maguder: I have a question related to the shuffle tracking.

[maguder]

I found a casino with very simple shuffle(like 26 cards=
slug , and only once shuffled) but poor penetration= 50-60% in 6 or 8decks shoe game, in Asia.
I know I should play with NRS=the formula. And I realized many pros play with HILO.
I believe if the shuffle was so simple, the condition is simular
to a very good penetration game or 2decks game.
and, I
believe playing efficiency gives u a lot bigger E.V for each
tracking play. So I sticked to HIOPT1and ace sidecount.(as
Hunce recommended long time ago.)
Im quite sure this way is better than HILO-alone.
What I would like to know is if ever I picked up HIOPT2 any dramatic differece between following A.B.C
A. HIOPT1with Acesidecount.
B.HIOPT2 no sidecount
C.HIOPT2 with ACE sidecount(independent)
all with simpleNRS play
and condition is
10ES D2 DAS ARS ENHC 50%pene tration
2boxplay with 2otherplayer(1boxeach).

Im not good at simulation stuff, so I will really apreciate any kind of Mathstady for this case. Im wondering if I should pick up HIOPT2 or not.

[Norm Wattenberger]

Side-counting aces in a shuffle-tracking scenario sounds very dangerous to me. You would need to keep a side-count in the track zone and carry that over to the next shoe. Very error-prone. I have not does the comparisons, but would bet HiLo works better than Hi-Opt I in most cases.

[maguder]

Thank u Mr.Wattenberger.

I still believe its a waste of chance if played simple HILO.
Imagine I can easyly remember how many Aces were in a specific slug, and hilo players treat them as one of the pictures.

What made me feel pity is they insure when some more ACEs remain in a few cards.( caz they recon them as pictures.)and lose onemore maximum bet.
On the other hand they stop playing maximum when 2 more ACES came out more than recorded, but for a game with insurrance trackable TC2is a good game, but hilo players miss these chance.
and just 2duces come but no more pictures+ expected(in NRS manner)hilo player play Maximum.

This is not extream examples nor rare cases.
If u encounter simple shuffle and can track, I think it will give u a big chance like 1,2decks game with good penetration.
and in these cases little better playing efficiency will give u a lot bigger E.V/h especially for a Kelly player.

[maguder]

Its very simple. all I have to remember is a slug with how many aces and 2s and running count. Like I remember 5/3/2= running -5 3aces 2duces .
its not too hard caz I dont care other data than just good part and dangerous zone(if any). And I dont play serously except for tracked part even if count goes high(no need to run the risk of being barred by count play.)
Dear Mr.Wattenberger, I believe a simple trackable shuffle gives u a game like GOOD PENETRATION game in 1,2decks. Caz high frequency of big TC and demands u to use induces with big TC.
If is that so little better playing efficiency will give u a lot bigger E.V/h.
So I would ask u how much is the difference between HIOPT1 and HIOPT2, in case if I could track and used NRS formula to play and used NRS formula to bet (with ace included pseudo TC.)

if its too much work I would like to know how much is the difference in case of puseudo 5TC and pseudo 3TC ( caz these mumbers I use very offten in tracking game.

[Norm Wattenberger]

It would have to be a very simple shuffle where you could track zones that are married to get the benefit that you are talking about. This means you are keeping a side count, while remembering the side counts in two slugs, and use that in the next shoe.

[maguder]

No, its very simple but penetration is only 50% and all the time 26cards known and 26cards unknown get together.
If I knew all of the 52cards for next game I didnt even need to use NRS. I just play for the exact TC which 2slugs made.
And even if I knew only 26card`s contents, it would be a big advantage,wouldnt be?

[Norm Wattenberger]

All my sims using NRS have concentrated on betting, errors and shuffle precision. I haven't looked at different counts. I would guess that Hi-Opt I with a side count is not likely to be any better than HiLo. Hi-Opt I simply isn't that great. Hi-Opt II is obviously much stronger. Of course if you have a track zone that is ace rich,and you marry it with unknowns, the unknowns will be a bit low on aces. Afraid I can't guess what the gain would be over HiLo.

