Those not so neutral 789s at a special RC 0

[Secretariat]

Hello all and especially the math heads as well as those who pay attention to the 789s, the so called “neutral” cards.

Imagine a 6D shoe at the 144 cards mark (12 cards past the 156 cards half point)
The HiLo count is RC 0 with 12 aces left, 48 tens and 60 low cards. The 12 “neutral” cards missing are four sevens, four eights and four nines. So there are 24 x 789s left in the 144-card shoe.

It’s time to bet and the RC 0 suggests a minimal bet BUT…

Would you consider a 2-unit bet (or more)?

I would like feedbacks from the experts.
Personnaly I think this subset justifies a 2-unit bet because…

Despite the RC 0, the Ten ratio is at 0,333 (48/144) right at the insurance threshold.
The blackjack odds are up at 0,56 instead of 0,48 so that’s one blackjack every 17 hands instead of one every 21 hands.
The odds to get a hard 20 (TT) are up at 0,112 instead of 0,095.
The odds of a two-card stiff (dealer’s and ours) involving a Ten are 0,140 instead of 0,119. Since the dealer has to hit to 17 (and we don’t) that’s a player advantage.
One downside is that double down opportunities will be fewer but not sure how much.

There are other implications that the math experts like Don could mention.

As a final note, the CV deck edit function suggests and improvement of 0,43 over a perfectly balanced count which seems to justify a 2-unit bet.

Your thoughts, anyone!

[tunicadave]

So your doing an Ace side count AND a Neutral side count?

[Freightman]

So your doing an Ace side count AND a Neutral side count?

Thats what he’s doing. I will eventually give a more detailed response, but I’m really kinda busy with a lot of this almost retired stuff.

[Secretariat]

So your doing an Ace side count AND a Neutral side count?

Basically yes!

[DSchles]

The 12 “neutral” cards missing are four sevens, four eights and four nines. So there are 24 x 789s left in the 144-card shoe.

What am I missing? A six-deck shoe has 24 7s, 24 8s, and 24 9s. You wrote, "The 12 'neutral' cards missing are four sevens, four eights and four nines." My higher math tells me that that leaves 60 7s, 60 8s, and 60 9s. And yet, you wrote, "So there are 24 x 789s left in the 144-card shoe." What sense does that make??

Don

[Freightman]

What am I missing? A six-deck shoe has 24 7s, 24 8s, and 24 9s. You wrote, "The 12 'neutral' cards missing are four sevens, four eights and four nines." My higher math tells me that that leaves 60 7s, 60 8s, and 60 9s. And yet, you wrote, "So there are 24 x 789s left in the 144-card shoe." What sense does that make??

Don

12 aces plus 48 face cards plus 60 low cards plus 24 neutral cards equals the 144 cards OP stated. His further statement of 12 neutral cards was simply a brain fart. He clearly meant to say 24.

Further, it’s pretty tough to identify 180 remaining cards, all neutral as you’ve stated when OP has mentioned 144 in categories listed identifying low neutral and high cards.

[Secretariat]

12 aces plus 48 face cards plus 60 low cards plus 24 neutral cards equals the 144 cards OP stated. His further statement of 12 neutral cards was simply a brain fart. He clearly meant to say 24.

Further, it’s pretty tough to identify 180 remaining cards, all neutral as you’ve stated when OP has mentioned 144 in categories listed identifying low neutral and high cards.

I had Freightman's dual ramping in mind when asking this. Would the OP statement be a starting point for the higher ramp, Freightman?

[Secretariat]

What am I missing? A six-deck shoe has 24 7s, 24 8s, and 24 9s. You wrote, "The 12 'neutral' cards missing are four sevens, four eights and four nines." My higher math tells me that that leaves 60 7s, 60 8s, and 60 9s. And yet, you wrote, "So there are 24 x 789s left in the 144-card shoe." What sense does that make??

Don

Half of the shoe is gone, Don. So let’s say there are three decks left which should be 156 cards
At the 156 cards mark there should be 12 aces, 48 tens, 60 low cards and 36 neutral/intermediate cards for a perfectly balanced shoe.
However, assume a shortage of 12 x 789s (4x7, 4x8, 4x9) at the 144-card mark.
That’s 12 neutral cards below normal at slightly below the 3-deck point. That’s what I meant.
Do you think that eliminates the house edge at 6D, S17,DAS?
If you had that information at the table would you bet 2 units?

[DSchles]

Half of the shoe is gone, Don. So let’s say there are three decks left which should be 156 cards
At the 156 cards mark there should be 12 aces, 48 tens, 60 low cards and 36 neutral/intermediate cards for a perfectly balanced shoe.
However, assume a shortage of 12 x 789s (4x7, 4x8, 4x9) at the 144-card mark.
That’s 12 neutral cards below normal at slightly below the 3-deck point. That’s what I meant.
Do you think that eliminates the house edge at 6D, S17,DAS?
If you had that information at the table would you bet 2 units?

The precise combinatorial analytic answer is no, because the house edge is 0.1369 for your remaining shoe composition.

Don

[Secretariat]

The precise combinatorial analytic answer is no, because the house edge is 0.1369 for your remaining shoe composition.

Don

So that reduces the 0,41 house edge but not enough. Right? Is that because of the fewer DD opportunities?

[DSchles]

So that reduces the 0,41 house edge but not enough. Right?

Right.

Is that because of the fewer DD opportunities?

Don't know. A sim would tell you if the frequency of DD's was decreased.

Don

[Secretariat]

Right.



Don't know. A sim would tell you if the frequency of DD's was decreased.

Don

Can we modify the decks in CV Data?

[Secretariat]

The precise combinatorial analytic answer is no, because the house edge is 0.1369 for your remaining shoe composition.

Don

That's what I call a clear answer. I certainly won't contest your math. Thanks Don!