See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789
Results 81 to 89 of 89

Thread: Maximizing the advantages of early surrender

  1. #81


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    It's too bad this entire thread had to go into the Disadvantage Forum because there is some good information here. Would it be possible to apply the yellow shading to individual posts within an otherwise useful discussion?

  2. #82
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    11,275
    Blog Entries
    59


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Open to other suggestions -- but, can't do that.
    "Croyez ceux qui cherchent la vérité, doutez de ceux qui la trouvent." --André Gide

  3. #83


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by tal32bur View Post
    So, I'm getting back into the swing of counting, after taking a hiatus for several years....

    These are the parameters for the game I currently have access to:

    ENHC, DAS (4 hands), full early surrender, S17, dealer BJ takes all, 6 decks hand shuffle.

    I've entered the above game parameters into a couple online strategy calculators to learn the basic strategy for this game.

    I don't have access to any simulation software, so the amount of analysis I can do at present is virtually nil.

    I am curious if anyone might know at what TC I would surrender a hard 13 versus a dealer 10? The online strategy calculators I'm using both state that I should surrender hard 14-16 against dealer 10.

    Given how valuable early surrender seems to be for EV, this sort of circumstance could make the list of my personalized 'illustrious 18" for this game's rules. This is just my intuition, and analysis often counters such ideas.

    Grateful in advance for any thoughts on how to maximize the advantages of early surrender.

    Cheers
    So, Playing here at my little casino...in the middle of nowhere...these are my best estimates for my game play so far:

    My play varies quite a bit from day to day in terms of spread and units, but my best approximation of my play from my notes is:

    Hands played: 1500
    Average units bet: 2
    Winnings to date:125 units

    I think my actual winnings over the house is at about 4% so far.

    I've been able to 'wong' in/out of the game pretty easily. I literally sit there and keep counting the cards and jump back in when advantageous.

    Table limits are really low here, but this is so much fun.

    I've been reading up on shuffle tracking. -not even considering betting off of this right now. but I catch myself watching the shuffle and trying to follow a slug.

    Gawd.... this fun.

    Thanks to Norm and Don for your advice on here.

  4. #84


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by tal32bur View Post
    So, Playing here at my little casino...in the middle of nowhere...these are my best estimates for my game play so far:

    My play varies quite a bit from day to day in terms of spread and units, but my best approximation of my play from my notes is:

    Hands played: 1500
    Average units bet: 2
    Winnings to date:125 units

    I think my actual winnings over the house is at about 4% so far.

    I've been able to 'wong' in/out of the game pretty easily. I literally sit there and keep counting the cards and jump back in when advantageous.

    Table limits are really low here, but this is so much fun.

    I've been reading up on shuffle tracking. -not even considering betting off of this right now. but I catch myself watching the shuffle and trying to follow a slug.

    Gawd.... this fun.

    Thanks to Norm and Don for your advice on here.
    Bien ahi. Segui matandolos che.

  5. #85


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by bjarg View Post
    Bien ahi. Segui matandolos che.

    la dulce vida. lástima que no son dólares.

  6. #86


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    You'll pardon me, but that's ridiculous and completely inaccurate.



    According to no one in the universe but you. The Hi-Lo insurance index for six decks is 3.0, and it isn't debatable.

    Don
    I have carefully thought about the insurance index again. For this particular hand situation of 16vsA, there are three possible card combinations: (10, 6)vsA, (7,9)vsA, and (8,8)vsA. The insurance indices for these situations are +3.3, +2.8, and +2.8 respectively. However, there are more (10,6)vsA combinations than the other two. Taking all together, we get the insurance index for this particular situation: 3.3*(8/11)+2.8*(3/11)=+3.2.
    I hope this is correct.
    Last edited by aceside; 04-07-2021 at 06:39 PM. Reason: Revised probability

  7. #87


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by jonasdouglas1986 View Post
    I think you should try playing online blackjack. It does not really require any card counting skills since everything is made online. Well, it does help a lot in having more chances to win but it is less hassle. There are a lot of online calculators that will definitely make your life easier. As mentioned, Wong's Professional Blackjack is a good book that will teach you more. One of the caisno books that you should get especially if you want to dig deeper. Well, thanks for sharing this concern by the way. It reminded me of playing the game again.
    I would bet that online poker is a better money making machine because you can easily collaborate with a partner, but for online blackjack, how do you do that? I am interested in online ones but haven’t played them. Which one should I try first?

  8. #88


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by k_c View Post
    This is what I get for 52 cards remaining of a 6 deck shoe before up card is dealt for a player hand of T-3. In the initial example of T-3 (half shoe) you would need to divide by around 3 to get a true count value but with 52 cards remaining you'd divide by around 1.
    -difference in TC for ES: ~+4 for 52 cards remaining, ~3.3 for half shoe

    TC can vary some by pen but how much of a handle one could expect on this is probably a function of common sense.

    If anyone is interested I could post some simple data on exactly how cards remaining, RC, and TC vary for insurance indexes for all penetrations listed at once. Insurance is simpler because all that needs to be determined is the probability of drawing a T.

    Other differences:
    -There is a LS value versus T for 52 cards, no value for half shoe
    -There is a LS value versus A for 52 cards, no value for half shoe
    -ES versus A at >=-9 for 52 cards, always ES for half shoe
    -There are values for surrender versus 8 or 9 for 52 cards, no value for half shoe (LS=ES for non A or T)
    -There is a value for stand versus A for 52 cards, no value for half shoe

    Code:
    Count tags {1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,1}
    Composition dependent indices for hand, rules, number of decks, and pen
    Player hand composition: 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1:  Hard 13, 2 cards
    Decks: 6 (possible input for cards remaining: 1 to 312)
    Cards remaining before up card = 52
    No subgroups are defined
    
    i>=2        2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      T      A
    
    Stand     >=1   >=-1   >=-3   >=-4   >=-4      h      h      h      h   >=17
    Double      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    Pair        -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    LS          -      -      -      -      -      -   >=16   >=14    >=9   >=13
    ES          -      -      -      -      -      -   >=16   >=14    >=4   >=-9
    
    Press any key to continue
    k_c

    This post is not entirely right because of a problem I found in my algorithm.

    I had intended to cycle through all possible running counts. For HiLo, 6 decks this range is -120 to +120. However, I was only cycling through possible running counts for single deck for which the HiLo range is -20 to + 20. Below are the running count indexes for half shoe and 52 cards remaining dealt from a 6 deck shoe using the entire running count range.

    Code:
    Count tags {1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,1}
    Composition dependent indices for hand, rules, number of decks, and pen
    Player hand composition: 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1:  Hard 13, 2 cards
    Decks: 6 (possible input for cards remaining: 1 to 312)
    Cards remaining before up card = 156
    No subgroups are defined
    
    i>=9        2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      T      A
    
    Stand    >=-1   >=-5  >=-10  >=-15  >=-15   >=96      h      h      h   >=60
    Double      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    Pair        -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    LS          -      -      -      -      -   >=78   >=59   >=41   >=25   >=44
    ES          -      -      -      -      -   >=78   >=59   >=41   >=10  >=-25
    
    (Divide by ~3 to get true count)
    
    
    Count tags {1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,1}
    Composition dependent indices for hand, rules, number of decks, and pen
    Player hand composition: 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1:  Hard 13, 2 cards
    Decks: 6 (possible input for cards remaining: 1 to 312)
    Cards remaining before up card = 52
    No subgroups are defined
    
    i>=2        2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      T      A
    
    Stand     >=1   >=-1   >=-3   >=-4   >=-4   >=37      h      h      h   >=17
                                                 <50
    Double      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    Pair        -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    LS          -      -      -      -      -   >=22   >=16   >=14    >=9   >=13
                                                                             <20
    ES          -      -      -      -      -   >=22   >=16   >=14    >=4   >=-9
    
    (Divide by ~1 to get true count)

    The point was to show how true count indices can vary by penetration. Unfortunately the thread was relegated to the yellow pages. Below is maybe a clearer example. It shows how insurance indices for Wong Halves (using doubled tags) varies with cards remaining to be dealt. (The running count and true count values for undoubled tags can be calculated by simply dividing RC/TC by 2.) Insurance should be taken at RC/TC greater than or equal to the values for each of the listed cards remaining values.

    Code:
    Count tags {2,-1,-2,-2,-3,-2,-1,0,1,2}
    Decks: 6
    Insurance Data (without regard to hand comp)
    **** Player hand: x-x ****
    Cards   RC      TC ref
    
    288     63      11.38
    287     47      8.52
    286     45      8.18
    285     44      8.03
    284     43      7.87
    282     42      7.74
    281     41      7.59
    279     40      7.46
    276     39      7.35
    273     38      7.24
    269     37      7.15
    265     36      7.06
    260     35      7.00
    254     34      6.96
    249     33      6.89
    242     32      6.88
    236     31      6.83
    229     30      6.81
    222     29      6.79
    215     28      6.77
    208     27      6.75
    201     26      6.73
    193     25      6.74
    186     24      6.71
    178     23      6.72
    171     22      6.69
    163     21      6.70
    155     20      6.71
    148     19      6.68
    140     18      6.69
    132     17      6.70
    124     16      6.71
    116     15      6.72
    109     14      6.68
    101     13      6.69
    93      12      6.71
    85      11      6.73
    77      10      6.75
    69      9       6.78
    61      8       6.82
    53      7       6.87
    45      6       6.93
    37      5       7.03
    29      4       7.17
    21      3       7.43
    13      2       8.00
    5       1       10.40
    2       0       0.00
    1       2       104.00
    
    Press any key to continue
    k_c

  9. #89


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by k_c View Post
    This post is not entirely right because of a problem I found in my algorithm.

    I had intended to cycle through all possible running counts. For HiLo, 6 decks this range is -120 to +120. However, I was only cycling through possible running counts for single deck for which the HiLo range is -20 to + 20. Below are the running count indexes for half shoe and 52 cards remaining dealt from a 6 deck shoe using the entire running count range.

    Code:
    Count tags {1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,1}
    Composition dependent indices for hand, rules, number of decks, and pen
    Player hand composition: 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1:  Hard 13, 2 cards
    Decks: 6 (possible input for cards remaining: 1 to 312)
    Cards remaining before up card = 156
    No subgroups are defined
    
    i>=9        2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      T      A
    
    Stand    >=-1   >=-5  >=-10  >=-15  >=-15   >=96      h      h      h   >=60
    Double      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    Pair        -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    LS          -      -      -      -      -   >=78   >=59   >=41   >=25   >=44
    ES          -      -      -      -      -   >=78   >=59   >=41   >=10  >=-25
    
    (Divide by ~3 to get true count)
    
    
    Count tags {1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,1}
    Composition dependent indices for hand, rules, number of decks, and pen
    Player hand composition: 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1:  Hard 13, 2 cards
    Decks: 6 (possible input for cards remaining: 1 to 312)
    Cards remaining before up card = 52
    No subgroups are defined
    
    i>=2        2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      T      A
    
    Stand     >=1   >=-1   >=-3   >=-4   >=-4   >=37      h      h      h   >=17
                                                 <50
    Double      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    Pair        -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    LS          -      -      -      -      -   >=22   >=16   >=14    >=9   >=13
                                                                             <20
    ES          -      -      -      -      -   >=22   >=16   >=14    >=4   >=-9
    
    (Divide by ~1 to get true count)

    The point was to show how true count indices can vary by penetration. Unfortunately the thread was relegated to the yellow pages. Below is maybe a clearer example. It shows how insurance indices for Wong Halves (using doubled tags) varies with cards remaining to be dealt. (The running count and true count values for undoubled tags can be calculated by simply dividing RC/TC by 2.) Insurance should be taken at RC/TC greater than or equal to the values for each of the listed cards remaining values.

    Code:
    Count tags {2,-1,-2,-2,-3,-2,-1,0,1,2}
    Decks: 6
    Insurance Data (without regard to hand comp)
    **** Player hand: x-x ****
    Cards   RC      TC ref
    
    288     63      11.38
    287     47      8.52
    286     45      8.18
    285     44      8.03
    284     43      7.87
    282     42      7.74
    281     41      7.59
    279     40      7.46
    276     39      7.35
    273     38      7.24
    269     37      7.15
    265     36      7.06
    260     35      7.00
    254     34      6.96
    249     33      6.89
    242     32      6.88
    236     31      6.83
    229     30      6.81
    222     29      6.79
    215     28      6.77
    208     27      6.75
    201     26      6.73
    193     25      6.74
    186     24      6.71
    178     23      6.72
    171     22      6.69
    163     21      6.70
    155     20      6.71
    148     19      6.68
    140     18      6.69
    132     17      6.70
    124     16      6.71
    116     15      6.72
    109     14      6.68
    101     13      6.69
    93      12      6.71
    85      11      6.73
    77      10      6.75
    69      9       6.78
    61      8       6.82
    53      7       6.87
    45      6       6.93
    37      5       7.03
    29      4       7.17
    21      3       7.43
    13      2       8.00
    5       1       10.40
    2       0       0.00
    1       2       104.00
    
    Press any key to continue
    k_c
    So it starts to reverse order again at 52 card mark? Thats interesting. Also i was curious if you might be able to show and 11vX example if its worth it of course.
    http://bjstrat.net/cgi-bin/cdca.cgi

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789

Similar Threads

  1. early surrender vs 10, late surrender vs A,house edge is?
    By kk7778 in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 11-05-2020, 01:53 AM
  2. Early surrender vs ace
    By Nitram in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-26-2020, 08:38 PM
  3. Early surrender
    By Nitram in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-22-2020, 01:39 PM
  4. Mr.Pro: Early Surrender
    By Mr.Pro in forum International Scene
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-25-2003, 07:45 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.