Taking insurance when the RC=0.

[BigJer]

If the insurance count is exactly 0, you will lower your variance by insuring any soft hand, any 8- 11, and any 18-21. (In this
context , the table below is an approximation, because it does not condition on a count of 0.

Does anyone use this?

[tomf23]

why would i light money on fire to limit variance?

[BigJer]

why would i light money on fire to limit variance?

Because that's when the bet's even on the mentioned hands, and it reduces variance.

[DSchles]

Because that's when the bet's even on the mentioned hands, and it reduces variance.

There have been extensive studies done on different insurance indices for different hands. I have never seen one as low as zero (instead of +3, for multi-deck) for any hands. Reducing variance can be important, but the difference in indices seems too big to me.

Don

[Meistro123]

I think this is in reference to an unbalanced count system where the index for insurance is 0. I know this because OP made a similar post a couple of months ago.


https://www.blackjacktheforum.com/sh...2884-Insurance

[DSchles]

I think this is in reference to an unbalanced count system where the index for insurance is 0. I know this because OP made a similar post a couple of months ago.


https://www.blackjacktheforum.com/sh...2884-Insurance

Well, then, it would surely help if that were stated somewhere. Thanks for the clarification.

Don

[BigJer]

I think this is in reference to an unbalanced count system where the index for insurance is 0. I know this because OP made a similar post a couple of months ago.


https://www.blackjacktheforum.com/sh...2884-Insurance

Oooops. I did.

[BigJer]

There have been extensive studies done on different insurance indices for different hands. I have never seen one as low as zero (instead of +3, for multi-deck) for any hands. Reducing variance can be important, but the difference in indices seems too big to me.

Don

Don, BTW, I got the info out of Jimmy G.'s book Beyond Counting.

[Counting_Is_Fun]

Don, BTW, I got the info out of Jimmy G.'s book Beyond Counting.

Ugg, wtf

[JBourne]

There have been extensive studies done on different insurance indices for different hands. I have never seen one as low as zero (instead of +3, for multi-deck) for any hands. Reducing variance can be important, but the difference in indices seems too big to me.

Don

Don, are any of those studies as worth reading? If so, can you provide any breadcrumbs to find it?

[DSchles]

Don, are any of those studies as worth reading? If so, can you provide any breadcrumbs to find it?

The magnificent, definitive study on the subject was done by R. Michael Canjar ("MathProf"), pp. 3-34 of Optimal Play: Mathematical Studies of Games and Gambling, edited by Stewart Ethier and William Eadington. The last page of the article contains complete Hi-Lo indices for every hand you can possibly get. They range from a low of 1.5 (A,9) to a high of 3.5 (T,5 and T,6).

There is also a famous online study by Cacarulo, published here, 16 years ago, in which Norm and I participated: https://www.blackjacktheforum.com/sh...-for-Insurance

Enjoy!

Don

[Optimus Prime]

I read the study, but I don’t understand how the composition of your hand or the dealer’s is relevant to the insurance decision other than, in an ace-reckoned count, to make your decision before counting any aces on the table. What is the reasoning here?

[ShipTheCookies]

The most important piece of information from that link is this quote by Don:

"A friendly word of advice: you would do well, in general, to not quote Frank Scoblete on anything, and, in specific, to even mention his name on this site!"