does anyone out there use the red seven count? have a few questions about snyders deviations after 6 decks are in the tray
he states taking ins. at pivot +2. when using the advanced red seven count he shows ins. at +4 (after 3 decks are gone out of a 6 deck shoe). i am assuming he means ins. at pivot +2 regardless of how many decks left. also doubling 9 v 2 at -4 after 3 decks are gone, wondering if he means only after 3 decks are gone or gradually drop to -4 .
I make no deviation plays until the the 6 deck shoe has at least 3 decks dealt. At 3 decks dealt and the RC is +4 you take insurance.. At 3 decks dealt out 6 or 2 decks dealt out of 4 and RC is -4 you doubl 9 v 2/
Try not to overthink it. You have 12 deviations with 4 to 8 deck play and you only use them when half the shoe is dealt. I use hi-low for double deck. I find I am able to play more naturally with RED 7 with multi-deck. I had another player come up to me at the bar when I was taking a break between sessions and it turned out the guy 'said' he was a counter but he couldn't figure out what system I was using but he was sure it wasn't hi-lo since I wasn't looking at the discard tray at all nor was I making the deviations when he was. I told him I wasn't counting.. he just smiled.. and I went back to play and he never bothered me again.
Here's an intuitive way to do these calculations that works most of the time, when comparing to the Hi-Lo indices, which are +3 for insurance and +1 for doubling 9 vs. 2.
Your IRC with Red Seven is -12. At the three deck level, your zero RC would be six higher than that (two per deck), or -6. For insurance to have a +3 index for Red Seven, at the three-deck level, you'd need the RC to be nine higher than -6 (9/3 = 3), or -6 + 9 = +3.
For doubling 9 vs. 2, your IRC with Red Seven is -12. At the three deck level, your zero RC would be six higher than that (two per deck), or -6. For 9 vs. 2 to have a +1 index for Red Seven, at the three-deck level, you'd need the RC to be three higher than -6 (3/3 = 1), or -6 + 3 = -3.
Clear?
Don
I see no reason whatsoever to not use any deviations until three decks are gone. You're clearly giving up opportunities. What's so special about three decks? When you have a sufficiently high RC to make a departure, you do so. The number of decks remaining should have nothing to do with that decision.
Don
To be honest with you Don, I sort of thought the same way but, not only in his book but in previous articles/info that he wrote he it seems to be clear that deviations early in the deck are not advisable. I have always chalked it up to some aspect related to the imbalanced count as the reason. When I play 4-deck using RED 7 if the RC is above +4 and maybe only a deck or a deck & a half has been played I have used a deviation play maybe 2-3 times that I recall and I believe 2 of them were a bust but that's not a big enough sample to really indicate anything. I have tried to find an article with a deeper reading of his counting systems. I know in earlier versions of his book there was no mention I believe of waiting until at least half of the decks were played out before using deviations.. Something of a mystery for me that I continue to find a solution for.
There's nothing inherent in the nature of an unbalanced count that would lead to such a conclusion. If you had a gigantic RC after, say, two decks out of six, there simply would be no reason not to use deviations. The problem, of course, is that the indices change as the penetration changes. So maybe Arnold just wanted to simplify the user's life.Originally Posted by VonDox
Don
Posting Permissions
-*-
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks