Add 7m9c to HL to improve betting and surrender

[bjanalyst]

Read my last reply to you. The 7m9c count is a level one plus/minus balanced side count. You are counting the 7s as +1 and teh 9s as -1 as they come out of the shoe, You rememver a SINGLE integer in your head, the 7m9c. So you remember the HL running count whichis an integer and the 7m9c which is also an integer. You remember two integers, period. And adding (1/2)*(7m9c) to the HL increases Beting Efficinecy which is most iimportnat for the shoe game.

I have keep things as simple as possible here, Two level one blaanced plus/minus counts and two integers to keep in your head.

[Freightman]

Oh no!!! This crap again. Did you compare your system to Hi-lo with side count 7? I am guessing that Hi-lo with side count 7 vs Hi-lo performs 6% better in SCORE. Counting the 9s as negative will have a harmful effect on insurance and hard 12 decisions but it does enhance the 14, 15 and 16 decisions. Siding count both 7s and 9s doesn't alway improve SCORE.

All I see in the tables are correlations. You mention you want to increase SCORE. How come there are no calculation for SCORE in your charts. You thinking that increase the correlations would increase SCORE I don't think this is necessary true.

Side counting 7 and 9 in this mess I think is more about PE vs BC. I can give examples, but I’m really seriously not interested in the effort of doing so. Further, I don’t know if it affects a SCORE or not, but if it does, then different tag values should be looked at for more oomph.

Counting the 9 won’t affect insurance decisions as such (see caveat), it will simply affect the strike point where it becomes profitable. Now for the caveat - a surplus or deficit of 9’s can be a linear factor that can alter the insurance strike point. Now, I really have no idea if this conglomeration side counts the ace, but if it does, then a surplus or deficit of aces would be far more effective for that purpose, increasing significantly the return on the most valuable index of all - insurance -this would increase PE, and is more easily measurable that can in fact be used to increase SCORE.

Now, I’d be curious if anyone is seriously contemplating this count system. For me the answer is no, and it further seems to me that effort expended in promoting this system is wasted. Mind you, it’s a free country.

[bjanalyst]

Simulation needed to prove claim. Hi-lo + side count 7 improve Hi-lo 6% in SCORE. Why would counting 9s as negative perform on par with Hi-OPT II with ASC?

Read my last reply to you. The 7m9c count is a level one plus/minus balanced side count. You are counting the 7s as +1 and the 9s as -1 as they come out of the shoe,

You are NOT keeping a side count of 7s and you are NOT keeping a side count of 9s.

You remember a SINGLE integer in your head, the 7m9c. So you remember the HL running count which is an integer and the 7m9c which is also an integer. You remember two integers, period. And adding (1/2)*(7m9c) to the HL increases Betting Efficiency which is most important for the shoe game. And 7m9c helps with surrendering hard 14 v 9, T, A and hard 13 v T.

I have keep things as simple as possible here, Two level one balanced plus/minus counts and two integers to keep in your head.

[bjanalyst]

Side counting 7 and 9 in this mess I think is more about PE vs BC. I can give examples, but I’m really seriously not interested in the effort of doing so. Further, I don’t know if it affects a SCORE or not, but if it does, then different tag values should be looked at for more oomph.

Counting the 9 won’t affect insurance decisions as such (see caveat), it will simply affect the strike point where it becomes profitable. Now for the caveat - a surplus or deficit of 9’s can be a linear factor that can alter the insurance strike point. Now, I really have no idea if this conglomeration side counts the ace, but if it does, then a surplus or deficit of aces would be far more effective for that purpose, increasing significantly the return on the most valuable index of all - insurance -this would increase PE, and is more easily measurable that can in fact be used to increase SCORE.

Now, I’d be curious if anyone is seriously contemplating this count system. For me the answer is no, and it further seems to me that effort expended in promoting this system is wasted. Mind you, it’s a free country.

Again, I am tired of explaining this again and again.

Please read my other posts before replying. You are keeping two simple level one plus/minus balanced counts and two integers in your head, period!

You are NOT tracking a side of 7s and 9s. You count the 7s as +1 and the 9s as -1 as they come out of the shoe and keep a single integer in your head, the 7m9c which along with the HL which is also a single integer is used to calculate a playing strategy running count = psrc = HL + k*(7m9c) for any given situation. The value of "k" depend on the situation. For insurance, k = 0 then psrc = HL. For betting k = 1/2 so betting running count = HL + (1/2)*(7m9c) and for surrendering hard 14 v 9, T, A and hard 13 v T k = 2 so psrc = HL + 2*(7m9c).

