ZEN (shoe game) 16 vs. 8 = +16
They call me Zen Master
Not only the frequency with which the (very high) true count occurs, but also the infrequency with which the hand itself may occur (soft double and splits, for example). It's your prerogative to learn 200 indices if you are so inclined. No one should talk you out of it. The I18 was designed to teach people that most of the other 180 or so just aren't worth very much.
And saying that, when the occasion finally does arise, it can be worth a lot isn't a very good argument. If you get hit with a stray bullet, wearing a bullet-proof vest would be worth a great deal, but that doesn't mean you walk the streets wearing one every day of your life.
Don
Don summed it up nicely, but here's a good YouTube video by Colin Jones that pretty much discusses the exact same topic. It's only about 5 min long. Give it a watch; it's very informative.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOEgqrwxVW0
You would want CVdata for index generatiom..And yes, it can generate any indexes for any card tags, rules, etc.. Note:The higher you set the the Pen level the higher the index it will spit out)..I believe with the demo "version" you can generate semi-accurate indexes...
http://bjstrat.net/cgi-bin/cdca.cgi
Yes, they were all valid candidates for making the I18 cut. That they didn't is a function of two different concepts. The first is that for 14 vs. 2 and 3 and 13 vs. 4, the counts need to be negative, and you always have a minimum bet out. So, for the index to make the cut, the frequency really has to be there (since the bet size isn't), and while plays like 0, -1, and -2 can survive, the greater negatives don't. (Note that I created the I18 mostly for the Hi-Lo, wide-spreading shoe player and NOT the low-spreading SD player. Your suggestions might have made the cut had the list been generated for SD (or for another count that reckons the seven -- see below).
Finally, 14 vs. 10 doesn't make it because of something completely different. The seven is critical for hitting or standing, and Hi-Lo doesn't count the seven! So this play has a horrible playing correlation, using Hi-Lo, and there simply is no index for it.
Don
Yes and no.
Looked at as a percentage increase from the system basic, no. However, the same virtual percentage increase, factored into a higher performing system, would obviously have a higher impact. Call it a compounding effect.
System A earns $100 before indices, and $120 after
System B earns $110 before indices, and $132 after.
Ergo, a 10% differential.
No, there is practically no difference at all between the frequencies of two-card 16s vs. 9 in SD compared to multi-deck, nor of multi-card 16s vs. 9. You get the initial two-card holdings just a shade less than once per 200 hands and you get any 16 vs. 9 (multi-card permitted) just a shade less than every 100 hands.
Don
Run the Sims. Review the SCORE.
It may well come down to the rules of your game and pen. If it's close, do what is easiest for you. There are some variations on tag values of 2-7s on Wong Halves the may improve SCORE and become easier. You could have the option of dropping and moving the Ace to improve IC and PE considerably. You could side count others to improve IC improve to near perfection. All can performed with everything to gain - nothing to lose format.
It comes down to what's "in" you. Only you can anwer that question.
Last edited by moses; 03-26-2018 at 04:08 AM.
I don't like whole deck conversion, neither quarter deck conversion. I like half deck conversion. The first benefit is, under half deck conversion, this version of Zen has roughly the same indexes as Hi-Lo.
The second benefit is to calculate TC easily when playing double decks. For 50% penetration DD game, you go through four stages of obtaining TC: multiply RC by 0.25, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5. If penetration is better than 50%, then in the near end of the show, you multiply RC by 0.6 or 0.7 (very deep penetration) to get TC.
Bookmarks