Comparison of different counts

[moses]

OK, so which one do you guys think is the best???


Couldn't resist!

These never ending threads are a result of T3 and Flash imposing their will on Hi Opt II. EOR will never change. However, constant change proves historical. Create confusion to confound the understanding. You don't need a mentor.

Wong Halves and Perfect Insurance is the best way to keep up with it all.

For a deeper understanding of the game see Moses Column Charts and Explanation.

Top engineers have the ability to understand complex equations. But the best ones can make complex simple again.

See thread "Is it Correct to double down on the play 4,4 vs 4. Don S has T3s. Fraud at it's finest.

[Bodarc]

OK, so which one do you guys think is the best???

You will know at the end of the 227 posts.

[Three]

You will know at the end of the 227 posts.

The one you could do flawlessly with the least heat.

[Freightman]

Tarzan. When you double down on 11. Do you consider the Ace as a small card for an unbalanced count? Or do you consider it as silent or neutral?

Interested in his answer of course, but I think he will say something about a surplus or deficit, the surplus affecting his decision not to double.

[Three]

I've tried it both ways. It's a small card coming at you but a large one sitting under 7,8,9. There outta be a law. Lol

That is why cards are side counted. They can be custom weighted for each decision. When you do that you don't have a win/lose you have a big win/big win. No law is necessary. Just better counting skills. It is about how you gather and use information.

[ZeeBabar]

Putting into perspective...

If you wong out at negative TC, you use a simple count have a decent BR, spread effectively while just using Basic Strategy, you will have an advantage.

If you use a simple count, wong out at negative TC, decent BR, spread effectively and use the I-18, you will have a greater advantage.

If you use a simple count, wong out at negative TC, decent BR, spread effectively and use more indexes, you will have a still greater advantage.

If you use a simple count, wong out at negative TC, spread effectively, use the I-18 and improve your game selection (good pen, fewer players etc), you will have an even bigger advantage...

And if you want another one or 1.5 percent gain, you can spend a zillion hours trying out different counts, learning different indexes and moving to a more difficult count.

Course, if you are starting out, you might just start with a higher learning count. Got it!!!!

[MJGolf]

That is why cards are side counted. They can be custom weighted for each decision. When you do that you don't have a win/lose you have a big win/big win. No law is necessary. Just better counting skills. It is about how you gather and use information.

OK; we know you, Moses and Tarzan have a multi parameter count (or side count various card values), given that this thread started as more of a "basic" question............how much time did it ACTUALLY take you to master/learn your count. (Or "counting skills" as you stated) How much time (hours or percentage wise) did you practice to get to the level you felt comfortable USING your count/method in a true casino environment.

I understand the practice aspect of BJ, using cards, Norm's programs, playing at lower limits in casino before risking real money, apps on the phone and reading/studying. It seems to me that a primary AND basic tenet is: that while counting is "simple" it is FAR from EASY. Since your methods are more complicated, what do you think it would take a "beginning" or entry level player time wise to reach that goal? Not everyone is a full time player. I really doubt most on this board ARE. But some play more than others; some to an avocational level; and some desire to reach an even 'different'/higher level (professional) But what are the REAL costs or expense in time?

Moses is NOT some beginning player at single deck and based upon his knowledge and comments, he has mastered that environment. Tarzan has done it in a way he doesn't have to spread as much to win. Both of them therefore have a greater PE developed and for their use. You use your methods to mainly exploit SP21. (But I don't understand your methods in theory yet.) Just wondered what the time expenditure would be.

[BJGenius007]

Tarzan. When you double down on 11. Do you consider the Ace as a small card for an unbalanced count? Or do you consider it as silent or neutral?

Never neutral.

According to Lance Humble and Carl Cooper, ace is single negative (-1) vs 7, 8, 10, A. Ace is double negative (-2) vs 9. But I think the two gentlemen are slightly wrong. My assessment is

Ace is single negative(-1) vs 7, 8, A. Ace is double negative(-2) vs 9, 10.