Most of the time for playing strategy variations, k = 0 so psrc = HL. But for betting, k = +1/2 so for betting you use k = +1/2 or brc = HL + (1/2)*(7m9c) 100% of the time.

So the value of "k" varies by situation and you choose the value of "k" for any given situation to give the best results.

I am not going o give any more charts here as I can see you have a hard time understanding very basic principles. I will try to keep things as simple as possible for you.

So this is simple. You keep two integers in your head, the HL and 7m9c, and both the HL and 7m9c are plus/minus balanced counts.

[Freightman]

Side counting 7 and 9 in this mess I think is more about PE vs BC. I can give examples, but I’m really seriously not interested in the effort of doing so. Further, I don’t know if it affects a SCORE or not, but if it does, then different tag values should be looked at for more oomph.

Counting the 9 won’t affect insurance decisions as such (see caveat), it will simply affect the strike point where it becomes profitable. Now for the caveat - a surplus or deficit of 9’s can be a linear factor that can alter the insurance strike point. Now, I really have no idea if this conglomeration side counts the ace, but if it does, then a surplus or deficit of aces would be far more effective for that purpose, increasing significantly the return on the most valuable index of all - insurance -this would increase PE, and is more easily measurable that can in fact be used to increase SCORE.

Now, I’d be curious if anyone is seriously contemplating this count system. For me the answer is no, and it further seems to me that effort expended in promoting this system is wasted. Mind you, it’s a free country.

Also, I get that the 7 9 is a simple plus minus side count, which can add extra credence to the surrender decision of 14 v 9 or 10. In the scheme of things, it’s not going to add much. However, if you’re inclined to side count 79, why not do 6789. That will do more credible things for you, including, which I’m sure can be figured out, improvements in PE as well giving more information regarding the insurance decision.

[Freightman]

Again, I am tired of explaining this again and again.

Please read my other posts before replying. You are keeping two simple level one plus/minus balanced counts and two integers in your head, period!

You are NOT tracking a side of 7s and 9s. You count the 7s as +1 and the 9s as -1 as they come out of the shoe and keep a single integer in your head, the 7m9c which along with the HL which is also a single integer is used to calculate a playing strategy running count = psrc = HL + k*(7m9c) for any given situation. The value of "k" depend on the situation. For insurance, k = 0 then psrc = HL. For betting k = 1/2 so betting running count = HL + (1/2)*(7m9c) and for surrendering hard 14 v 9, T, A and hard 13 v T k = 2 so psrc = HL + 2*(7m9c).

Most of the time for playing strategy variations, k = 0 so psrc = HL. But for betting, k = +1/2 so for betting you use k = +1/2 or brc = HL + (1/2)*(7m9c) 100% of the time.

So the value of "k" varies by situation and you choose the value of "k" for any given situation to give the best results.

I am not going o give any more charts here as I can see you have a hard time understanding very basic principles. I will try to keep things as simple as possible for you.

So this is simple. You keep two integers in your head, the HL and 7m9c, and both the HL and 7m9c are plus/minus balanced counts.

Trust me, I get it, as I’ve just said in the post above. However, I don’t care.

[seriousplayer]

Read my last reply to you. The 7m9c count is a level one plus/minus balanced side count. You are counting the 7s as +1 and the 9s as -1 as they come out of the shoe,

You are NOT keeping a side count of 7s and you are NOT keeping a side count of 9s.

You remember a SINGLE integer in your head, the 7m9c. So you remember the HL running count which is an integer and the 7m9c which is also an integer. You remember two integers, period. And adding (1/2)*(7m9c) to the HL increases Betting Efficiency which is most important for the shoe game. And 7m9c helps with surrendering hard 14 v 9, T, A and hard 13 v T.

I have keep things as simple as possible here, Two level one balanced plus/minus counts and two integers to keep in your head.

I get what you are saying. It will NOT make a "significant" improvement in SCORE no matter how you modify the mechanics.

[Gramazeka]

I get what you are saying. It will NOT make a "significant" improvement in SCORE no matter how you modify the mechanics.

You is wrong. Do you read posts Brett Harris before ?

