Add 7m9c to HL to improve betting and surrender

[Freightman]

This post seals the deal to display that you have no concept of what you're doing! You desperately would like this play to be included in the sims?? By all means, add it! It occurs once every 84,000 hands, or about once every 840 hours, so by all means it should make an enormous contribution to the ultimate SCORE!!!

Don

Hmm, perhaps the play could be incorporated into the Illustrious 964.

[DSchles]

Hmm, perhaps the play could be incorporated into the Illustrious 964.

LOL! Not sure if it would make the cut!

Don

[stringer]

Hmm, perhaps the play could be incorporated into the Illustrious 964.

hahahahahh… that's a good one!!!The sad thing here is that I can't help feeling that Gronbog's time might be better spent calculating something more useful.

[bjanalyst]

This post seals the deal to display that you have no concept of what you're doing! You desperately would like this play to be included in the sims?? By all means, add it! It occurs once every 84,000 hands, or about once every 840 hours, so by all means it should make an enormous contribution to the ultimate SCORE!!!

Don

I really did not want any more posts until sims were done and I did not intend to post again until sims were done but I have to correct this. I agree that 7,7 v 8 DAS will not make much difference in the SCORE and perhaps it should not have been included in the top 7 plays. The major gain of HL w 7m9c is in BE and surrender plays.

But the reason for my response here is that there is an error in the above statement by a factor of 43 which needs to be corrected.

The statement was 7,7 v 8 DAS occurs once every 84,000 hands which comes to 0.0012%.

Table 7.1 of BJA shows that out of every 100,000 hands played 7,7 v 8 DAS occurs once every 43 hands.

So the actual frequency is 0.43% not 0.01%.

So that statement is off by a factor of 43.

I made this post before sim results only because of this blatant error that I would like corrected.

But you made your point. 7,7 v 8 is infrequent and probably should not have been included in the top 7 plays.

But I am not counting on 7,7 v 8. I am counting on increased BE and the surrender plays I mentioned.

So let's see what happens.

Again, I only replied before sims were done to correct this error by a factor of 43. Otherwise I wound have not posted.

So again, please wait until sims are done to post.

If I am proved wrong with the sims then you can bad mouth me all you want.

But wait for the sim results before flinging insults please.

[Freightman]

BJAnalyst said
“ Table 7.1 of BJA shows that out of every 100,000 hands played 7,7 v 8 DAS occurs once every 43 hands. ”

You’ve misread the table, badly as in more than bad. Don will tell you that somewhat more vociferously than me. I look forward to the entertainment value.

[DSchles]

I really did not want any more posts until sims were done and I did not intend to post again until sims were done but I have to correct this. I agree that 7,7 v 8 DAS will not make much difference in the SCORE and perhaps it should not have been included in the top 7 plays. The major gain of HL w 7m9c is in BE and surrender plays.

But the reason for my response here is that there is an error in the above statement by a factor of 43 which needs to be corrected.

The statement was 7,7 v 8 DAS occurs once every 84,000 hands which comes to 0.0012%.

Table 7.1 of BJA shows that out of every 100,000 hands played 7,7 v 8 DAS occurs once every 43 hands.

So the actual frequency is 0.43% not 0.01%.

So that statement is off by a factor of 43.

I made this post before sim results only because of this blatant error that I would like corrected.

But you made your point. 7,7 v 8 is infrequent and probably should not have been included in the top 7 plays.

But I am not counting on 7,7 v 8. I am counting on increased BE and the surrender plays I mentioned.

So let's see what happens.

Again, I only replied before sims were done to correct this error by a factor of 43. Otherwise I wound have not posted.

So again, please wait until sims are done to post.

If I am proved wrong with the sims then you can bad mouth me all you want.

But wait for the sim results before flinging insults please.

Sigh. Patiently, I explain. Table A57 shows that 7,7, vs. occurs 44 times per 100,000, which is 0.044%, so the above (your 0.43%) is off by a factor of 10. The hand occurs precisely once every 2,273 hands. But it gets worse. We aren't interested in the frequency of 7,7 vs. 8. We are interested in how often you get to invoke your mind-boggling departure of splitting 7,7 vs. 8 at TC>=+5, which I clearly stated.

