1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
Did you find this post helpful?
Yes |
No
Originally Posted by
Rudy
Someone knows what is the BC, PE and IC for this count? I read somewhere that BC is .98 and PE .922, is that correct? It attracks my attention that is not on the Card Counting Strategy Summary. Perhaps Norm can explain that too
Rudy.
Assuming only integer values, I get
BC: .987 by in one fashion or another constructing {-2,2,2,2,2,2,1,0,-1,-2} Can you side count four denominations?
IC: 1.00 by constructing {1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,-1} Can you side count all five denominations?
PE: .92 because Griffin says so. Can you side count all five denominations?
It has a high barrier to entry. It's terrible until you're maintaining at least a couple side counts. The Gordon Count on its own is miserable, and even with the necessary ace side count for any non-flat betting scenario, it's still pretty junky. You gotta get moving on those middle cards. So, most people don't use it because, until you're side-counting about three denominations, you haven't gained much of anything over a 'standard' system. And since you can take a standard system and make it more powerful by adding side counts later, it seems more reasonable to start with a firm, simple, strong, baseline count and go from there. Most people who actually go to the trouble to calculate the gain their complicated system achieves, wind up disappointed. Note the author of the linked article, a former JPL AI programmer and investigative AP if there ever was one, cheered its power specifically in deeply dealt single deck games. Although I imagine he dabbled in MP stuff, the author actually used Halves in pitch games.
But I have a soft rule against dissuading people from ambitious but quite possible feats of mental skill. I wish you well and would love to hear about your successful efforts.
Bookmarks