As Norm said.
i WOULD like to know the method to generate it. thanks.
I don't think blocks are the way to approach side-counting. Being able to adjust individually for a certain denomination is much cleaner. The problem with a block is you get a lot of interference, so that while your brain power required goes up, the usefulness goes down. Also, chang, play with some numbers involving cards remaining and block cards remaining: look at the fact that towards the end of the shoe would be when you would be using this information. Let's say you are dealt a hand where your side count excels (13 vs 3 for example). Approximately 4 decks dealt and 2 remain. Let's further say that you've counted 48 block cards, which is exactly what would be dealt from 4 decks. In this example here, this is the hand you are waiting for to use your information. If 678 are above or below average density, it will strongly affect the play. Looking at the discard pile, if you are not VERY exact, you will have big problems. Here are some exact numbers for this situation: If there are 4.36 decks played, you are at -1 block cards per deck remaining. If there are 3.69 decks played, you are at +1 block counts per deck remaining.
Also, CVIndex doesn't calculate block counts for you. I devised my own block count for 789 with Wong Halves, just to see what would happen and to develop my blackjack math skills. It was a lot of work, but I learned a great deal that was useful later for other things. I tried some practice with the count and it was very tough, I noticed that the side count tended to "slip" towards one direction. Using the information in real time was a big headache. I lacked the simulation expertise to properly sim this system, so I just started playing through shoes in CVBJ and recording the results, including the exact deck composition each time the 789 block caused a deviation from regular counting. I figured this would give me a good idea whether it was never, sometimes or often that the side count would come into effect. I did Play All through 100 shoes and meticulously recorded the results. My 789 side count was used 64 times during 100 shoes. Using a CA, I plugged in the deck compositions for each time I made a play in order to score whether is was correct to deviate from the main count. 40 of the plays were good deviations from the main count (including 3 Insurance adjustments), while 24 of the plays went in the other direction. Measuring the EV of the side counting relative to the main count, the +EV from a $10 to $100 spread over 100 shoes was $41.50. I know these results aren't definitive with such a small sample, but for me at least this experiment gave me a good idea of how it would really work. I don't recommend block side counting. And I didn't even get into the potential for errors.
At the time I did this 789 side count math, with the approach that I developed, it was helpful to me that the block of three cards were neutral to the main count. At this point I am confident that I could develop side count adjustments for any main count with any crazy-ass side count and come up with accurate strategies. I'm still tinkering with some ideas, but I don't expect them to be super powerful or easy to use. Mostly I just enjoy delving into the math. I do think my experience with developing the 789 side count and looking at it carefully led to understanding what may be a much better approach, but I don't want to share yet (if ever).
Sure, I get what you are saying. I made my decision at the time to analyze a 789 block because that was easier for me (at the time). The things I learned along the way would likely have been nearly the same. I've moved on from this idea, but in defense of the 789 block, I'll just point out a few things. The thing about 678 block being better I think comes from old school single deck games, back whenever that was analyzed. In my case, 789 block was better for surrender decisions, which was not (I think) factored into the old school single deck situation. Also, I had a very nice adustment for insurance with the 789 block which would be much less potent with a 6 instead of the 9. Factoring in Insurance and Surrender I think the 2 different blocks are probably very close in value. But for me at least, this would have been a totally unworkable and risky way to sidecount, so I'll just have to leave it at that. And as I could see by playing through 100 shoes with the strategy, playing heads up the block adjustment only became a factor about one play once every shoe and a half.Originally Posted by chang04133
Posting Permissions
-*-
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks