Hello all,

I am reading with interest Don's discussion of Complete Basic Strategy ("Complete Basic Strategy EVs," Appendix A, "Blackjack Attack: Playing the Pros' Way' - 3rd edition).

Question 1) I realize it's not much, but exactly how much player advantage can be garnered from a player using Complete Basic Strategy and flat-betting (no counting, no progressions) in, say, a 6 deck, H17, -0.43 player advantage game? (Sorry if I missed the answer in Don's book.).

Question 2) I was surprised that the Complete Basic Strategy Tables don't take into account all of the cards from the previous hands, only the cards from the current hand. I guess that's where the Illustrious 18, the Catch-22 (pg. 375), and the Fab 4 come into play?

Question 3) For the purposes of an absolutely flawless, Perfect Basic Strategy, I guess it would be impossible, short of using a computer, for a player to take into account the exact value (and not 'just' an approximation, as with counting) of every card already played?

Question 4) If this were possible, could it give the flat betting player the advantage in a single deck, double deck, or six deck game?

Question 5) Would it be possible to integrate Complete Basic Strategy Tables with all of the 'most influential' indices, producing a master set of charts that would obviate the need to consult multiple charts (e.g., Complete Basic Strategy Tables, Deviation Play Tables) and also perhaps eliminate confusion as to what decision to make if faced with data advocating competing decisions?

Question 6) For a flat bettor, could someone please tell me the approximate correlation between a round or rounds with any positive running (not true) count and a win on the next hand for, say, a 6-deck, H17, -0.43 player advantage game?

Question 7) For example, whenever, say, Rounds 1-5 of the above-mentioned 6-deck game reflect any positive running (not true) count, it seems that Round 6 will win more than 50% of the time. If this is true, wouldn't this be a good way to avoid playing a whole shoe and thereby not look like a counter because you are just flat betting only Rounds 1 through 5 and then betting big on Round 6, after which you leave the table, repeat at another casino, etc. Or, if the player would indeed have an advantage for Round 6 in the aforementioned example, perhaps said advantage is too small to capitalize on?

I realize my questions are not limited to one topic. So, if possible, please respond in a manner similar to the following:

Question 1) "Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx."

Question 2) "Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx."

Question 3) "Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx."

Question 4) "Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx."

Question 5) "Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx."

Question 6) "Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx."

Question 7) "Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx."

Please reconsider before posting a reply that contains nonproductive answers. Snide, disrespectful, or overly terse comments tend to, among other things, derail the thread.

Thank you in advance for your replies!