Since >= +5 occurs 2.7% of the time 2,273/0.027 = 84,175, which is how frequently you will get to make your departure -- once every 840 hours. Some of us older folks may be dead by then!

PLEASE don't profess to explain the math to me. PLEASE!

Don

[lij45o6]

Sigh. Patiently, I explain. Table A57 shows that 7,7, vs. occurs 44 times per 100,000, which is 0.044%, so the above (your 0.43%) is off by a factor of 10. The hand occurs precisely once every 2,273 hands. But it gets worse. We aren't interested in the frequency of 7,7 vs. 8. We are interested in how often you get to invoke your mind-boggling departure of splitting 7,7 vs. 8 at TC>=+5, which I clearly stated.

Since >= +5 occurs 2.7% of the time 2,273/0.027 = 84,175, which is how frequently you will get to make your departure -- once every 840 hours. Some of us older folks may be dead by then!

PLEASE don't profess to explain the math to me. PLEASE!

Don

To put it simply: Once every 35 days...assuming you are playing 100 hph for 24 hours per day.

In other words : insignificant!

[bjanalyst]

Sigh. Patiently, I explain. Table A57 shows that 7,7, vs. occurs 44 times per 100,000, which is 0.044%, so the above (your 0.43%) is off by a factor of 10. The hand occurs precisely once every 2,273 hands. But it gets worse. We aren't interested in the frequency of 7,7 vs. 8. We are interested in how often you get to invoke your mind-boggling departure of splitting 7,7 vs. 8 at TC>=+5, which I clearly stated.

Since >= +5 occurs 2.7% of the time 2,273/0.027 = 84,175, which is how frequently you will get to make your departure -- once every 840 hours. Some of us older folks may be dead by then!

PLEASE don't profess to explain the math to me. PLEASE!

Don

Point made and sorry for my mistake.

I asked Gronbog to take out 7,7 v 8 DAS as one of the top strategy changes for HL w 7m9c. I put in in there because It increased CC of HL by 37% for this play. But it occurs too infrequently to be included in the top HL v 7m9c strategy changes.

So if Gronbog has not done the sims yet, I asked him to stick to the top 6 strategy changes and the correction for HL betting that I mentioned first. I should have stuck with what I first said. Thanks for making this point about the infrequent occurrence of 7,7 v 8 DAS.

So here is what is being simulated then:

1 brc = betting running count = HL + (1/2)*(7m9c)

2 Six most important playing strategy changes

a Surrender 8,8 v T DAS if HL + 2*(7m9c) >= 2*dr
b Surrender hard 14 v 9 if HL + 2*(7m9c) >= 6*dr
c Surrender hard 14 v T if HL + 2*(7m9c) >= 3*dr
d Surrender hard 14 v A if HL + 2*(7m9c) >= 6*dr
e Surrender hard 13 v T if HL + 2*(7m9c) >= 7*dr
f Stand hard 14 v T if HL + 3*(7m9c) >= 9*dr

3 All other strategy changes use stand-alone High Low.
If psrc = playing strategy running count = HL + k*(7m9c) then k = 0 for all other strategy changes other than those in (1) and (2) above.

If this works out then the beauty of this is that a HL player can continue to use the HL count with these few correction patches, like band aids, to the HL count. No need to learn any new system or indices except for the top six mentioned above and correction for betting.

Sorry for including 7,7 v 8 DAS as a top HL w 7m9c strategy change. I stand corrected.

[bjanalyst]

To put it simply: Once every 35 days...assuming you are playing 100 hph for 24 hours per day.

In other words : insignificant!

There ae other plays that 7m9c help with that are not insignifant but are not worthy for the top 6 either. The 7m9c when used with thiese plays increases the CC in the 2% to 6% range which is why I did not included in the top 6. I included standing on hard 14 v T if HL + 3*(7m9c) >= 9*dr in the top 6 because CC of the HL for this play was increased 37% by including 7m9c with the HL.

Many of these plays with a 2% to 6% increase in CC of HL are in the Illustrious 18 so that is why I am mentioning them here.

If sims results of the top 6 and BE gains show significant improvement in HL, then if player is keeping the 7m9c side count anyhow he might as well memorize these few extra plays and take advantage of them.