[bjanalyst]

For the shoe game BETTING efficiency is most important. The 7m9c improves HL betting effiiciency. Wong said the betting is much more important than playing strategy variations for the shoe game. Simuilations done by Gronbog on my KO with 5m7c and AA89mTc and HL with AA78mTc showed that imporving betting effieincy increased the SCORE around three times as much as imporving playing efficiency So maximizing the betting is most important.

I told you that use brc = betting running count = HL + (1/2)*(7m9c) for betting and you have a count that has approximately the same BE as the HO2 with ASC. When 1/2*(7m9c) is added to HL you have a system where brc counts the 7s are counts as +1/2 and the nines as -1/2. This is exactly the tag values of the 7 and 9 needed for betting.

So the primary reason for the 7m9c is to increase BE. But as a side benefit, since you have the 7m9c anyhow, use if to help with surrendeirng hard 14 v 9, T, A and hard 13 v T. It is also helpful for standing on hard 14 v T where you stand on hard 14 v T if KO + 3*(7m9c) >= 9*dr. You maximum bet is out in each of theses plays were are very sensitive to 7m9c. And remember the Ten is the up card in three of these plays (hard 14 v T hit/stand, hard 14 v T surrender, hard 13 v T) so these situations occur often. And as I said proper surrender increases expected value and decreases risk all with your maximum bet out so you have a huge boost in the SCORE.

As I expaliend you use psrc = HL + 2*(7m9c) for these surrender plays. That means these surrender decisions are very sensitive to the 7m9c. Your maximum bet is out on these plays and you want to have a very accurate surender decision which you get with 7m9c.

So in summary 7m9c helps first and foremost with betting when use\d with the HL. Secondly it helps with hit/stand hard 14 v T and surrendering hard 14 v 9, T, A and hard 13 v T. There are other plays that 7m9c helps with but I will not go into them here. The ones I just listed are the major plays that 7m9c helps with.

[seriousplayer]

You is wrong. Do you read posts Brett Harris before ?

I am very familiar with the BRH System. Bjanalyst's idea is contrary to Brett Harris'. BRH System advance side counting was meant for high level count systems, like level 2 and 3. The difference is Bjanalyst is applying advance side counting technique to a level 1 count system which don't work well because of the level 1 tag values.

He did that to resist using higher level counts.

[Gramazeka]

It does not increase SCORE ? Or Hi Opt 1 works poorly ? I not understand you. Ok, please read Snyder- http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/sdcnt.htm

[bjanalyst]

I am very familiar with the BRH System. Bjanalyst's idea is contrary to Brett Harris'. BRH System advance side counting was meant for high level count systems, like level 2 and 3. The difference is Bjanalyst is applying advance side counting technique to a level 1 count system which don't work well because of the level 1 tag values.

He did that to resist using higher level counts.

The primacy count being level 2 or 3 has nothing to do with whether a side count will work well or not.

I have heard constant complaints about using the Unbalanced KO and complicated side counts. Many counters love the HL and refuse to switch.

So I decided for those who refuse to switch to KO and want to keep HL and to make things as simple as possible, to add one simple plus/minus level one side count to the hL which would increase both BE and PE.

The 7m9c is a very simple level one plus/minus count which is even easier to keep since neither the 7 or the 9 are counted in the HL (not a requirement but nice in that it makes keeping the 7m9c even easier).

You should always be looking for the best game and you should always play a game with surrender. So if you find a game with surrender my prediction is that the HL with 7m9c will come in very, very close to the HO2 w ASC. The HO2 w ASC does not do a great job for surrender so what HL w 7m9c falls behind the HO2 w ASC for standard blackjack it picks up with better surrender plays . And the BE of HL + (1/2)*(7m9c) is the same as the BE of HO2 w ASC.

So I will stick by what I have said from the very beginning. HL w 7m9c is an EXTREMELY easy system where you can use the HL indices and playing strategies 90% of the time with only a few cases where 7m9c is used and then use brc = HL + (1/2)*(7m9c) for betting and you a very simple system that if LS is offered, should come in very close to the HO2 w ASC.

[bjanalyst]

It does not increase SCORE ? Or Hi Opt 1 works poorly ? I not understand you. Ok, please read Snyder- http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/sdcnt.htm

BE is most important near the end of the shoe especially in deeply dealt games like Snyder suggested you look for. And while in general penetration is more important than rule, the surrender is an exceptional rule that should be looked for as it increases expected value and reduces risk and so has a huge impacts on increasing SCORE. So you should look for deep penetration and LS.