See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 14 to 26 of 43

Thread: Case study: Splitting 66v3 or not @ RC7 Double deck

  1. #14
    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 Secretariat View Post
    Here’s an interesting situation that came up recently in a heads up double deck game H17, DAS, 75% pen, which leads to 13/14 rounds per shoe. I’d like the take of the best players of the forum on this.

    It involves the infamous twins, 66s, against dealer 3 and at round 3.
    Using HiLo, RC before the deal is +4 with a $ 50 bet at a $25 minimum table.
    At decision time the RC is up to +7 which is very promising early in a DD shoe.

    Splitting those 66s at that count is a -1% EV and standing is -20% EV.
    Please correct my math if I am wrong but if I don’t split, and stand, I give up 19% on that $50 hand (roughly $10 average on the long term) and I expect to make that up in the next 10 rounds.

    If the average TC for the next ten rounds is TC2 (could go up to TC4 and down to TC1 or TC0) with an average $100 bet, I would have ten hands at an average 0.85% advantage (or 85 cents) for an expected win of $8.50. That is a little short of the $10 loss while standing. Thus, mathematically speaking, splitting the 66s at hand #3 would remain the right play, it seems… but but but…

    However, there’s some valuable information I did not mention.

    In the first two rounds, four 5s came out and a player using Wong Halves would have an extra 2 to his count compared to a HiLo player. I play HiLo but when I see so many 5s, I intuitively know that my advantage is stronger than my HiLo count suggests.

    On the down side, it is also obvious that those four 5s removed seriously hamper the probabilities to get a 5 on top of a split 6 and therefore, the chances to get a double down opportunity are reduced significantly.

    It’s also worth nothing that all 8 aces are unplayed and that the possibilities to get blackjacks at high counts in the following rounds are thus increased.

    WOULD YOU STAND ON 66v3 IN THIS SITUATION?
    I wonder how some of the best players here see that play. To me it appears that standing on those 6s is a good choice in this situation as it allows somehow to maintain a great count while the dealer break probability on a 3 at that count is nearly 40%.

    The worst scenario would be to split and end up with 6T and 6T while the dealer makes his hand with a 3-8-T for example, wasting another T and thus deflating a great count.

    If one’s been waiting for a great count for an hour or so, this may be the best chance to eventually place a big bet. I’d hate to waste that opportunity because I splitted those shitty 66s.

    Is there a way to mathematically justify the stand 66v3 here?

    What da ya think?
    Help for you-

    http://bjstrat.net/cgi-bin/cdca.cgi
    "Don't Cast Your Pearls Before Swine" (Jesus)

  2. #15


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Gramazeka View Post
    Thanks Gramazeka. You always give solid references and I appreciate it.
    I received that BJ Strat ref from k_c and Don a couple weeks ago and I refer to it quite often.

    There's no question that the better math play for 66v3 at that count is to split.

    However my hope with this thread was to find out if some top players would consider standing in this situation early in a DD shoe.

    In you case would you consider, not splitting at RC7, and commit some sort of "sacrifice"
    in order to maintain a great count and hopefully win larger bets subsequently.

    Unfortunately, not too many answers so far and it's partly my fault because my OP was way too long.
    I think it's an interesting problem though and I'd like to find out if some experienced APs would consider standing and "control" the count.
    Last edited by Secretariat; 11-20-2021 at 07:23 PM.

  3. #16
    Senior Member Tarzan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Atlantic City
    Posts
    1,013


    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    I saw the A5vs2 thread, was going to respond to it, but was unable to attach a photo of my chart for the hand, along with losing all I had typed out on it somehow while trying to upload it. I gave up, wandered off, and two days later noticed the thread was closed. Apparently, it wandered off topic or whatever, and at least and luckily it never devolved into calling anyone a donkey-raping shit eater (something I learned was somewhat of a classic from seeing it on "South Park"), but I never got my post in there. I wasn't going to make anything rosier about the thread, my point being that you can't use the true count for betting purposes as any means of directly calculating or correlating the composition-dependent index for this hand. For A5vs2, I have patterns that fit on a chart someplace that have nothing to do with TC. In a 6D game, the sort of patterns that I would double on A,5vs2 with 3 decks remaining are 2-18-0, more (2,3) removed than (4,5) within the {2-5} grouping--- 0-19-4, (6) ahead of (A), more (2,3) removed within {2-5} grouping, lot of (8,9) removed, you get the idea. Right off the bat, nothing with a "0" in the middle ever gets doubled regardless of the TC. 10-0-0=HIT, 0-0-10=HIT. These examples are well into the zone to double. I can send you my chart for the hand, and although it'll allow you to see what I'm talking about, I'm not sure if it would do anything other than reinforce that you can't make an accurate decision to deviate from basic strategy on this hand based on TC, and require specific information about deck composition.

    I was trying to work in my mind a DD game in which I would ever stand 6,6vs3, conserving cards to avoid pulling the cut card to get one more hand, the circumstances and oh... fuck that, I probably wouldn't. I split unless at -3 or less, then hit, sort of. In that vast ocean of all possible deck compositions, a single line zigs and zags through it, one side is split, and over the fence is hit, with my chart for any given hand based on an even distribution within groupings, so clearly (4,5) within the {2-5} and (7,8), (9) within the {6-9} alter this line in one direction or another, (but there is no zone in which to stand). Key card impact moves this line in measurable increments. If I see a "0" in the middle with two big numbers on either side of it, I hit 6,6vs3, even if the TC isn't -3 or lower. General examples of this 7-0-6, 9-0-7, 7-0-5, etc., definitely going to hit. The true count can also be quite low, less than -3 and the optimal decision be to split 6,6vs3... Think about it, 0-5-5, more (2,3) removed than (4,5) within the {2-5} grouping, lots of (7,8) removed within the {6-9} grouping, you only have one unit out there anyway, so wtf. To deviate from basic strategy on some hands is going to require some sort of composition dependent index to be accurate, and is impossible to calculate as accurately using the TC as a sole point of reference.

    The bottom line is that I think of the TC for my bet, but I go into another mode of operation as soon as I have a hand in front of me. I have this set of numbers rolling around, and think of whether this puts me in the red zone, deep into the red zone, right on the line of demarcation, just inside the purple zone, deep inside the purple zone, etc., the set of numbers jumbling about place me at a specific point. I have the big three groupings, A/6, (2,3) to (4,5) ratio, whatever, and it all adds up to an exact point on the chart for that specific hand someplace. If right on the line, then you consider whether to play risk averse or not, to be a little farther into the desired zone with more money at risk, etc., but I think of the TC in terms of my bet and my playing decisions as two very different things. Now that I trailed on, possibly confused the shit out of anyone reading this, I shall wander off jubilant that I got to throw my 2 cents in there about A,5vs2 being a unique hand that there's an issue with deviating from basic strategy without using a composition dependent index to do so.

    The impact of perfect play on these hands vs simply following basic strategy might show up on a simulation, but it's probably not going to make you or break you at the tables, and it's a relatively tiny margin in the grand scheme of things. There are much more important hands to fixate on. The most difficult hand in blackjack in terms of composition dependent play would I guess be 4,4vs6. It's fascinating, because there is a point on the chart in which the zones to hit, split, or double and come together like a pie at a single point, where the difference between hitting, splitting, or doubling all come within .0001 in EV of one another, or whatever it is, and you have to go pretty far off into any of the three zones on the chart to make any huge differences in EV from there. Most difficult hand, least pay out or gain from enhanced or near perfect play. Does that tell you something? I can describe the exact sort of deck composition I would need to be in any of the three zones on the chart. I know that if I'm at 6-10-0, with some extra (A) with one deck remaining with 4,4vs6, the optimal play is to double. I am thinking in terms of my location on the chart, the color coding of that zone that the set of numbers I am jockeying around puts me in, and from there how far into the given zone if there are risk adverse considerations.

    I've dazzled people with amusing card counting demonstrations, have always turned a profit in the long haul, but was I any more profitable than anyone else? Probably not. My amazing 4,4vs6 expertise probably hasn't made any huge difference in the grand scheme of things in terms of financial consideration, but the work on such things certainly honed my skills and sense of pride as a player. You can get jiggy with it and pick apart these little crevices, but most of your money is going to come from having a shitload of money out there in a high count and doubling 10 or 11, not from your amazing 4,4vs6 composition dependent playing decisions.




    Last edited by Tarzan; 11-24-2021 at 12:10 AM.

