FBM ASC Basic and Advanced - Outline, by request

[Freightman]

Btw, does anybody know if Freightman is related to bjanalyst?

As per usual, you have nothing constructive to contribute

[Freightman]

Btw, does anybody know if Freightman is related to bjanalyst?

Attention BJAnalyst
Send me an email at [email protected]

I have a question to ask you which I don’t want to post in the forum. Thank you

[davethebuilder]

For the record I gave you a helpful for your Opening Post because after looking through the humour I thought it was quite well written. Still, I think the idea of QTC needs further explanation and simulating to quantify its effect. Maybe Norm or Dog Hand can help you with that.

[Freightman]

For the record I gave you a helpful for your Opening Post because after looking through the humour I thought it was quite well written. Still, I think the idea of QTC needs further explanation and simulating to quantify its effect. Maybe Norm or Dog Hand can help you with that.

Thanks for complement. Agree, it was well written. Further, agree to your comment on further simming, especially since I haven’t. Am I having fun with this thread? - yes.

https://youtu.be/vk7eA4gVDno

3 minute mark of Rainman link, nobody can count down a 6 deck shoe, so who can count down intermediates?
So, Let’s see now. I’ve got everyone wondering about this. Some of my fans would love to call me out on this, but it just sounds so.....legit, and they don’t want to......look so bad. Well, maybe, just maybe it is legit.

Clearly, we need some expert opinion. Perhaps Snarky and Douchebag6582 can weigh in. They’re certainly not shy about such things.

All the clues are there about results. Someone might ask the question the right way or actually get close to the answer. There’s been a half assed stab, but sometimes, you can’t see the forest for the trees. In any event, I calculate that I have at least several hours to work out what those results are before I have to explain the clues

[Norm]

Of course other cards are calculated. True count is calculated the way true count is always calculated. QTC is the method of evaluating the quality of true count. Post 15 I think demonstrates this quite nicely.

I recall some years back in chat at BJ21 with a well known poster (Lawyer from Oakland Calif area, some might know whom I’m referring to) where the topic of our conversation was this very point (conception days). This intelligent fellow simply couldn’t get it through his head that concentration Of intermediates, or lack thereof, was a factor in quality of true count. If the true count was there, just blast away - perhaps a factor in why he stopped playing. Perhaps the concept was so new to me that I failed to properly articulate the point.

Snarky missed it too. Btw, did I remind you to let me know the names of my fervent supporters. I wanted to thank them personally for their ongoing support.

Of course the intermediate cards matter. My point is that they are not totally ignored in TC index calculations in normal count systems as they affect the divisor. Believe me, this is not a matter of me not getting something through my head.

[PinkChip]

True 10 portion edited.
Hi lo is 505 balanced, but the groupings for QTC are 544. That portion is right.

Ok, in this case 20 intermediates are possible. I just was confused because you wrote "Use Hi Lo" in your example (post #15).

[Freightman]

Ok, in this case 20 intermediates are possible. I just was confused because you wrote "Use Hi Lo" in your example (post #15).

No worries. I said hi lo though I use halves as there is a much greater universal understanding. I again slightly edited post 15, which will be evident to you to give you an idea of more of what I look for.

[Freightman]

Of course the intermediate cards matter. My point is that they are not totally ignored in TC index calculations in normal count systems as they affect the divisor. Believe me, this is not a matter of me not getting something through my head.

We’re simply looking at it in different ways. Did you get my reminder in me wanting to thank my fervent supporters. They’ve become a bit quiet last day or so, and I think some encouragement is in order.

[Sharky]

We’re simply looking at it in different ways. Did you get my reminder in me wanting to thank my fervent supporters. They’ve become a bit quiet last day or so, and I think some encouragement is in order.

You keep implying that I am a ‘naysayer’ of yours, and all I can say to that is PLEASE don’t flatter yourself….REMEMBER, you are just a pimple on my ass, nothing more….EVER

You just hate like being corrected, like when:

you gave your ramp on an H17 NS game (-.66 he) and you were ramping up at +1, I simply pointed out to you that you are still behind, pal

or when you played with other counters and were so enamored with yourself when the TC rose and you put two big bets out and got “2 snappers” then returned to the table min….you said they left the table and you were wondering what they were thinking about you….so I said, perhaps, “this kat knows nothing about cover”

the only reason I remember these so vividly – aside from an impeccable memory – was how you ‘blew up at me’…also never heard of BJ=snapper, so that was memorable…I thought your reaction was so funny that whenever I see you posting ‘bull jive’ I point it out….and then laugh at your response(s)

FOR THE RECORD: I am not a paid member and don’t participate and know nothing about any rating system, or feedback….again, you are a pimple in my ass, nothing more

AND FOR THIS ‘SYSTEM’, I give you an A for effort, C for substance….only value I see is on hard 12/13 strategies and if/when a group is full (ie, no 2, 3, 4, 5s left) coupled w/ ASC, you may never hit a 16 no matter the up card….but these cases are so far and few in shoe games and in a SD game, your top three scenarios are ‘bull jive’ as Pinky pointed out you can’t have >16, so that’s minimized as well…other then that….just seems like a ‘weak’ cover system for those inclined….certainly, this system can’t be much of an ev move

Good luck

[Freightman]

You keep implying that I am a ‘naysayer’ of yours, and all I can say to that is PLEASE don’t flatter yourself….REMEMBER, you are just a pimple on my ass, nothing more….EVER

You just hate like being corrected, like when:

you gave your ramp on an H17 NS game (-.66 he) and you were ramping up at +1, I simply pointed out to you that you are still behind, pal

or when you played with other counters and were so enamored with yourself when the TC rose and you put two big bets out and got “2 snappers” then returned to the table min….you said they left the table and you were wondering what they were thinking about you….so I said, perhaps, “this kat knows nothing about cover”

the only reason I remember these so vividly – aside from an impeccable memory – was how you ‘blew up at me’…also never heard of BJ=snapper, so that was memorable…I thought your reaction was so funny that whenever I see you posting ‘bull jive’ I point it out….and then laugh at your response(s)

FOR THE RECORD: I am not a paid member and don’t participate and know nothing about any rating system, or feedback….again, you are a pimple in my ass, nothing more

AND FOR THIS ‘SYSTEM’, I give you an A for effort, C for substance….only value I see is on hard 12/13 strategies and if/when a group is full (ie, no 2, 3, 4, 5s left) coupled w/ ASC, you may never hit a 16 no matter the up card….but these cases are so far and few in shoe games and in a SD game, your top three scenarios are ‘bull jive’ as Pinky pointed out you can’t have >16, so that’s minimized as well…other then that….just seems like a ‘weak’ cover system for those inclined….certainly, this system can’t be much of an ev move

Good luck

Actually, I don’t consider you a part of that group that I refer to as naysayers. Other than your self aggrandizing opinion of yourself, your flaw is withdrawing from debate you’ve initiated, after you’ve been hoisted

https://youtu.be/DZN4r8p6KbU

Speaking of zits, see about 100 seconds in

[Sharky]

...Other than your self aggrandizing opinion of yourself, ...

YIKES....coming from the undisputed master of 'delusion of grandeur', I'll take it as a complement, thx

Sharky out

[Sharky]

Actually, I don’t consider you a part of that group that I refer to as naysayers. ...

you sure have a funny way of showing it

Snarky missed it too. Btw, did I remind you to let me know the names of my fervent supporters. I wanted to thank them personally for their ongoing support..

you assclown

[21frogman]

You just hate like being corrected

Has "like" as it appears to be used in this quote actually become a part of our written lexicon?