1 Double hard 9 v 7 if HL + 7m9c >= 4*dr

2 Double hard 10 v T if HL + 7m9c >= 4*dr
2a Risk Averse: use 7*dr instead of 4*dr

3 Stand hard 13 v 2 if HL + 7m9c >= (-1)*dr

4 Stand hard 13 v 3 if HL + 1.5*(7m9c) >= (-3)*dr

5 Stand hard 16 v 9 if HL - 7m9c >= 5*dr

6 Stand hard 16 v T if HL + 7m9c >= 0

7 Stand hard 15 v T if HL + (1/2)*(7m9c) >= 4*dr

8 Split T,T v 5 or 6 if HL + (1/2)*(7m9c) >= 5*dr
8a Risk Averse: use 6*dr instead of 5*dr

And I would also like to mention three more extended Late Surrender plays that 7m9c helps with:

Extended Late Surrender

a Surrender hard 14 v 8 if psrc1 = HL + 1.5*(7m9c) >= 11*dr

b Surrender hard 13 v 9 if psrc2 = HL + 2*(7m9c) >= 11*dr

c Surrender hard 13 v A if psrc3 = HL + 3*(7m9c) >= 11*dr

Initially someone looking at these surrender plays which have HL indices of around 10 or so, would say making these plays is crazy. The index is too high.

But remember, that is based on the HL count and index of 10.

The SD of theses psrc = HL + k*(7m9c) is larger than the SD of the HL and so will occur more frequently.

So, for example, surrender hard 13 v A if psrc3 = HL + 3*(7m9c) >= 11*dr

But SD(psrc3) / SD(HL) = 1.4676 / 0.8771 = 1.6733. So a psrc3 true count of 11 occurs as often as a HL true count of 11 / 1.6733 = 6.6. So now, taking into account SD, the psrc3 index of 11 does not seem so extreme. And this is a surrender play with your maximum bet out and surrender increases expected value and decreases risk so should have a significant impact on ScORE.

These plays are NOT part of the top 6 but I mentioned them here to show you that there is a bit more gain to be had from using 7m9c with HL in addition to the gain of using the top 6 plays.

So let's see how the top 6 plays sim results turn out. If they show significant improvement then I can go into these additional plays I mentioned above and there are even a few more that I still did not mention above but probably not all that significant so I am not mentioning them here, especially after the brouhaha over my including 7,7 v 8 DAS play.

[Stealth]

I do not know how to do sims.

Then why are you posting possible counting solutions here?

If Don tells you you are wrong, then stop wasting your time and Gron's.

[bjanalyst]

Then why are you posting possible counting solutions here?

If Don tells you you are wrong, then stop wasting your time and Gron's.

Don said I was wrong to include 7,7 v 8 DAS in my top 6. He did not say I was wrong with my system. Wait for sim results please.

[DSchles]

Don said I was wrong to include 7,7 v 8 DAS in my top 6. He did not say I was wrong with my system. Wait for sim results please.

What I said about your system was that it will not rival Hi-Opt II, as you claimed it would.

Don

[bjanalyst]

What I said about your system was that it will not rival Hi-Opt II, as you claimed it would.

Don

Thanks for the clarification. My goal with the 7m9c was to put a patch to the HL to improve the HL. My goal was not necessarily to beat the HO2 w ASC although I would not mind beating HO2 w ASC.

Because I mentioned that I think that for the LS game that the HL w 7m9c might beat the HO2 w ASC everyone automatically assumes that was my goal in including the 7m9c with the HL. My goal was to improve the HL. If it beats HO2 w ASC when LS is offered then great. But I wanted an easy side count to give a significant improvement to HL which I believe that the 7m9c will achieve.

So here is the scenario: BE - betting efficiency and PE = playing efficiency

BE: HL w 7m9c and HO2 w ASC tie
PE for regular blackjack: HO2 w ASC beats HL w 7m9c
PE for LS: HL w 7m9c beats HO2 w ASC

So as far as I am concerned, I think the final SCORE will be a toss up. I cannot predict the winner.

So what I will need from the sims is the SCORE for HL, HL w 7m9c with top 6 strategy changes and HO2 w ASC.

Remember, there are a few more 7m9c strategy changes to HL in addition to the the top 6 so there is a bit more power that can be squeaked out of the HL w 7m9c.

I am very interested in the sims results and I want to thank Gronbog again for being so kind as to do sims for everyone's benefit.