  4. #17


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarzan View Post
    I saw the A5vs2 thread, was going to respond to it, but was unable to attach a photo of my chart for the hand, along with losing all I had typed out on it somehow while trying to upload it. I gave up, wandered off, and two days later noticed the thread was closed. Apparently, it wandered off topic or whatever, and at least and luckily it never devolved into calling anyone a donkey-raping shit eater (something I learned was somewhat of a classic from seeing it on "South Park"), but I never got my post in there. I wasn't going to make anything rosier about the thread, my point being that you can't use the true count for betting purposes as any means of directly calculating or correlating the composition-dependent index for this hand. For A5vs2, I have patterns that fit on a chart someplace that have nothing to do with TC. In a 6D game, the sort of patterns that I would double on A,5vs2 with 3 decks remaining are 2-18-0, more (2,3) removed than (4,5) within the {2-5} grouping--- 0-19-4, (6) ahead of (A), more (2,3) removed within {2-5} grouping, lot of (8,9) removed, you get the idea. Right off the bat, nothing with a "0" in the middle ever gets doubled regardless of the TC. 10-0-0=HIT, 0-0-10=HIT. These examples are well into the zone to double. I can send you my chart for the hand, and although it'll allow you to see what I'm talking about, I'm not sure if it would do anything other than reinforce that you can't make an accurate decision to deviate from basic strategy on this hand based on TC, and require specific information about deck composition.

    My count enumeration program may provide some information if a specific input can be provided. (No promises)

    Correct me if I'm wrong but the tags of your count are:
    {2,3,4,5} -1, {6,7,8,9,A} 0, {T} +1
    Tags are relative to what remains in shoe. (If a negatively tagged card is removed running count increases. If a positively tagged card is removed running count decreases.)

    In addition to referencing a running count for an input number of cards remaining, each card group can be divided into subgroups which can be side counted in any possible combination.

    Below is an example of the above counting system for an input hand of A-2 with 156 cards remaining from 6 decks. There is independent input for the optional subgroups which are chosen by the user and can be changed. These subgroups are {1}, {6,7}, {8,9}, {2,3}, {4,5}. There are many other possible subgroup combinations but these are what were chosen. The inputs for subgroup cards removed were {1}=24 (all aces removed}, {6,7}=24 (~average number), {8,9}=24 (~average number), {2,3} (~average number), {4,5} (~average number). Program generates indexes for what is input. It shows there are no indexes but A-2 should be doubled versus up cards of 2,3,4,5,6. The removal of all of the aces has changed strategy versus 2,3,4 from hit to double (given approximate average numbers of other side counted subgroups.)

    Edit #1: There is an apparent output error. I am still working on the program. There appears to be double indexes which are not being output.
    Edit #2: There is only 1 possible subset of 156 cards where an A-2 can be dealt with the given input and the strategy for A-2 versus 2,3,4,5,6 is double so the output may be right after all. The RC versus 2,3,4,5,6 is +13 but if RC is less or more no subsets are possible. Using side counts is not easy.

    Code:
    Count tags {0,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,0,1} Dealer stands on soft 17
    Composition dependent indices for hand, rules, number of decks, and pen
    Player hand composition: 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0:  Soft 13, 2 cards
    Decks: 6 (possible input for cards remaining: 1 to 312)
    Cards remaining before up card = 156
    Subgroup removals: {1}24 {6,7}24 {8,9}24 {2,3}24 {4,5}24
    
                2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      T      A
    
    Stand       h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h
    Double      d      d      d      d      d      -      -      -      -      -
    Pair        -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    LS          -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    ES          -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    
    Press any key to continue
    k_c
    Last edited by k_c; 11-24-2021 at 04:21 PM.

  5. #18


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarzan View Post
    Right off the bat, nothing with a "0" in the middle ever gets doubled regardless of the TC. 10-0-0=HIT, 0-0-10=HIT... basic strategy on some hands is going to require some sort of composition dependent index to be accurate, and is impossible to calculate as accurately using the TC as a sole point of reference.
    That makes sense as a surplus of 6789s helps the dealer 2 to reach 8-9-10-11. Furthermore, our “likely” 6789 hit card on A5, places us at 12v2, 13v2, 14v2 and 15v2, a probable losing proposition that is not worth a double down on A5v2. No need to show EVs here.

    A shortage of 6789s leads towards more double down opportunities against 2s and that happens quite frequently regardless of the main count. Too bad we can’t see Tarzan’s tables but here are other examples.

    A Tarzan count of 0-14-0 (12) is certainly humanly trackable and with HiLo count it would look like (+3, 12xA, 25x789). Correct my numbers if there's need to but it looks like it yields a +7% EV for the Double Down and +5% for the hit. DD is the right move.

