #4


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    This is also detailed in Arnold Snyder's book....

  5. #5


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    So do you have to redo all the departure indices then?

  6. #6


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Yes, this works, HOWEVER, if you're betting based on TC you still have to convert to TC.

    I have done this, however, when I'm close to an index for a play decision.

  7. #7


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

    Thoughts?
    Both methods will produce very similar results. It depends if you like to do multiplications or divisions.

  8. #8


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by cuts you up View Post
    So do you have to redo all the departure indices then?
    No you would essentially do the math backwards. You have a index number that you multiply by the number of half decks and that gives you a running count limit. If your running count is higher than this limit than you take the index.

    This is literally in Black belt in Blackjack.

  9. #9


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Obi-wan21 View Post
    This is also detailed in Arnold Snyder's book....
    Yeah, I remember first reading about this approach to TC there as well.

  10. #10


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    The mousetrap we have works perfectly well.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. True Count of Running Count 21 Half Decks 6
    By BlackJohn in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 02-17-2019, 11:27 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-07-2014, 01:23 PM
  3. True Edge vs. True Count
    By spassky962000 in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 04-08-2014, 02:05 PM
  4. zoomie: Alternative count for SP21
    By zoomie in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-25-2008, 08:57 AM
  5. Norm Wattenberger: True Count Compression and True Edge
    By Norm Wattenberger in forum Main Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-02-2005, 10:38 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.