H17 Soft 19 vs 6

[DK-Diggity]

OK, I'm taking flack for the software and I want a second opinion.

When I use CVCX and select the strategy ( Wong, Basic High-Low, Full Indexes, DAS, Multi-deck, H17 ); the tables show soft 19 vs 6 has an index of +1.

When I change that to S17 the tables still show +1.

I've tried changing all kinds of options and the tables only show +1. I'm on v 6.0.160

These really hateful internet people are telling me it's -1 and flinging poop at me and really cramping my style, so what's what? Which way is up?

Sincerely,
The software drone diggity

[Norm]

CVCX can simulate multiple rule sets at once. It changes the indices during the sim to match the rules. Because of this, it doesn't know which rule set you want displayed. To see this, go to Define/Edit Strategy and you can see all of the tables.

[DK-Diggity]

That’s where I’m looking. Also when I go into the mode where you can edit the tables, it shows +1 for h17 and s17.

Is it displaying the correct index? Is it +1?

[Norm]

Well, it depends on which version of the book you are using and whether you are using the indices in the main sections of the book or the appendices. He switched from flooring to truncation, and since indices depend on other indices, it depends on how many other indices. Also, he refined indices as new printings took place.

Having said that, I'd likely use 0 for truncation and 0 or -1 for flooring. The latter is so close it depends on deck estimation. Using 0 is easier and a hair better for risk aversion.

[DK-Diggity]

So then why does mine say +1?

[Cacarulo]

OK, I'm taking flack for the software and I want a second opinion.

When I use CVCX and select the strategy ( Wong, Basic High-Low, Full Indexes, DAS, Multi-deck, H17 ); the tables show soft 19 vs 6 has an index of +1.

When I change that to S17 the tables still show +1.

I've tried changing all kinds of options and the tables only show +1. I'm on v 6.0.160

These really hateful internet people are telling me it's -1 and flinging poop at me and really cramping my style, so what's what? Which way is up?

Sincerely,
The software drone diggity

The basic strategy of A8v6 (H17) is DD and the floored index is zero.

A8v6 (H17) = 0
A8v6 (S17) = +1

Sincerely,
Cac

[DK-Diggity]

Why does mine say +1?

[DK-Diggity]

Should I be using "Old Complete High-Low"? The other table with +1 I was referencing is "Basic High-Low"

[Norm]

The old tables use flooring and the newer truncation. Flooring is somewhat better. Although he also made a few other minor changes over the years.

The tables in CV are from the books as that's what people are used to. This is somewhat confusing in the case of Professional Blackjack as the text includes some compromises where the appendices don't. Also, I don't know exactly how users are calculating TC and how many indices they are using.

[21forme]

Speaking of flooring, a few weeks ago, I was cashing out chips and it was something like $982. I jokingly said to the cashier, "feel free to round up." She replied, "how about if I floor?"
I'm surprised a cashier knew that term!

[Cacarulo]

Should I be using "Old Complete High-Low"? The other table with +1 I was referencing is "Basic High-Low"

The index that maximizes the expected value is zero but you can use +1 as the risk aversion index which is preferable.

Sincerely,
Cac

[Cacarulo]

So then why does mine say +1?

My advice: if you have software capable of generating indexes such as CV, it is ALWAYS convenient that you generate your own.

Sincerely,
Cac

[Dog Hand]

Speaking of flooring, a few weeks ago, I was cashing out chips and it was something like $982. I jokingly said to the cashier, "feel free to round up." She replied, "how about if I floor?"
I'm surprised a cashier knew that term!

21forme,

Were you surprised, or were you floored? ????

Dog Hand