8's vs 10 how costly

[Mr. White]

I had this play a few months ago but surrender was not offered. If i remember correctly my KO Tc was around +7 or +8. I didnt have this index play because its not included for kO or REKO-F, but i thought i remembered the hi-lo index to stand and not split was around +8 or +9. I took longer to decide what to do and finally decided to just go with basic strategy since i wasnt sure and had no index. Of course i got another 8 to split and ended up losing 3 max bets, maybe 4 cant remember if i doubled on one of the 8s. It bothered me for awhile after because i really didnt want to split.

Thats part of the reason i have thought about switching to hi-lo or FELT/RPC. Cause its hard to add so many indices for an unbalanced count. Right now i use about 45 indices with KO. But atleast for right now im sticking with KO. I just looked at a few other counts and they didnt have the published index for this play either so i presume this play of standing instead of splitting isnt that important. But i HATE that play!!!!! I dont care how small a gain it is!!! It doesnt come up that often at all but when it does i know it will bother me lol.

How should i deal with this play using KO? Of course surrender first if allowed. But if not allowed can i just stand or is it better to just use basic stategy.( I want to stand even at TC +3 lol but i dont). I have seen maybe +8 for hi-lo,NT21 uses +5(because risk averse maybe?). FELT-F doesnt include this index.
...

...Or maybe i have this backwards and i should be more risk averse with smaller bankroll?

Are you actually TCing KO, or using the Color of Blackjack method?

If you're doing the actual TC conversion, then you can use whatever HiLo index you want to use, minus 4. Better would be to generate a set for TKO, but short of that, HiLo - 4 will get you darn close. (This is assuming you're using Brett Harris' UB TC simplification - For KO: employing an IRC of (-4)*decks and then dividing your running count by remaining decks, as normal. If you're using an IRC of 0, do NOT subtract 4 from the indices...) IE: Insure at HiLo TC 3, but insure at TKO TC -1, etc.

Also, I think you know this but just to make sure there is no chance of confusion, TC KO indices are of course going to be vastly different than the running count Reko-F indices.

Modern Blackjack Print edition has a full set of risk adverse TC'd KO indices, as well.

But -- don't move from TKO to HiLo just for indices -- true counted KO is certainly more powerful than HiLo. Why make the switch to a weaker system when you can get the indices you need as described above? Switching to a level II is another story that you'd have to decide for yourself.

Also, and I'm most certainly no expert in this, but a smaller BR is absolutely a reason to use risk adverse indices. With RA play, although the EV of a given play might be slightly less, you are able to bet a little more per given level of risk, making you more money overall.

[tawny]

I dont actually do full out TKO on the fly. But i can figure out the TC at any given time by just figuring out what the neutral RC would be at any given time and subtracting it from the actual RC and then i can do the TC like with any other balanced count. Its basically just using this formula TC= RC-(4*Decks played)/decks unplayed with IRC of 0. I never use this while playing though. For betting i usually use COBJ system.

But for indexes i wanted something more accurate so i use hi-lo indexes. The Brett Harris way i think is the same thing i do just using the different formula for an IRC of 0. Say i am 3 decks into 6 decks and count is 18 Rc, the way i do it is: 18 - (4*3)/3=2TC.Brett Harris would be -6/3=-2 and add 4 =2TC. But when i first started playing with TKO i didnt want to use this formula at table ,but i could probably do it much faster now, so i figured out what the RC would be for all my TC indexes at each deck depth. So for any hi-lo index of 2 TC i just know the corresponding RC number. So it would be 14,16,18,20,22 for decks played 1,2,3,4,5. And if i was at 2.5 decks played i know right away that a 2TC is 17 RC.

This has served me very well so far but now i am going to play more than the 6 deck games in my area and i dont know if it is realistic to memorize all these corresponding RC numbers for different index for different games some shoe and some DD. So i am trying to figure out how i will use KO for DD. Dont want to use the method i use for 6 decks so i might just use REKO-F for DD. I really want to stick with KO but i will see how i like it with double deck before deciding if i want to move to balanced count.

I checked Modern Blackjack and it didnt have TC index for 8/8 v 10 except for surrender. So i am not going to worry about it unless the TC is so high then i will just stand.

[ZenKinG]

Not exactly right. Losing less is a +EV move compared to losing more.

Aint that the TRUTHiness

[splitaces]

I was recently playing with a max bet out and caught a pair of 8's vs 10. I know illustrious 18 and fab 4. The proper decision was to split but I couldn't do it. I was playing heads up and figured I would rather surrender the hand and save the big cards. Any opinions as to how costly this decision was? THX

Max bet means tc ...? If no surrender, then go by index. If split, split. If stand, stand. Splitting when index calls for it has saved me many times. No fear!

[ZenKinG]

Max bet means tc ...? If no surrender, then go by index. If split, split. If stand, stand. Splitting when index calls for it has saved me many times. No fear!

Disagree.. If you cant surrender, it is much better to stand unless count is TC is negative you hit, even if you might squeeze out a little more EV with splitting, but you need to consider risk also.

[Smartpart]

Aint that the TRUTHiness

Disagree.. If you cant surrender, it is much better to stand unless count is TC is negative you hit, even if you might squeeze out a little more EV with splitting, but you need to consider risk also.

o.O

[splitaces]

Disagree.. If you cant surrender, it is much better to stand unless count is TC is negative you hit, even if you might squeeze out a little more EV with splitting, but you need to consider risk also.

Why wouldn't you follow index? I don't even have an index for not splitting 8s, though I'm sure there may be one at a really high tc that I haven't memorized.

Expected loss for standing is -.53, surrender -.5 (obviously), and splitting is -.47 roughly w bs.


http://wizardofodds.com/games/blackj...dix/9/6ds17r4/


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[NT21]

The Index for not splitting 8,8 vs T is 5

[blueefficacy]

Correct or not, I never split 8s v T if I have a bigger than minimum bet out.

[NT21]

If that's cover, great. If not, that's gambling. To each his own.

[21forme]

The proper decision was to split but I couldn't do it.

If you play by your gut, you should not be playing.

The Index for not splitting 8,8 vs T is 5

Wong says it's +8

[ZenKinG]

Why wouldn't you follow index? I don't even have an index for not splitting 8s, though I'm sure there may be one at a really high tc that I haven't memorized.

Expected loss for standing is -.53, surrender -.5 (obviously), and splitting is -.47 roughly w bs.


http://wizardofodds.com/games/blackj...dix/9/6ds17r4/


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

No need to follow any index for splitting on this certain type of play because if ur using halves or hi-lo, the index to surrender is 0, and you always want to consider surrender FIRST.. So only at -1 would you consider splitting or hit/stand, in which I would do the latter because of risk/reward preference.. And splitting at a high true count is EVEN WORSE odds, as the dealer has a high chance of a 20, and you have a high chance of 18 or 19, which is a losing hand.

[Three]

If you are better off surrendering than splitting that says something about how bad the split is in a positive count. I had a direct bet and got 88vT where no surrender was offered. Of course I didn't split but I did pull a 5 for 21.

I usually stand but took a hit this time. i was just playing the paper and moving on as the game sucks there. There are other things to play there besides BJ though.