Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31

Thread: Those not so neutral 789s at a special RC 0

  1. #1


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Those not so neutral 789s at a special RC 0

    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!

  2. #2


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    So your doing an Ace side count AND a Neutral side count?

  3. #3


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by tunicadave View Post
    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.

  4. #4


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Secretariat View Post
    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

  5. #5


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Secretariat View Post
    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!
    I have been using three counts for a very long time. I use Zen, ace side count and 8/9 side count, so I have covered all ranks of cards. This is similar to Tarzan Count. For people who are not familiar with Tarzan Count: In short, basic version of Tarzan count is three columns (2-5, 6-9, 10's) with ASC.

  6. #6


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    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.

  7. #7


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    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?

  8. #8


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by tunicadave View Post
    So your doing an Ace side count AND a Neutral side count?
    Basically yes!

  9. #9


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Freightman View Post
    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?

  10. #10


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by BJGenius007 View Post
    I have been using three counts for a very long time. I use Zen, ace side count and 8/9 side count, so I have covered all ranks of cards. This is similar to Tarzan Count. For people who are not familiar with Tarzan Count: In short, basic version of Tarzan count is three columns (2-5, 6-9, 10's) with ASC.
    Seems perfect fit for the Zen count since 89s are the only cards valued at zero. How do you use that info? Do you know how much more EV do you get.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 4-step Martingale on neutral/negative counts as Cover?
    By trotch in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 02-15-2018, 12:53 PM
  2. Jackie Chiles: Random bets in neutral situations
    By Jackie Chiles in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 12-05-2005, 12:37 AM
  3. Bert Nommel: Simulations: The Ace Neutral Level Two Counts
    By Bert Nommel in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-01-2003, 11:58 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.