floored indices

[Mr. E]

Can someone please help explain the term floored when referring to indices? Thanks in advance!

[Freightman]

Can someone please help explain the term floored when referring to indices? Thanks in advance!

Another way of saying it - you can round up automatically or you can round down automatically or you can just round to whatever integer is closest.

Flooring is the same as rounding down - so anything between +1 and +2 is automatically +1
- so anything between -1 and -2 is automatically -2.

The term applies to all counts not just deviations.

[lij45o6]

Flooring: take your current number and shift leftward in the number line until you hit the first integer.

Ex: 0.5 -> 0, -2.2 -> -3, 1.99 -> 1, ect…

Trick question: what is the floored value of 0.9999…?

[JesterCW]

Life is short. Give yourself the true one .

[Freightman]

Life is short. Give yourself the true one .

Nicely said. Almost everyone sims by full true counts, so anything between (for example) 1.0 and 1.99 is 1, everything between 2.0 and 2.99 is 2 etc. etc. You’re likely surveilled on the same basis.

This gives you an excellent opportunity to look bad by using 1/2 true counts (which ramps a bit differently than full true counts), combined with variable or dual ramps throwing in some opposition type betting schemes and a touch of that QTC . Such an individual can’t hide the fact of counting, but is welcomed to play due to poor deck estimation and non optimal betting. Interestingly enough, proper execution of these strategies results in surprisingly strong results. They’re other benefits as well, but I’ll keep those to myself.

Optimal betting is so boring and robotic and is based on ramps designed to knock it out of the park each time at belt vs an approach of maximizing revenue over N sessions.

[Freightman]

Freightman poetically said

Nicely said. Almost everyone sims by full true counts, so anything between (for example) 1.0 and 1.99 is 1,

I’ve seen pros jump from min $25 to 2x200 at true 1.0 - a mistake despite what the sim says. Just in the past week, I came across a number of you tube videos by a group called Blackjack Advisors - a slash and burn group birthed from the Colin Jones School of Robots. Certainly seem successful enough though I actually perused their “professional” advice and actually took a series of notes which I think I’ll comment on in a new thread. May do that from Starbucks a bit later.

[Sidecount]

Flooring: take your current number and shift leftward in the number line until you hit the first integer.

Ex: 0.5 -> 0, -2.2 -> -3, 1.99 -> 1, ect…

Trick question: what is the floored value of 0.9999…?

We will get close to this if 366 cards remain in an 8 deck shoe with a running count of +9. That is 0.99939

Will be good to have this info when this scenario arises. I don't want to accidentally round up!

[Freightman]

We will get close to this if 366 cards remain in an 8 deck shoe with a running count of +9. That is 0.99939

Will be good to have this info when this scenario arises. I don't want to accidentally round up!

just in case you do

https://youtu.be/hImNp-PcMlY?si=htFmmGI9LngrsEYk

[lij45o6]

We will get close to this if 366 cards remain in an 8 deck shoe with a running count of +9. That is 0.99939

Will be good to have this info when this scenario arises. I don't want to accidentally round up!

Won’t need to! The answer is unintuitive but simple.

[DSchles]

We will get close to this if 366 cards remain in an 8 deck shoe with a running count of +9. That is 0.99939

Did you possibly mean RC = +7?

Don

[DSchles]

Trick question: what is the floored value of 0.9999…?

If by the dots you meant to imply the repeating decimal (bar over to the top of the last 9), then that value is 1.

Don

[lij45o6]

Correct. And, yes…that’s what I was trying to imply.

[Sidecount]

Did you possibly mean RC = +7?

Don

Nah. But you are correct that I goofed it. Didn't bither going back because it was just a little joke anyway. Kudos for noticing though! LOL