Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Correct HiLo Indices

  1. #1


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Correct HiLo Indices

    I don't know if I'm just losing my mind or what but I've used the indices in Stanford Wong's Professional Blackjack (Black Hardcover don't know exactly what the version of it is) for a WHILE and use flooring. Is this CORRECT?

    He also says when it's on the # it's a coinflip and it doesn't really matter which you choose, but in CVBJ it has some indices DD>= Value and for the Hit ones Hit < Value, why is this?

    The reason I'm bringing this up is I just noticed there's several versions of indices in CVBJ for HiLo (1994 HiLo, Old Complete HiLO) and some of the numbers are DIFFERENT?

    I think I'm going crazy, what's up?

  2. #2


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by PonyPrincess View Post
    I don't know if I'm just losing my mind or what but I've used the indices in Stanford Wong's Professional Blackjack (Black Hardcover don't know exactly what the version of it is) for a WHILE and use flooring. Is this CORRECT?

    He also says when it's on the # it's a coinflip and it doesn't really matter which you choose, but in CVBJ it has some indices DD>= Value and for the Hit ones Hit < Value, why is this?

    The reason I'm bringing this up is I just noticed there's several versions of indices in CVBJ for HiLo (1994 HiLo, Old Complete HiLO) and some of the numbers are DIFFERENT?

    I think I'm going crazy, what's up?
    For index play, effect for deviating from the index within +/- 2 range is nominal. If you have doubt, just use Basic Strategy on the close call occasions.

  3. #3
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,461
    Blog Entries
    59


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by PonyPrincess View Post
    I don't know if I'm just losing my mind or what but I've used the indices in Stanford Wong's Professional Blackjack (Black Hardcover don't know exactly what the version of it is) for a WHILE and use flooring. Is this CORRECT?

    He also says when it's on the # it's a coinflip and it doesn't really matter which you choose, but in CVBJ it has some indices DD>= Value and for the Hit ones Hit < Value, why is this?

    The reason I'm bringing this up is I just noticed there's several versions of indices in CVBJ for HiLo (1994 HiLo, Old Complete HiLO) and some of the numbers are DIFFERENT?

    I think I'm going crazy, what's up?
    The original PBJ tables used flooring. He later changed them to truncation. The original indices and method were better.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  4. #4


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    It took me a bit to get it but if you look at the cost of errors, how far away from the indices seems to influence the cost of errors. Allot of calls are right on the line, especially for me surrenders. I noticed that even though i had a high incidence of bad surrender calls, I had a relatively low error cost that resulted from them. At least I think this is how it works. I'm not sure if it does and I don't know that it doesn't but I'd love to a graph based on cost of errors versus frequency. It might be able to do this but I'd defer to Norm.
    Oneoff


    I'm not a bad player... I just play cover on every hand!

  5. #5


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Okay, I think I figured out what was throwing me off. In CVBJ the Old Complete Hilo indices look correct, but in CVCX all the Hit/Stand #s are off by one (like 16vT = 1) I don't know if it's like that on purpose or it's a typo. I think all my simulations would be off if that's the case!

  6. #6


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    cvcx high-low.jpg

    Some of the surrender #'s are weird too, 16v9 +2 for surrender...

  7. #7
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,461
    Blog Entries
    59


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    CVCX has old and new HiLo indices. Same as CVBJ.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  8. #8


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    The screenshot is the Old Complete High-Low indices in CVCX, which are different than the Old Complete High-Low indices in CVBJ. I'm just confused did I just tick some setting that's making it show those ones in CVCX? CVData has the correct looking indices too.

    cvdata high-low.jpg

    Both Old Complete High-Low.

  9. #9
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,461
    Blog Entries
    59


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    One of those charts is for single-deck and the other multiple-deck.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  10. #10


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Ohh, that makes sense.

  11. #11
    Senior Member bigplayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    1,807


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by PonyPrincess View Post

    He also says when it's on the # it's a coinflip and it doesn't really matter which you choose, but in CVBJ it has some indices DD>= Value and for the Hit ones Hit < Value, why is this?

    I think I'm going crazy, what's up?
    Wong changed the methodology for rounding (from Truncate to Flooring?) which resulted in the negative indexes changing by one notch. I still should not matter much but you can buy a newer edition of Professional BJ on Kindle or Paperback or just look at the index numbers in Casino Verite under Complete High Low. Regarding the index question, you cannot Hit and Double at the same time, so one has to be >= and the other has to be <. If it's something like 8 vs 6 you would double down at or above the index and play basic strategy below the index (Hit).

  12. #12


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Does original PBJ tables refer to the black hard cover edition and does later refer to the current green paperback edition? I use the indices from the current green paperback edition and round the true count for both betting and playing decisions. Are you suggesting that I should use the indices from the black hard cover edition and floor the true count for both betting and playing decisions? I have both books. How much am I hurting myself by using the indices from the current green paperback edition and rounding?

  13. #13
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,461
    Blog Entries
    59


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    The old black leather book used flooring and the green paperback uses truncation. Neither uses rounding. The difference is in the negative indices. They really don't matter all that much since you would mostly be betting min or leaving the table anyhow. It would matter in single-deck with multiple players as the count can swing neg during a round and the indices matter more.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.