Does anyone have an email address for Bryce Carlson? If so could you email me with his address or ask him to email me?
[email protected]
Does anyone have an email address for Bryce Carlson? If so could you email me with his address or ask him to email me?
[email protected]
> Does anyone have an email address for Bryce
> Carlson? If so could you email me with his
> address or ask him to email me?
> [email protected]
I have it, but I don't know if he wants it given out. Does he know you?
Don
Don,
I wouldn't expect you to give out Bryce's email, but I'm an AOII user with some technical questions I would really appreciate answers to.
Is there any chance of forwarding my questions to Bryce (via you perhaps?)
I have questions regarding additional indices which I've worked out and memorised (and would like confirmation of their accuracy) and also Ace and Eight multiparameter questions as well. Do you think Bryce would be interested in answering such questions? If not, I'll understand - he must be sick to death of answering questions. But if there's a way of getting answers, I'd be most grateful.
Hope you can help.
. . . simply post your questions here?
There is a possibility that Bryce might see your post and choose to respond to it.
And even if he does not, there are a few other "regulars" here who know a thing or two about AOII and blackjack in general, and just might be able to provide an answer.
As with comps, all you gotta do is ask. :-)
> . . . simply post your questions here?
> There is a possibility that Bryce might see
> your post and choose to respond to it.
> And even if he does not, there are a few
> other "regulars" here who know a
> thing or two about AOII and blackjack in
> general, and just might be able to provide
> an answer.
> As with comps, all you gotta do is ask. :-)
If Bryce doesn't answer, I'll e-mail him and tell him to read the question here. then, if he chooses to respond, you'll be all set!
Don
OK, I will. Thanks.
I did an indices comparison between AOII and Hi Opt II, which are fairly similar, and came up with some additional indices. Whilst most of the additional indices would not be used in normal play, I have found that it useful to know how close you are to the index number for 2 reasons:
1) It gives you confidence in knowing that you are making the correct play instead of just following the system with blinkers on.
2) If you get to play tournament, there are likely to be times where you have to take the risk, and knowing how close you are to the index helps you to more clearly assess the risk.
So here are some of the additional indices which I would welcome confirmation or correction on:
Rules: Standard multideck game, with no DAS.
Stand else hit
14 v 8 s25/h
14 v 9 s31/h
13 v A s30/h
Double else hit
8 v 2 d26/h
7 v 2 d39/h
7 v 3 d28/h
7 v 4 d21/h
7 v 5 d18/h
7 v 6 d17/h
6 v 3 d33/h
6 v 4 d27/h
6 v 5 d23/h
6 v 6 d25/h
5 v 3 d35/h
5 v 4 d28/h
5 v 5 d24/h
5 v 6 d27/h
Double else stand
soft20 v 2 d19/s
soft20 v 7 d30/s
soft19 v 2 d15/s
soft19 v 7 d28/s
soft18 v 7 d29/s
If no doubles...
soft18 v 2 s-26/h
soft18 v 3 s-27/h
soft18 v 4 s-25/h
soft18 v 5 s-25/h
Splits
10's v 2 p19/s
10's v 7 p26/s
9's v 9 p-26/s
8's v 9 p31 or less /s
8's v A p-25/h
7's v 5 p-25/h
Late surrender
17 v 9 sr24/s
8's v 9 sr15/p
16 v 7 sr21/h
15 v 7 sr23/h
14 v 7 sr25/h
13 v 7 sr35/h
13 v 8 sr27/h
13 v 9 sr21/h
13 v A sr22/h
12 v 9 sr26/h
12 v 10 sr20/h
I know that some of these numbers are way out of the realm of normal play, but here they are nonetheless. I would appreciate comments regarding the accuracy of these numbers.
I also have indices for double after split, dealer hits soft 17 and early surrender.
I'll do those later.
By the way, I ran extensive simulations on SBA to generate standard indices to compare with Bryce's original indices and found that Bryce's figures yielded better return when I ran simulations on CVData (5000,000,000 hands). So I'm sticking with his original figures unless he tells me otherwise.
I'd also like Bryce Carlson's and other's comments on multiparameter Ace side counting for playing purposes in particular:
Insurance: Ace +1 (ie. each additional Ace subtract "1" from RC)
10 v 10 Ace -5
16 v 10 Ace +1
As I side count Aces anyway I have been incorporating these into my playing. My simulations indicate that 10 v 10 multiparameter play has some benefit. I am unable to measure the effect of the insurance multiparameter play on my simulator.
