Originally Posted by
seriousplayer
You didn't say indices were not important but you did say
"The decrease in SCORE had nothing to do with the indices " in post 78. So stop the lying.
You are taking my quote out of contents.
When I said that the decrease in the SCORE had nothing to do with indices, I was referring to the HL w 7m9c indices and how Gronbog's initial sim run resulted in a decrease in the SCORE. Our original thought was to check the indices as maybe I calculated them incorrectly. So Gronbog calculated his own indices for the top 6 and he found out that my LSL generated indices and his indices agreed. So the decrease in the SCORE in this case had to be something other than the indices. Upon further investigation Gronbog found the problem was in his coding of hard 14 v T surrender and standing decisions. That bug is what caused the SCORE to decrease. So for THIS PARTICULAR situation I was referring to the decrease in the SCORE had nothing to do with the indices that were chosen but with a bug in his sim program. That is what I was referring to. Very disingenuous of you to take my statement out of context and then make it look like I am an idiot and I do not know what I am talking about.
Of course the SCORE is calculated with sims which use indices and if Risk Adjusted indices are used, for example, the SCORE increases. But that was not what I was talking about in the above quote you cited.
At any rate, please no more about CC comparisons. You are doing this on purpose to make me look bad, discredit me and make me look like an idiot. Then you increase the number of posts, Don gets mad and then uses this as an excuse to discredit me. I fell like it is a coup against me.
Also please REPLY from below not to this post but to my post I put up on the Tarzan count vs KO w AA89mTc and 5m7c.
I noticed that no one replied to my last Tarzan post a few days ago about the Tarzan count. I listed the counts you mentioned that beat HO2 w ASC supposedly those counts being easier than KO with 5m7c and AA89mTc. And I showed YOUR post was misleading because you were either using the Gordon count with multiple single card side counts or more complicated primary counts being level 2 or level 3 counts with ASC as compared to my primacy level one KO count.
If you refer to that post you will see that you totally overlooked Gronbog's sims on the very best Tarzan post and my KO with AA89mTc that I posted. If you look closely you will see that KO w 5m7c and AA89mTc beat the very best Tarzan count for back counted scenarios, the Tarzan count being the very best blackjack count that you have. And if 45m79c were used in place of 5m7c the increase over the Tarzan count would be even greater.
So you have a three component count, KO, AA89mTc and 5m7c beating the very best count you have, the 4 levels of components complicated Tarzan count, and no one had a word to say about the Tarzan count being complicated but my system has constantly been criticized as being complicated.
And as I said, if you simply substitute 45m79c for 5m7c so you are using KO w 45m79c and AA89mTc then you still have three levels of complexity, with the two side counts being easy to keep using chips, beating the complicated 4 level very best Tarzan count you have by an even greater degree than KO w 5m7c and AA89mTc did.
Bookmarks