See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 14 to 26 of 89

Thread: Maximizing the advantages of early surrender

  1. #14


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by G Man View Post
    Who's using Hi-Lo running counts for playing decisions ?
    As opposed to true counts? Not sure I understood the statement.

  2. #15


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by bjarg View Post
    As opposed to true counts? Not sure I understood the statement.
    Yes, sure, as opposed to true counts. If you use running counts, you need different ones for each level of penetration, like K-O.

    Don

  3. #16


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    Yes, sure, as opposed to true counts. If you use running counts, you need different ones for each level of penetration, like K-O.

    Don
    I picked half shoe as the most logical reference penetration to obtain a true count reference. In the index example for T-3 v T the index for ES was +10 with 3 decks remaining out of 6 (TC = ~3.3).

    k_c

  4. #17


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    Yes, sure, as opposed to true counts. If you use running counts, you need different ones for each level of penetration, like K-O.

    Don
    Thanks. I wasnt understanding if it was a general statement regarding hilo (as in "who is using hilo?") or specifically of running count versus true count.

  5. #18
    Senior Member Gramazeka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    1,438


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Dog Hand View Post
    tal32bur,

    Wong's "Professional Blackjack" Table A1 Part 4 Surrender gives a HiLo index of +5 if you have 10,3 or 9,4 and +1 if you have 8,5 or 7,6 for ES vs. X.

    Hope this helps!

    Dog Hand
    There are a lot of mistakes and as far as I remember these including.
    "Don't Cast Your Pearls Before Swine" (Jesus)

  6. #19


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by bjarg View Post
    Thanks. I wasnt understanding if it was a general statement regarding hilo (as in "who is using hilo?")
    No, I am using Hi-Lo myself.
    G Man

  7. #20


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by k_c View Post
    I picked half shoe as the most logical reference penetration to obtain a true count reference. In the index example for T-3 v T the index for ES was +10 with 3 decks remaining out of 6 (TC = ~3.3).

    k_c
    I know what you did, but it's just one level. What does the player do for all the other levels, learn eight different indices?

    And, by the way, if you were looking for the halfway point as your most logical reference penetration, I don't agree that it would be three decks. If you're playing, say, a 4.5/6 game, to me, the most logical reference point would be halfway through the number of decks that are going to be dealt, which, of course, is 2.25. Just sayin'.

    Don

  8. #21


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    I know what you did, but it's just one level. What does the player do for all the other levels, learn eight different indices?

    And, by the way, if you were looking for the halfway point as your most logical reference penetration, I don't agree that it would be three decks. If you're playing, say, a 4.5/6 game, to me, the most logical reference point would be halfway through the number of decks that are going to be dealt, which, of course, is 2.25. Just sayin'.

    Don

    This is a very reasonable suggestion. Initially the program required the user to input the pen (number of cards remaining to be dealt) before index generation. It would be relatively easy to restore this option.

    I went to half shoe default for standardization.

    k_c

  9. #22


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by k_c View Post
    I went to half shoe default for standardization.
    But you don't say what the player is supposed to do everywhere else in the shoe except the middle. What's the point?

    Don

  10. #23


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    But you don't say what the player is supposed to do everywhere else in the shoe except the middle. What's the point?

    Don
    In my estimation if you had to choose one index to apply to any penetration it would be the half shoe index. Can that be improved upon? Yes, but one may be getting oneself into overkill mode. For example in a deeply dealt game there may be a HiLo index for doubling hard 15 or 16. This is because in a deeply dealt game there can be count subsets where all of the 7,8,9 cards are eliminated. However, the chance of ever running into this situation and actually recognizing it in real time is more than remote. In a game with very shallow penetration there may be no indices at all because not enough cards can be dealt to even get to a running count requiring a basic strategy deviation. In that case the half shoe index would serve in arriving at the right decision anyway.

    I believe the suggestion you made of adapting a single index to the shuffle point of the game you are playing would be marginally better but may or may not be worth the extra effort.

    k_c

  11. #24


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Gramazeka View Post
    There are a lot of mistakes and as far as I remember these including.
    Gramazeka: do you have a better information source or correct indexes to share?

  12. #25


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by k_c View Post
    In my estimation if you had to choose one index to apply to any penetration it would be the half shoe index. Can that be improved upon? Yes, but one may be getting oneself into overkill mode. For example in a deeply dealt game there may be a HiLo index for doubling hard 15 or 16. This is because in a deeply dealt game there can be count subsets where all of the 7,8,9 cards are eliminated. However, the chance of ever running into this situation and actually recognizing it in real time is more than remote. In a game with very shallow penetration there may be no indices at all because not enough cards can be dealt to even get to a running count requiring a basic strategy deviation. In that case the half shoe index would serve in arriving at the right decision anyway.