    The deck compo would be in terms 2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-T-A …
    … (12-12-12-12/9-9-8-8/48/12) or 48-34-48 (12) translated as 0-14-0 (12)

    Now let’s say you add two 2s, two 3s, two 4s, two 5s.
    The deck compo is now 14-14-14-14/9-9-8-8/48 (12).
    The HiLo RC count is now negative -13, 12xA, 25x789
    DD (+9,6%) is better than hitting (+6,2%)

    Now let’s go the other way with a deck compo of 10-10-10-10/9-9-8-8/48/12
    The HiLo RC count is now positive at +11, 12xA, 25x 789
    DD is still better than hitting (+4,9% v +3,6%) but not as much

    Ironically, the proposition becomes 50-50 with a big HiLo RC of +19, 12A, 25 X 789
    This time it’s slightly in favor of hitting (1,9%) v (1,8%).

    I don’t know where that falls in the red, purple, or whatever color zone Tarzan uses but this supports his reminder that the main count alone cannot determine the best way to play A5v2, and dozens of other hands, in different situations.

  6. #19


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Secretariat View Post
    That makes sense as a surplus of 6789s helps the dealer 2 to reach 8-9-10-11. Furthermore, our “likely” 6789 hit card on A5, places us at 12v2, 13v2, 14v2 and 15v2, a probable losing proposition that is not worth a double down on A5v2. No need to show EVs here.

    A shortage of 6789s leads towards more double down opportunities against 2s and that happens quite frequently regardless of the main count. Too bad we can’t see Tarzan’s tables but here are other examples.

    A Tarzan count of 0-14-0 (12) is certainly humanly trackable and with HiLo count it would look like (+3, 12xA, 25x789). Correct my numbers if there's need to but it looks like it yields a +7% EV for the Double Down and +5% for the hit. DD is the right move.

    The deck compo would be in terms 2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-T-A …
    … (12-12-12-12/9-9-8-8/48/12) or 48-34-48 (12) translated as 0-14-0 (12)

    Now let’s say you add two 2s, two 3s, two 4s, two 5s.
    The deck compo is now 14-14-14-14/9-9-8-8/48 (12).
    The HiLo RC count is now negative -13, 12xA, 25x789
    DD (+9,6%) is better than hitting (+6,2%)

    Now let’s go the other way with a deck compo of 10-10-10-10/9-9-8-8/48/12
    The HiLo RC count is now positive at +11, 12xA, 25x 789
    DD is still better than hitting (+4,9% v +3,6%) but not as much

    Ironically, the proposition becomes 50-50 with a big HiLo RC of +19, 12A, 25 X 789
    This time it’s slightly in favor of hitting (1,9%) v (1,8%).

    I don’t know where that falls in the red, purple, or whatever color zone Tarzan uses but this supports his reminder that the main count alone cannot determine the best way to play A5v2, and dozens of other hands, in different situations.

    This is the output of my count enumeration program for hand of A-5 for the Tarzan Count dealt from 6 decks with 142 cards remaining. There are 30 {6,7}, 32 {8,9}, 24 {2,3}, and 24 {4,5} removed as side counted groups.

    Indexes are Tarzan running count for 142 cards remaining and above side count removals.

    Note that since all cards but T and A are side counted the only way running count can vary while keeping number of cards remaining constant is by increasing number of T and decreasing number of A or vice versa.

    Code:
    Count tags {0,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,0,1} Dealer stands on soft 17
    Composition dependent indices for hand, rules, number of decks, and pen
    Player hand composition: 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0:  Soft 16, 2 cards
    Decks: 6 (possible input for cards remaining: 1 to 312)
    Cards remaining before up card = 142
    Subgroup removals: {6,7}30 {8,9}32 {2,3}24 {4,5}24
    
                2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      T      A
    
    Stand       h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h
    Double   >=-1   >=-2   >=-4   >=-5   >=-7      -      -      -      -      -
    Pair        -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    LS          -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    ES          -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -   >=10
    
    Press any key to continue
    k_c

  7. #20


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Hello KC
    I designed a soft hands strategy chart with shortages of 789s at TC0
    That leads to quite a few strategy deviations.
    Does that look ok to you?
    Thanks
    Secretariat
    Attached Files Attached Files

  8. #21


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Secretariat View Post
    Hello KC
    I designed a soft hands strategy chart with shortages of 789s at TC0
    That leads to quite a few strategy deviations.
    Does that look ok to you?
    Thanks
    Secretariat
    Your chart seems fairly reasonable.

    What I did was to generate a lot of data for a hand of A-5 for 52 cards from 4 decks remaining and 4 aces and varying numbers of (7,8,9) removed(/present) as an example. First set of data is for no side counts at all and 52 cards remaining. After that 4 aces along with 0,3,6,9,12,15,18,21,24 (7,8,9) are removed as side counts. Hi-Lo running count indexes for 52 cards remaining are listed with each set of data.

    I hope you find this helpful and can cross check the data with your chart for a hand of A-5.

    Code:
    No side counts
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
    Count tags {1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,1} Dealer hits soft 17
    Composition dependent indices for hand, rules, number of decks, and pen
    Player hand composition: 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0:  Soft 16, 2 cards
    Decks: 2 (possible input for cards remaining: 1 to 104)
    Cards remaining before up card = 52
    No subgroups are defined
    
                2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      T      A
    
    Stand       h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h
    Double   >=18    >=6   >=-2   >=-6  >=-13      -      -      -      -      -
    Pair        -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    LS          -      -      -      -      -      -   >=29   >=24   >=18   >=33
    ES          -      -      -      -      -      -   >=29   >=24   >=15    >=1
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
    
    Optional side count of aces, (7,8,9)
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
                    ******************
                    4 aces, 24 (7,8,9)
                    ******************
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    Count tags {1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,1} Dealer hits soft 17
    Composition dependent indices for hand, rules, number of decks, and pen
    Player hand composition: 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0:  Soft 16, 2 cards
    Decks: 2 (possible input for cards remaining: 1 to 104)
    Cards remaining before up card = 52
    Subgroup removals: {1}4 {7,8,9}0
    
                2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      T      A
    
    Stand       h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h
    Double      -      -   >=11   >=-1   >=-5      -      -      -      -      -
    Pair        -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    LS          -      -      -      -      -      -      -   >=22   >=13   >=11
    ES          -      -      -      -      -      -      -   >=22   >=11    >=1
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
                    ******************
                    4 aces, 21 (7,8,9)
                    ******************
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
    Count tags {1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,1} Dealer hits soft 17
    Composition dependent indices for hand, rules, number of decks, and pen
    Player hand composition: 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0:  Soft 16, 2 cards
    Decks: 2 (possible input for cards remaining: 1 to 104)
    Cards remaining before up card = 52
    Subgroup removals: {1}4 {7,8,9}3
    
                2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      T      A
    
    Stand       h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h
    Double      -      -    >=8   >=-2   >=-6      -      -      -      -      -
    Pair        -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    LS          -      -      -      -      -      -      -   >=23   >=14   >=14
    ES          -      -      -      -      -      -      -   >=23   >=12    >=2
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
                    ******************
                    4 aces, 18 (7,8,9)
                    ******************
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
    Count tags {1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,1} Dealer hits soft 17
    Composition dependent indices for hand, rules, number of decks, and pen
    Player hand composition: 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0:  Soft 16, 2 cards
    Decks: 2 (possible input for cards remaining: 1 to 104)
    Cards remaining before up card = 52
    Subgroup removals: {1}4 {7,8,9}6
    
                2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      T      A
    
    Stand       h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h
    Double      -   >=21    >=5   >=-1   >=-7      -      -      -      -      -
    Pair        -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    LS          -      -      -      -      -      -   >=30   >=22   >=15   >=19
    ES          -      -      -      -      -      -   >=30   >=22   >=13    >=1
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
                    ******************
                    4 aces, 15 (7,8,9)
                    ******************
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
    
    Count tags {1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,1} Dealer hits soft 17
    Composition dependent indices for hand, rules, number of decks, and pen
    Player hand composition: 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0:  Soft 16, 2 cards
    Decks: 2 (possible input for cards remaining: 1 to 104)
    Cards remaining before up card = 52
    Subgroup removals: {1}4 {7,8,9}9
    
                2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      T      A
    
    Stand       h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h
    Double      -   >=12    >=2   >=-2   >=-6      -      -      -      -      -
    Pair        -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    LS          -      -      -      -      -      -   >=29   >=23   >=16   >=24
    ES          -      -      -      -      -      -   >=29   >=23   >=14    >=2
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
                    ******************
                    4 aces, 12 (7,8,9)
                    ******************
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
    
