Learning about side counts

[LoneWoLF]

Real world isnt a sim. Is your deck estimation in a shoe game to the exact card? Is your ace side count estimation of 1/4 deck to the exact card. If it isnt, you're getting the same EV. Keep in mind, im talking about 6-8 deck games, highly dealt pitch game are a different story. Delusional people i swear. I wish we could do a case study. Both play 1872 hours a year (36 hours a week) Hi Lo vs RPC vs Halves vs HiOPT II ASC. I bet you Hilo comes out on top or that everyone is very close to each other. The count you use is the least significant thing someone can worry about. Ill probably have the chance of counting two shoes simultaneously a week which would more than make up the difference of a higher count counting 1 table.

[Three]

Real world isnt a sim. Is your deck estimation in a shoe game to the exact card? Is your ace side count estimation of 1/4 deck to the exact card. If it isnt, you're getting the same EV. Keep in mind, im talking about 6-8 deck games, highly dealt pitch game are a different story. Delusional people i swear.

What people don't seem to understand is there is value to knowing the rank side counted is not out of whack. These people think it doesn't change my bet or play most of the time. The truth is it allows you to play with far less variance. The info can change a weak index into a strong index. This is talking about correlation of the count tags to the play. This makes EV accumulate much faster for each decision made using that index. It may only change a few plays but you are accumulating EV faster each time you make the decision. Look at any of these graphs:

https://www.card-counting.com/cvcxonlineviewer3.htm

With better correlation to count tags the EV difference would be greater for each point in the graph. Some of the plays are not even worth making like splitting 3,3v8. There just isn't much EV difference to make it worth the risk. This isn't because 8 is a greta dealer upward or having one hand of 6 is better than 2 hands of 3. We know none of that is true. The m-value for 6 decks is only -1.4149. You would think splitting would be done very very frequently. The trouble is the play depends almost exclusively density of 8's and 7's and to a lesser degree 6's. These cards give you strong double totals if you get them on the split hand and give the dealer the weakest hands (14, 15 and 16) if one is the hole card. The main count is almost irrelevant. If you side counted those ranks or a rank the play would accumulate EV very fast rather than have next to no EV differential. This would become a very strong index play rather than one so weak you should just ignore it simply because you know the side counted ranks are at expected levels, surplus or deficit.

For betting the side counting the ace has a big impact if you count it properly. The trouble is most systems tell you to count it the same as the T's but it is 20% more important. System sellers like things to be as simple as possible. The wisdom is people are to lazy or stupid to buy into things that are too complicated. This is a marketing decision not a comment on anyones intelligence or work ethic. They just want the largest customer base possible. If the ace is counted properly betting variance decreases and you can bet more at the same RoR because you bet more when that is appropriate and less when that is appropriate. This allows a spread of say 12 to have a higher bet while using the better info than using weaker info.

Anyway I see value in betting more without increasing risk. I also see value in accumulating extra EV with every decision I make. I also see value in betting more accurately. Let us not forget the value of the variance reduction relative to EV (increase in SCORE) that each one of these affords. To me the ones that try to deny these absolute mathematical certainties are the ones that are delusional. There is nothing wrong with choosing to play with weaker stats but it is wrong to say the stronger game is delusional. Whenever I run the numbers I am always amazed at how much everyone seems to think is not worth it and just throw away. As games deteriorate and your advantage dwindles very one of these things that people say are not worth it increase EV more and more significantly. How bad do games need to get and how low does the EV need to be before this wisdom left over from the era of great games finally dies? Those that argue the gains aren't worth it look at the dollar amount but not the way it changes all the important stats that define your chances of success and the likelihood of your busting your BR. The effect of the gains become more and more significant as conditions deteriorate. The dollar amounts never change but their recent of dwindling EV keeps getting more significant. Basically that means the effect on your chances to be successful keep increasing as the games deteriorate.

The wisdom of it isn't worth it started when the 4 deck shoe was introduced because your advantage was still huge but the dollars gained were not worth it due to the ratio of that to EV. Then you got 6 and 8 deck show lowering EV more. Then you got H17 which was a brutal blow to EV. Then you got no LS which again was a huge hit. Then 6:5 BJ and restricted doubling. I got news for you. The time that it became worth it has long passed. It is not so much the increase in EV as it is the decrease in n0, the increase in CE (certainty of BR growth), increase in SCORE, and increase in the percentage gain of tactics widely viewed as not worth it. When your EV dwindles so much that it doubles EV without changing the dollars gained will it be worth it then. If you still think it is not worth it maybe what you really mean is playing BJ at all is not worth it.