See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 79 to 91 of 152

Thread: Illustrious 18 - indexes

  1. #79


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Freightman View Post
    Please note - not available to users of Hi Opt 2.
    Why?

  2. #80


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by 21frogman View Post
    Why?
    Consider issues of a square peg in a round hole. By inference, misshapen balls of Hi Opt users do not rest, or sit well on a well engineered golf tee. Therefore, by extension, utilization of dual control ball controls causes Hi Opt balls to slip and fall

    Standard engineering theory.

  3. #81
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,461
    Blog Entries
    59


    4 out of 4 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Give it a rest, or find a forum about testes.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  4. #82


    0 out of 2 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    aceside trolled as follows
    I have thought about this again and found your conclusion is valid, but your math has some typo. Suppose we have a deck of cards that consists of 2s (2 of spades) and a 3s (3 of spades), and another deck of cards that consists of a 2d (2 of diamonds) and a 3d (3 of diamonds).

    If we put these two decks together, the six total 2-card combinations are as follows:
    2s3s, 2s2d, 2s3d, 3s2d, 3s3d, 2d3d

    The odd of drawing a 2-card 2+3=5 combination is 4/6=67%. If we remove one deck off the top, the odd of a 2-card 2+3=5 is still 67% statistically.
    No it’s not. You need to do something silly, like including other card ranks and then determine the composition of the remaining cards.

    And then he said
    If we have three such decks of cards: 2s, 3s; 2d, 3d; 2c, 3c, the odd of drawing a 2-card 2+3=5 combination is 9/15=60%. If we remove two decks off the top, the odd of a 2-card 2+3=5 is still 60% statistically.
    See above

    Conclusion - flawed logic

  5. #83


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Not trying to get in the middle of this, nor to defend aceside, but, in the above, what, specifically, are you objecting to?

    Don

  6. #84


    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Freightman View Post
    aceside trolled as follows
    So why are you feeding the troll?

  7. #85
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,461
    Blog Entries
    59


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Excellent question.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  8. #86


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Norm - Do your rules permit trolling?

  9. #87
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,461
    Blog Entries
    59


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    No. Just difficult to draw lines some of the time. And false claims of trolling can be as bad. There is no rule against being wrong. Being wrong, in and of itself, is allowed. There are better ways of responding to people who are wrong. And sometimes, responding poorly, and repeatedly, to a perceived troll is trolling.

    In Wikipedia, this can be handled with an IBan -- interaction ban. But, it's not very effective.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  10. #88


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    Excellent question.
    When written, who knows in advance what posts will or will not make it past the editorial board. Why, just the other day on a trip home from out of town, I had a tire blow at 70 mph. Needless to say, I was in somewhat of a foul mood, having survived what could have been a really not so nice occurrence. It was in this foul mood that I commented on a particular point.

    Said post challenged a well known and respected poster (of whom I also respect) on a particular point. Not withstanding a couple comments, the worst being - Big fucking deal (which could have easily been redacted) - the post in its entirety was deleted by an unknown editor- a post which had professional relevance. Interestingly enough, I sometimes take screen shots of posts, of which this was one.

    Now, here we have a constant stream of non stop dribble which is permitted, almost certainly from a sock account. Would be nice if Zee came back to entertain us with intelligent commentary. As for feeding the troll, why should I be any different, and for that matter, escape retribution from the censorship board.

  11. #89
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    1,154


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by BJGenius007 View Post
    Card combination only matters on single deck in some cases. Multiple deck (2, 4, 6, 8D) indexes are almost identical because there are so many cards in the shoe so different card combination almost doesn't matter. For example, you only need to memorize the index 16 v 9 and don't need to memorize different indexes for AAT22 v 9 or 79 v 9. So Wong's books like all other BJ books just list two different index tables. One for single deck. And the other for multiple decks (applying to double decks, six decks and eight decks.) (Technically there are four kinds of tables because S17 and H17 indexes are different.)
    I agree with you for the most part, but there is still something that needs clarification from you or anybody.
    For HiLo, the insurance indexes are:
    1Deck: +1.4
    2Deck: +2.4
    6Deck: +3.0
    8Deck: +3.0.

    For HiLo, the hand 9 vs 2 double-down indexes are:
    1Deck: -1 or ?
    2Deck: +1
    6Deck: +1
    8Deck: +1
    Here is what bothers me the most. The basic strategy for the hand 9 vs 2 is double down, but the HiLo index is +1. Can anybody help explain this discrepancy?

    Also, insurance and other blackjack indices come from different mechanisms. Can anybody explain a little more.




  12. #90
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,461
    Blog Entries
    59


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Card counting is not basic strategy.
    Card counting is not basic strategy.

    Indices affect one another.
    Indices affect one another.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  13. #91
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    1,154


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    Card counting is not basic strategy.
    Card counting is not basic strategy.

    Indices affect one another.
    Indices affect one another.
    Can you give an example of indices affecting one another? The insurance index is independent and thus will not be affected by any others.

    Also, I recently switched to a double-deck H17 game but still kept using the same 6-deck surrender indices of below:
    16 vs 9, -0
    16 vs 10, -3
    15 vs 10, -0
    15 vs A, -1
    Not many people posted surrender indices for double-deck games. So, can you verify if these are good or not for me?

Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. CV Blackjack Indexes?!!! or Book Indexes?!!!
    By RoadWarrior in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 07-25-2022, 02:10 PM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-16-2021, 05:26 PM
  3. Halves Indexes Looking for Early Surrender Indexes
    By GreenHouse in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-17-2017, 11:27 AM
  4. orster52: BJ indexes = Span21 indexes
    By orster52 in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-23-2008, 09:47 PM

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.