[maguder]

Ok thank u very much.
One more question, the simplest shuffle with 26cards known and unknown I play,, If I can cut the decks by myself all the time,,. I think this game is better than 85%penetration 6decks shoe game(untrackable), and playing efficiency is little bit more important in these cases. And if we track we bet big any way( of course if count went down in the slug I might bet down=but no because Aces came out), so I thought I must concentrate on improving my playing,, Did I miss any factor I should have taken into consideration? Or I underestimate HILO?

Beside questions. I want to tell the reason I stick to HIOPT1or2.
For the tracker who can remember Aces independently, hiopt`s playing efficiency is way bigger than HILO( actually majority of Japanese counter use hilo for betting and hiopt for playing) and advanced players utilize the Ace`s dual nature too.(like for Wing on11 and insurrance -card, and Wing on 8,9,10 +card((so use hilo to decide in latter case)
I know everyone here would say its tiring and misleading.
I believe so too,I myself mistake.
but my question was if ever u could play OK with sidecount or HIOP2, what will be the difference? thats all.
I dont say Im very good and no mistake. But I know many good players who can track with complicated countsystem too.
(to be honest Im asking this for a very good player caz, he cant wright in English so well. and he wanted to ask this question n here)

Anyway thank u Mr. Watternberger, I learned a lot from ur study on internet. Ur explanation with colored charts are always very good for me to understand.

[brownian bridge]

Norm,

I would like to know how good Hi-Opt II(without Ace side count) works than Hi-Lo when used for simple NRS.

[Gramazeka]

> Ok thank u very much.
> One more question, the simplest shuffle with 26cards
> known and unknown I play,, If I can cut the decks by
> myself all the time,,. I think this game is better
> than 85%penetration 6decks shoe game(untrackable), and
> playing efficiency is little bit more important in
> these cases. And if we track we bet big any way( of
> course if count went down in the slug I might bet
> down=but no because Aces came out), so I thought I
> must concentrate on improving my playing,, Did I miss
> any factor I should have taken into consideration? Or
> I underestimate HILO?

> Beside questions. I want to tell the reason I stick to
> HIOPT1or2.
> For the tracker who can remember Aces independently,
> hiopt`s playing efficiency is way bigger than HILO(
> actually majority of Japanese counter use hilo for
> betting and hiopt for playing) and advanced players
> utilize the Ace`s dual nature too.(like for Wing on11
> and insurrance -card, and Wing on 8,9,10 +card((so use
> hilo to decide in latter case)
> I know everyone here would say its tiring and
> misleading.
> I believe so too,I myself mistake.
> but my question was if ever u could play OK with
> sidecount or HIOP2, what will be the difference? thats
> all.
> I dont say Im very good and no mistake. But I know
> many good players who can track with complicated
> countsystem too.
> (to be honest Im asking this for a very good player
> caz, he cant wright in English so well. and he wanted
> to ask this question n here)

> Anyway thank u Mr. Watternberger, I learned a lot from
> ur study on internet. Ur explanation with colored
> charts are always very good for me to understand.

The best combination of systems for tracking,this is Halves(double)+ unbalanse Ten count+ NRS. You can master it? ))
p.s. The negative moment Hi Opt consists in that Ase+ small card it is bad for game.

[Norm Wattenberger]

No idea what the gain would be with an ace side-count used in ST. Never known anyone to use one and never bothered to sim it. Most trackers probably don't even bother with NRS. But I am certain that using NRS is far more valuable than using a side-count with a simple shuffle.

[Norm Wattenberger]

Depends on rather a large number of variables. But, I would not expect much difference. It is certainly possible that HiLo would perform better.

> Norm,

> I would like to know how good Hi-Opt II(without Ace
> side count) works than Hi-Lo when used for simple NRS.

[G Man]

In a 6 decks game, a known slug of 26 cards being married to an unknown slug of the same size as an average 1.70% edge over the basic starting advantage if you flat bet any of these + slugs. Taken from Snyder'S Cookbook.