There are other multiparameter indices I have but the benefits are outweighed by the potential for error and the extra effort required in playing. But I'd like to incorporate any others that yield reasonable results. Comments please.
Any 8's side count multi's worth exploring???
Well that's it for the moment.
I hope I get some positive feedback.
The other additional indices will follow in a few days.
Thanks, guys.
> I know that some of these numbers are way
> out of the realm of normal play, . . .
Just some?! :-)
> I also have indices for double after split,
> dealer hits soft 17 and early surrender.
Busy beaver, aren't we?! :-)
> By the way, I ran extensive simulations on
> SBA to generate standard indices to compare
> with Bryce's original indices and found that
> Bryce's figures yielded better return when I
> ran simulations on CVData (5000,000,000
> hands). So I'm sticking with his original
> figures unless he tells me otherwise.
Apples to oranges comparison. Bryce's numbers in the book attempted to be risk-averse indices, but contained some errors, apparently. If you use SBA to generate a set of r-a indices, customized for AOII, they'll likely not only outperform the standard indices, but will probably best Bryce's set, as well. Again, we're talking SCORE here, and not just EV.
> I'd also like Bryce Carlson's and other's
> comments on multiparameter Ace side counting
> for playing purposes in particular:
> Insurance: Ace +1 (ie. each additional Ace
> subtract "1" from RC)
> 10 v 10 Ace -5
> 16 v 10 Ace +1
> As I side count Aces anyway I have been
> incorporating these into my playing. My
> simulations indicate that 10 v 10
> multiparameter play has some benefit. I am
> unable to measure the effect of the
> insurance multiparameter play on my
> simulator.
Forget 10 v. 10 altogether as a play. If you've generated a r-a index for this play, you're likely to note that it is so high as to be not worth knowing.
Don
If you use SBA to
> generate a set of r-a indices, customized
> for AOII, they'll likely not only outperform
> the standard indices, but will probably best
> Bryce's set.
As usual Don you are correct.The r/a indices I generated for AO II outscore Carlsons in over 40 sims.I think that his were a type of generic r/a and still extremely accurate.
I did an indices comparison between AOII and
Hi Opt II.
Have you run any score comparisons between Omega and Opt II yet and if so what were the results for different conditions?
As I am using AoII with sucess and am interested in any conclusions Re: side counts for b or p.
C'mon Bryce let's hear from you!
What indices do you get for the following game.
sd,das ,doa,s17,39/52.
9v2,8v5,8v6,A8v5 and A8v6?
I am receiving some confusing results ie 8v6=+5!where surely this is a bs play and therefore I would assume the number should be about-2?
I am generating E/v max by truncating so perhaps yopu can run a sim to compare.
> Does anyone have an email address for Bryce
> Carlson? If so could you email me with his
> address or ask him to email me?
> [email protected]
and would appreciate any reply - be it Bryce, Don S, or whomever. One matrix number 7,7 vs 8 has an deviation number of -1. Normally, this would mean at -1 or worse (more nrgative) you should do the opposite. BS, for 7,7 vs 8 S17 DAS is different for SD & DD than for 4D and up [Note: all NDAS BS says nevr split 7,7 vs 8]. I'm curious how this matrix number should be interpreted: Do NOT split at -1 or worse for DD and SD?? Or DO split for 4D and up at -1 or greater?? or is there another interpretation. Appreciate any and all replies.
Thanks
> and would appreciate any reply - be it
> Bryce, Don S, or whomever. One matrix number
> 7,7 vs 8 has an deviation number of -1.
> Normally, this would mean at -1 or worse
> (more nrgative) you should do the opposite.
> BS, for 7,7 vs 8 S17 DAS is different for SD
> & DD than for 4D and up [Note: all NDAS
> BS says nevr split 7,7 vs 8]. I'm curious
> how this matrix number should be
> interpreted: Do NOT split at -1 or worse for
> DD and SD?? Or DO split for 4D and up at -1
> or greater?? or is there another
> interpretation. Appreciate any and all
> replies.
For SD only, it means split if the index is -1 or higher (normal interpretation).
There should be a completely different number (perhaps even two) for multi-deck, whereby you split over a range of two positive numbers, hit below the lower number and stand above the higher number.
Don
Posting Permissions
-*-
Bookmarks