Quote Originally Posted by Secretariat View Post
Don made this highly interesting point yesterday before the lights went out.

He said:
“When the 9 is counted the wrong way for insurance in Halves, it absolutely makes sense that a side count of intermediates could help. Nor do I dispute the strategy decisions improvement. But I do not take your word for it for improving betting. Of all known modern-day point counts, Halves has always had the highest and closest-to-perfect BE. It makes no sense to me whatsoever that suddenly double counting the 6-9 would improve betting.”

As you know, I never miss a chance to learn something.

When Don said I should try Hi-Opt II, I did and I found value in it but it will never be my system of choice.

When Don pointed BJ Strat to me I did go to BJ Strat.

When Norm said I should sim instead of focusing only one “once in a quadrillions” deck compositions with BJ Strat, I tried to improve my ability with CV Data.

I’m still a beginner with CV Data but Norm, I need your honest help here, not vague answers like your last two replies. We expect help and straight answers from you.

So here it is.

I did three CV Data sims last night with modified decks after the lights went out and I was surprised with the results considering that I changed deck compositions by only 6 middle cards at once.

Again, I am not that confident with my ability with CV Data sims but I am asking you, Norm, Don, Cac, or anyone else if those sims make sense and why or why not.

Those sims, plus BJ Strat, tend to show that with fewer 789s in the deck, there may be value in betting more.

I am not campaigning here. I am just looking for the truth and insightful answers.


Using CV Data sims I came up with the following results for
6D, S17, DAS, 4.5/6 pen, 1-15 spread at or near the 3-deck mark

They seem to confirm that the fewer 789s the better the SCORE
(perhaps due to more Blackacks ??)
please note that with Halves, 7 and 9s would cancel out.

DECK COMPOSITIONS
A) Basic HiLo 12-12-12-12-12-12-14-14-14-48 : SCORE = 11.90
B) Basic HiLo 12-12-12-12-12-12-12-12-12-48 : SCORE = 16.83
C) Basic HiLo 12-12-12-12-12-12-10-10-10-48 : SCORE = 21.16

EVs with same deck compositions as above according to BJ STRAT
BASIC STRATEGY BEST STRATEGY
A) -0.3892 -0,3671
B) -0.3415 -0.3411
C) -0.3251 -0.2762

Your thought anyone…
Do you get similar results simming modified decks at the 3-deck mark?
And if I am wrong, don’t blast me. Just explain why.
With this knowledge through side counting can we modify our betting?
Notwithstanding anything Norm has said, above, this is simply a reaffirmation of the floating advantage. We know that a pre-deal TC of 0 is surely worth more in single deck than in 6-deck. Those are the extremes. All you have really done, above, is to create two pre-deal TCs of zero, but where there are fewer cards remaining in the (C) situation than in the (A) one. I dare say that you could create thousands of other zero-count subsets, but with unequal amounts of cards remaining, and "demonstrate" many other (bogus?) effects having nothing at all to do with intermediate-card deficits.

Do you understand my point?

Don