    Count tags {1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,1} Dealer hits soft 17
    Composition dependent indices for hand, rules, number of decks, and pen
    Player hand composition: 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0:  Soft 16, 2 cards
    Decks: 2 (possible input for cards remaining: 1 to 104)
    Cards remaining before up card = 52
    Subgroup removals: {1}4 {7,8,9}12
    
                2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      T      A
    
    Stand       h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h
    Double   >=13    >=7    >=1   >=-3   >=-7      -      -      -      -      -
    Pair        -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    LS          -      -      -      -      -      -   >=30   >=24   >=19   >=31
    ES          -      -      -      -      -      -   >=30   >=24   >=17    >=3
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
                    ******************
                    4 aces, 9 (7,8,9)
                    ******************
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
    
    Count tags {1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,1} Dealer hits soft 17
    Composition dependent indices for hand, rules, number of decks, and pen
    Player hand composition: 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0:  Soft 16, 2 cards
    Decks: 2 (possible input for cards remaining: 1 to 104)
    Cards remaining before up card = 52
    Subgroup removals: {1}4 {7,8,9}15
    
                2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      T      A
    
    Stand       h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h
    Double    >=2    >=0   >=-2   >=-2   >=-8      -      -      -      -      -
    Pair        -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    LS          -      -      -      -      -      -   >=29   >=25   >=22      -
    ES          -      -      -      -      -      -   >=29   >=25   >=18    >=2
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
                    ******************
                    4 aces, 6 (7,8,9)
                    ******************
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
    
    Count tags {1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,1} Dealer hits soft 17
    Composition dependent indices for hand, rules, number of decks, and pen
    Player hand composition: 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0:  Soft 16, 2 cards
    Decks: 2 (possible input for cards remaining: 1 to 104)
    Cards remaining before up card = 52
    Subgroup removals: {1}4 {7,8,9}18
    
                2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      T      A
    
    Stand       h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h
    Double   >=-5   >=-5   >=-3   >=-1   >=-7      -      -      -      -      -
    Pair        -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    LS          -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -   >=25      -
    ES          -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -   >=21    >=3
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
                    ******************
                    4 aces, 3 (7,8,9)
                    ******************
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
    
    Count tags {1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,1} Dealer hits soft 17
    Composition dependent indices for hand, rules, number of decks, and pen
    Player hand composition: 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0:  Soft 16, 2 cards
    Decks: 2 (possible input for cards remaining: 1 to 104)
    Cards remaining before up card = 52
    Subgroup removals: {1}4 {7,8,9}21
    
                2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      T      A
    
    Stand       h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h      h
    Double   >=-8   >=-6   >=-4    >=4   >=-6      -      -      -      -   >=22
    Pair        -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    LS          -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    ES          -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -    >=4
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
                    ******************
                    4 aces, 0 (7,8,9)
                    ******************
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    
    
    Count tags {1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,1} Dealer hits soft 17
    Composition dependent indices for hand, rules, number of decks, and pen
    Player hand composition: 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0:  Soft 16, 2 cards
    Decks: 2 (possible input for cards remaining: 1 to 104)
    Cards remaining before up card = 52
    Subgroup removals: {1}4 {7,8,9}24
    
                2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      T      A
    
    Stand       h      h      h      h      h                           h      h
    Double  >=-11   >=-7   >=-1    >=9   >=-5      -      -      -      -   >=11
    Pair        -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    LS          -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
    ES          -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -    >=7
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    k_c

  9. #22


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Thank yous so much KC.
    I will study that in the next couple of days.

    How long does it take to program and come up with indices like that?
    Not sure if CV Data can do that.

  10. #23
    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
    Quote Originally Posted by Secretariat View Post
    Not sure if CV Data can do that.
    Just change the shoe contents in CVData.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  11. #24


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    Just change the shoe contents in CVData.
    One more thing to study!!! I am not really competent with CVData yet.

    In what menu can you edit the shoe?
    Last edited by Secretariat; 11-29-2021 at 12:55 PM.

  12. #25


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    OK just found it Norm. Index generator is working now.
    Say I specify the cards like 444444555-16
    Does the index generator work exactly at that point or does it finish the shoes?

  13. #26
    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
    Works the way it always works. You set where to start and stop in the shoe, you set the number of cards of each value, and it millions or billions of hands for each index.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Case study: Splitting 66v3 or not @ RC7 Double deck
    By Secretariat in forum The Disadvantage Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-17-2021, 09:13 AM
  2. Is Double for less(after splitting Aces) really worth +0.07% ?
    By James989 in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 11-16-2017, 03:23 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.