See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27

Thread: Side counting aces in HI-LO

  1. #1


    4 out of 4 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Side counting aces in HI-LO

    Continuing with the ASC topic, I am going to show you four different ways to do it and the SCORES that we can obtain with any of them.

    A)

    PC = -1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 -1 (IRC = 0) (HI-LO)
    SC = 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (IRC = -24)

    In this case we use the secondary count of aces for insurance bets only. We adjust the RC by doing "PC + SC". In this way the value of the ace will be ZERO increasing the HI-LO IC from 0.7647 to 0.8674.
    If you don't feel comfortable adding aces starting from -24 you can also do it by subtracting aces but starting the count at +24 and adjusting the RC to "PC - SC". The two forms are equivalent.
    The new index for insurance is no longer "+3" but "-1".
    For everything else we continue using HI-LO (PC).

    B)

    PC = -1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 -1 (IRC = 0) (HI-LO)
    SC = 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (IRC = -24)


    Here we also use the secondary count of aces only for insurance bets. The RC is calculated as "PC + 2*SC". Now the ace will be ONE increasing the IC of HI-LO from 0.7647 to 0.8908.
    Same as above, if you prefer to subtract aces you can change the value of the ace in SC to -1 and the IRC to +24. The RC is adjusted by doing "PC - 2*SC".
    The new index for insurance is no longer "+3" but "-5".
    For everything else we continue using HI-LO (PC).

    C)

    PC = 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 -1 (IRC = -24)
    SC = 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (IRC = -24)

    Here the secondary count of aces is used only for betting purposes using RC = PC - SC. For playing we use the primary count (PC). This is an unbalanced count in which we
    can use the indices of HI-LO minus 4. Insurance index would be "-1" (+3 - 4) , 16vT would be "-4" (0 - 4) and so on.

    D)

    PC = -1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 -1 (IRC = 0) (HI-LO)
    SC = 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (IRC = 0)

    This is the case of "dynamic insurance" explained in other posts.
    The difference with the previous ones is that it is NOT necessary to adjust the RC.
    The secondary count is kept and depending on the aces that have come out, the value of the index is reduced accordingly.
    If we look closely the reduction in the index ALSO occurs in cases A, B and C.
    The reduction in the indices has to do with the imbalance of the count systems used. I think this is the explanation that many were requiring.

    Finally, I do not want to forget the old-fashioned method that many people still use. This is the case in which the RC is adjusted
    depending on whether we are above or below the expected average number of aces.
    I don't really care to explain it as I find it totally awkward to use and more prone to mistakes due to the additions and subtractions required for balancing.
    In my opinion cases A and B are far superior.

    Code:
    SCORES (6D,S17,DOA,DAS,SPA1,SPL3,NS,4.5/6,Play All,R22 indices,50 billion rounds,heads up)
    
    HI-LO alone
    
        1-12   1-16 
        21.15  25.00
    
    HI-LO w/ASC
    
        1-12   1-16 
    A   22.01  25.90
    B   22.15  26.04
    C   22.53  26.42
    D   21.51  25.36
    Enjoy.

    Sincerely,
    Cac

    PS: I forgot to mention that the above data is for 6D. If you need a different number of decks you can
    change the number 24 to 4*decks.
    Last edited by Cacarulo; 06-10-2022 at 07:58 PM.

  2. #2


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Thanks I was looking for something like this post.

  3. #3


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Cacarulo View Post
    Continuing with the ASC topic, I am going to show you four different ways to do it and the SCORES
    Sincerely,
    Cac
    I like your Method D a lot but am skeptical too. Earlier you showed 6-deck numbers as follows:
    Six decks
    Generic index: +3

    Dynamic index:
    12 or more aces came up: +2
    17 or more aces came up: +1
    19 or more aces came up: 0

    However, 6-decks are a rarity. Can you also show this method for 8-decks to convince me?

  4. #4


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by LoKee View Post
    Thanks I was looking for something like this post.
    You're welcome.

    Sincerely,
    Cac

  5. #5


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by aceside View Post
    I like your Method D a lot but am skeptical too. Earlier you showed 6-deck numbers as follows:
    Six decks
    Generic index: +3

    Dynamic index:
    12 or more aces came up: +2
    17 or more aces came up: +1
    19 or more aces came up: 0

    However, 6-decks are a rarity. Can you also show this method for 8-decks to convince me?
    6-decks are not a rarity.

    Code:
    
    Eight decks
    Generic index:
    +3 if aces >=  1 (prob: 0.029611)
    
    Dynamic index:
    +2 if aces >= 18 (prob: 0.022279)
    +1 if aces >= 23 (prob: 0.007769)
     0 if aces >= 25 (prob: 0.004744)
    -1 if aces >= 27 (prob: 0.000849)
    -2 if aces >= 29 (prob: 0.000106)
    -3 if aces >= 30 (prob: 0.000025)
    
    If you look carefully, you will notice that a dynamic index less than +2 is very unlikely to occur.

    Sincerely,
    Cac
    Last edited by Cacarulo; 06-10-2022 at 07:40 PM.

  6. #6


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Cacarulo View Post
    6-decks are not a rarity.

    Code:
    
    Eight decks
    Generic index:
    +3 if aces >=  1 (prob: 0.029611)
    
    Dynamic index:
    +2 if aces >= 18 (prob: 0.022279)
    +1 if aces >= 23 (prob: 0.007769)
     0 if aces >= 25 (prob: 0.004744)
    -1 if aces >= 27 (prob: 0.000849)
    -2 if aces >= 29 (prob: 0.000106)
    -3 if aces >= 30 (prob: 0.000025)
    
    If you look carefully, you will notice that a dynamic index less than +2 is very unlikely to occur.

    Sincerely,
    Cac
    I don't quite understand your probability part, but your probability numbers seem small.
    Let me give you my estimate of the true count (TC) probability.
    For a 6-deck game with a 4.5/6 pen, the probability of TC>+3 for any density of aces should be about 18%.

  7. #7


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Aceside, are you saying the frequency of true count greater than +3 is 18%? That is way off. It’s closer to 3% maybe even a little less

  8. #8


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    5.21%.

    Don

  9. #9
    Senior Member Gramazeka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    1,267


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    5.21%.

    Don
    Pen 4.5/6
    Attached Images Attached Images
    "Don't Cast Your Pearls Before Swine" (Jesus)

  10. #10


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Green21 View Post
    Aceside, are you saying the frequency of true count greater than +3 is 18%? That is way off. It’s closer to 3% maybe even a little less
    I just re-estimated this number and found that my number of 18% is way off. This also means that my earlier estimate of the insurance flat-bet number is way off too.

    Don's number looks fine, but Gramazaka's graph numbers are hard to read. What are these numbers?

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Does side counting aces benefit hi lo or wong halves?
    By blueman in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-22-2019, 06:42 PM
  2. 11 v T ENHC side counting aces
    By Meistro123 in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-11-2018, 07:07 AM
  3. Red Seven: Side Counting Aces
    By BlackjackFeign in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-28-2016, 02:38 AM
  4. Side counting aces tko method
    By Vandammage in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-18-2015, 09:12 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.