For HL player who refuses to switch to KO use 5m9c as a side count to HL

[Freightman]

I think you need to add an intermediate strategy. With three different options, you have enough exciting new info to charge $3000 for a FBM bootcamp.

I suppose I could introduce a hi lo - halves intro, followed by the regaled FBM ASC Basic, with the exciting denouement of FBM ASC Advanced.

Intro would counting techniques, indices starting with I18 and Fab 4. comportment,
FBM ASC Basic includes basics of Sidecount via memory, chip handling with color or nut method
Advanced and Advanced emphasizing Quality of True Count, muscled up with dual ramp system for ultimate performance.

Worth a shitload more than 3k.

[Freightman]

I’m going to put a great tip out.
Concentrate on deck estimation. Learn how to judge 1/4 decks. In the future you will thank me.

A similar but easier way would be to round off to full deck and then interpolate. Essentially creating a slightly different ramp based on half true counts

[beating vegas]

Who said it was just for regular counting ?
Perhaps it could be for different skills where that do come up from time to time.

Think better skills. They are games out there to use them.

[Freightman]

Who said it was just for regular counting ?
Perhaps it could be for different skills where that do come up from time to time.

Think better skills. They are games out there to use them.

I was responding from a counting perspective. What you’re suggesting is Advanced Slug Theory, which from my perspective, requires a solid grasp of fundamentals to take maximum advantage.

[beating vegas]

I was responding from a counting perspective. What you’re suggesting is Advanced Slug Theory, which from my perspective, requires a solid grasp of fundamentals to take maximum advantage.

It applies to other things also. There more tools you have the better you be.

[Freightman]

It applies to other things also. There more tools you have the better you be.

At one time, I might have been interested. I’m 90% retired now. Today, I worked for about 1/2 hour returning emails while sitting at my Satellite Starbucks office, after which I shopped with the wife (she was shopping for a new dress). BBQd chicken for dinner. A typical relaxing day.

I used to relish and attack new challenges. Just not interested anymore.

[Wave]

At one time, I might have been interested. I’m 90% retired now. Today, I worked for about 1/2 hour returning emails while sitting at my Satellite Starbucks office, after which I shopped with the wife (she was shopping for a new dress). BBQd chicken for dinner. A typical relaxing day.

I used to relish and attack new challenges. Just not interested anymore.

Dude...you've made it...enjoy it...

[Wave]

I have a new count. You keep a side count of 2,3,4,5,6,7,8 ,9 and Aces.

I haven’t done any sims. But this count will make you an extra 1 dollar an hour.

LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!! ROTFFLMFAO!!!

(In lieu of Good Fellas laughing pic)

[bjanalyst]

You keep using CC (correlation coefficients), a statistical measure of the strength of the relationship between two variables or two data sets. For example, you said HL has WACC of 73.7%. What is the other variable do you compare HL to?

I WACC I calculated CC for each count being compared with around 30 top strategy changes. Then I use the same weight to each of the 30 or so strategy change CC to calculate WACC. Then I just compare WACC between the two counts. WACC is related to PE. Then I also calculate BCC of the two counts. And this can be done in less than 30 minutes with zero variance and has proven to be very accurate when sims were run. If both WACC and BCC of one count 1 is large than count 2 then count 1 SCORE will be higher than count 2 SCORE. This has been shown with over 20 sims by Gronbog of counts he tested for me. In the case of HL w 5m9c and HL w ASC, the CC of HL w 5m9c is larger than BCC of HL w ASC but WACC of HL w 5m9c is lower than HL w ASC. So the SCOREs should be close. The WACC of HL w ASC is 4.9% greater than HL w 5m9c and the BCC of HL w 5m9c is 1.9% greater than HL w ASC but BE is more important than PE in the shoe game, like twice as important. But HL w ASC WACC of 4.9% is 2.5 times the BCC increase of HL w 5m9c so maybe HL w ASC will slightly beat HL w 5m9c but it will be very close.

[bjanalyst]

There are a couple statements bjanalyst makes that require comment. First is the claim that CC is more accurate than sims. This is nonsense. CC is a back of the envelope estimate. It is useful. But, it is in no way as powerful as simulation. The second is that sims do not take into account how a human plays and sim perfect play. Also nonsense. CVData has several settings to simulate player and dealer errors, along with innumerable types of cover play.

Thanks for the explanation. I did not know sims took into account dealer or player errors also. Thanks for the information.

I am not saying and never did say that CC are better than sims but they do give a very good predictions of what the sim results will be.

CC are quicker than sims as they can be run to compare two counts in like 30 minutes with zero variance so if I did say better I meant better because quicker and no variance. But sims are of course better than CC for actual results.

But in defense of CC, every single time the CC increased, even by a very small amount, the SCORE increased, without exception. There were no situations where the CC increased and the SCORE decreased.

As I mentioned before when Gronbog was doing sims on HL w 7m9c there were six top strategy changes but the SCORE decreased when all six CC increased which made no sense. So Gronbog went back and ran 100 million hand sims (less than one hour) one each of the top 6 strategy changes individually. He then found the strategy change that the SCORE did not increase for and found his coding error. He fixed the error and the SCORE increased for each strategy change individually and of course for all six strategy changes applied together.

The point I am making here, is that each of the six strategy changes were tested individually and the SCORE increased for each strategy change that the CC increased. That is how sensitive the SCORE is to CC. Including all six in one sim could hide some errors in CC of individual strategy changes but again every single time the CC increased even for one strategy change tested individually the SCORE increased.

[bjanalyst]

I’m going to put a great tip out.
Concentrate on deck estimation. Learn how to judge 1/4 decks. In the future you will thank me.

Switch to KO which is exact at a true count of four and at true counts of 3, 5, and 6 is more more accurate than HL true counts. You want accuracy for betting and playing strategy at these true counts as that is where your big bets are out. With the KO at a true count of 5, for example, you are one true count point over the pivot of 4 but 5 true count points over the pivot of zero for the balanced HL Thus the HL is five times more sensitive in errors in deck estimation at tc = 5 than the KO is. That is, estimating decks remaining to the nearest full deck for the KO at a true count of 5 is equivalent to the accuracy of estimating decks remaining for the HL to (1/5) of a deck. Switch to KO.

The attached PDF shows this.
Accuracy of HL vs KO true counts.pdf

[Counting_Is_Fun]

At one time, I might have been interested. I’m 90% retired now. Today, I worked for about 1/2 hour returning emails while sitting at my Satellite Starbucks office, after which I shopped with the wife (she was shopping for a new dress). BBQd chicken for dinner. A typical relaxing day.

I used to relish and attack new challenges. Just not interested anymore.

My guess would be that about 90% of us wish that you would 100% retire from this forum, again.

[PinkChip]

My guess would be that about 90% of us wish that you would 100% retire from this forum, again.

Rather than that, 1 forum member creates postings which are 99 times as long as the postings from the others.