    I believe the suggestion you made of adapting a single index to the shuffle point of the game you are playing would be marginally better but may or may not be worth the extra effort.

    k_c
    You seem to be misunderstanding what I'm saying. If you use true count, I'm fine with using a single index regardless of penetration. But, you seem to be talking about using a single RUNNING count, regardless of level of penetration. What sense does that make? Do you propose using the 3/6 RC for when you're at 1/6 or 4.5/6?

    Don

  13. #26


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    You seem to be misunderstanding what I'm saying. If you use true count, I'm fine with using a single index regardless of penetration. But, you seem to be talking about using a single RUNNING count, regardless of level of penetration. What sense does that make? Do you propose using the 3/6 RC for when you're at 1/6 or 4.5/6?

    Don
    I'll try explain my methodology.

    In order to compute probability of drawing each rank for an already input counting system:
    1. First required input is number of cards remaining to be dealt
    2. Second required input is the running count
    3. Third input is cards that for one reason or other the user has determined should be specifically removed from the shoe
    4. User can optionally decide to side count any ranks or even create subgroups which to side count. Generally this is not used but if taken to an extreme all ranks could theoretically be side counted and in that case there would only be 1 possible shoe composition and number of cards remaining possible.

    Notice that so far there is only consideration of running count. In fact there will never be consideration of true count until the user decides it is prudent to calculate it from a running count/cards remaining pair.

    Let's say user wanted to decide whether to insure a hand of T-3 with 26 cards remaining dealt from single deck and a HiLo running count of +2. Input is cards remaining=26, RC=+2, specific removals = T,3,A (A because insurance requires up card of ace.) Output of rank probabilities are below. The probability of drawing a ten is .34646, so insurance should be taken.

    Code:
    Count tags {1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,1}
    Decks: 1
    Cards remaining: 26
    Initial running count (full shoe): 0
    Running count: 2
    Subgroup removals: None
    Specific removals (1 - 10): {1,0,1,0,0,0,0,0,0,1}
    
    Number of subsets for above conditions: 7
    Prob of running count 2 with above removals from 1 deck: 0.092696
    
    p[1] 0.069293  p[2] 0.071334  p[3] 0.0535  p[4] 0.071334  p[5] 0.071334
    p[6] 0.071334  p[7] 0.081803  p[8] 0.081803  p[9] 0.081803  p[10] 0.34646
    
    Press any key to continue:
    What I have done recently is to take this further. Below is the combinatorial analysis of a player hand of T-3 for a running count of +2 and 26 cards remaining to be dealt from a single deck versus all up cards. A shoe is created with number of ranks present expressed in floating point values based upon the probability of drawing each rank. I changed my combinatorial analyzer to be able to process these.

    Code:
    Number of decks: 1   Count tags {1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,1}
    Player hand composition: 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1:  Hard 13, 2 cards
    After player hand is dealt - Cards remaining: 26, Running count: 2
    Subgroup removals: No subgroups are defined
    Shoe comp (A-5):  {2.2908, 1.8698, 1.4023, 1.8698, 1.8698}
    Shoe comp (6-10): {1.8698, 2.079, 2.079, 2.079, 8.5906}
    After up card is dealt - Cards remaining: 25
    Running count (up card 1 to 10): {1,3,3,3,3,3,2,2,2,1}
    
    Up card   Stand      Hit   Double  Split 1  Split 2  Split 3  Surr     Strat
    
       1    -76.073  -62.669  -93.209                                        hit
       2    -27.855  -33.159  -66.318                                      stand
       3    -21.789  -30.328  -60.657                                      stand
       4    -11.566  -26.419  -52.838                                      stand
       5     -3.987  -23.146  -46.293                                      stand
       6    -11.665  -25.074  -50.148                                      stand
       7    -48.421  -32.838  -67.954                                        hit
       8    -53.715  -39.134  -82.297                                        hit
       9    -54.028  -38.547  -79.197                                        hit
      10    -59.167  -47.379  -87.233                                        hit
    
    Overall hand EV vs all upcards: -35.1492
    
    Press c or C for EV conditioned on no dealer blackjack, any other key to exit
    When I generate indices I go through all of the possible running counts for a given penetration and record the running counts where strategy changes as running count indices. True count can then be computed from these and is dependent upon the number of cards remaining which has been input.

    As I mentioned I decided to default to half shoe pen when generating indices to keep it simpler but it would be easy to give user the option to input pen. Anyway indices are always recorded as running count until they are converted to true count at the end.

    Hope this helps,
    k_c

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

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.