[Freightman]

MJ. Im not sure if your question in #24 was for me. But it's how I began. I didn't know about anything else. I read what Thorp had to say about ratios of tens. Then since I thought it would be a good idea to try to win every hand, I took it into columns.

T3 whizzed me off with his slop comment. But he was correct. I thought about it driving all the way to your neck of the woods and back. It finally hit me, the added diversity a 5th column will bring.

Moses, is game speed affected.

[Three]

If you use a simple count, wong out at negative TC, spread effectively, use the I-18 and improve your game selection (good pen, fewer players etc), you will have an even bigger advantage...

Actually the I18 isn't the best set of indices to learn if you only play advantage counts with a simple system. Most of the I18 are negative TC indices so you would never or very rarely use them. A counters basic strategy would be much better than basic strategy for your basic strategy comment if you wong out of all negative counts. As Don pointed out, when backcounting the simple approach is much less handicapped than it is for playall. There are 2 issues with that. One, I hope nobody literally plays all. Two, just backcounting will ensure a BO in a short amount of time. For most approaches the results will be somewhere between play-all and backcounting. Sims tell you the numbers for the approaches you intend on using and comparing.

[DSchles]

"Most of the I18 are negative TC indices so you would never or very rarely use them."

Sigh. What a ridiculous statement! For multi-deck S17, I18 + Fab 4 + four extra for Catch 22 = 26 indices. FOUR of them are negative!!

What ARE you thinking??

Don

[Phoebe]

Actually the I18 isn't the best set of indices to learn if you only play advantage counts with a simple system. Most of the I18 are negative TC indices so you would never or very rarely use them

Si je ne m'abuse Docteur (untranslatable) ...13 most important are positive TC and cumulative actual gain of 5 lasts is only 6% ?

[Three]

.how much time did it ACTUALLY take you to master/learn your count.

My count took about 2 months to do perfectly and use in the casino. Speed and comfort with the fastest dealers took another 6 months of play. For Hiopt2/ASC I was transitioning from Hiopt1/ASC so it didn't take but a few weeks to be perfect and fast. I started using Hiopt1/ASC when I tried to figure out a way to beat BJ at the age of 18. Many years later I found out it was a count called Hiopt1/ASC and got accurate indices instead of my back of a napkin estimates. I just learned that in a week after I decided what cards were most important to track for betting and playing and a way to maximize both types of decisions (counting the ace separately from the other cards).

Since your methods are more complicated, what do you think it would take a "beginning" or entry level player time wise to reach that goal?

To be fast it would take tutoring. But to go straight to my current BJ system, I doubt anyone would stick to it long enough to finish the process and most are probably not able to do it at all, It would take a year. You should not go straight to my system. There is a lot about winning to learn that has nothing to do with the system you use. Even with my system without learning the non-counting part you are setting yourself up to fail. A mentor is a must for most. Especially those that are tough to teach because they will not learn what they need to know from reading about it. If they can they will suffer so much along the way they will almost certainly have quit. You can teach yourself to count but you can't teach yourself to be a winning counter without a lot of growing pains. If a beginning player was willing to progress through at least 1 other count and most likely several other counts it would take at least a year. Most likely much more. First you would need to learn to count. This could be starting with a simple ace side count system like Hiopt1 or Hilolo (well Hilolo uses a balanced ace side count so that might be best not to start with) or another simple system that is is ace reckoned instead of ace neutral. Learning to side count early is a big help if your goal is to get close to what I do.

But what are the REAL costs or expense in time?

The cost in lost playing time will be overcome at some point. And from there on the gains will add up for the rest of your playing career. How long that takes depends on how good you are when you race out to play with a weaker approach (as stated you need to learn a lot more than counting to be successful this added time may actually be you losing money and a portion of that can be trying to learning the non-counting aspects of being successful), how much you play in that time interval (you might play 8 hours a month or 40 hours a week, factor 1 may cause this to be a further negative with more playing time but hopefully that doesn't happen), and of course how quickly you can absorb and learn to count and the need for you to improve the base level you bring when you start learning.

I will answer the SP21 stuff in a PM. There is no point in educating the opposition especially in the open forum.