See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 66 to 78 of 89

Thread: Maximizing the advantages of early surrender

  1. #66
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,461
    Blog Entries
    59


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Gronbog View Post
    Care to show your work?
    u-g-PGQXGL0.jpg
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  2. #67
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    1,154


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Gronbog View Post
    How did you do that? Care to show your work?
    It also depends on what hand value the player has. If the player has 12vsA, he should take insurance at +5 instead of ES. If the player has 16vsA, he should take insurance at +10 instead of ES.
    This is my calculation: you set the player's disadvantage of not taking ES equal to the player's advantage of taking insurance. For example for the hand 16vsA: 68%-50%=(x-2.4)*2.2%, then you get x=10.

    Let Norm use his CVData to verify this.
    Last edited by aceside; 04-04-2021 at 12:38 PM.

  3. #68


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Where are you getting the player's disadvantages at the various true counts, for ES, and why are you using 2.4, the insurance index for DD, when we're talking about a shoe game, where insurance = +3.0?

    Don

  4. #69


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    I have played games (in Europe) where I ES after taking insurance. Raised eyebrows sometimes, but was accepted.

    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    Well, it would be nice of you were right, but that isn't the way the casinos see it.

    Don

  5. #70
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    1,154


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    Where are you getting the player's disadvantages at the various true counts, for ES, and why are you using 2.4, the insurance index for DD, when we're talking about a shoe game, where insurance = +3.0?

    Don
    This part is tricky. I just assume the player's disadvantage does not change very much with the true count by taking the midground of hitting and standing disadvantages. The insurance index for a six-deck shoe should be +2.4. Another tricky part I haven't included above is a 0.5 factor, but somebody has verified that we can take both ES and insurance, so there is no need to calculate this.

  6. #71


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by aceside View Post
    I just assume the player's disadvantage does not change very much with the true count
    This, sometimes substantial, change in (dis)advantage is the entire reason for the existence of index numbers.

    You really need to stop posting erroneous hard numbers as if they are facts and as if you are an authority on these subjects.

  7. #72


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by aceside View Post
    Another tricky part I haven't included above is a 0.5 factor, but somebody has verified that we can take both ES and insurance, so there is no need to calculate this.
    Here is another one. Just another number out of thin air.

  8. #73


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by aceside View Post
    This part is tricky. I just assume the player's disadvantage does not change very much with the true count by taking the midground of hitting and standing disadvantages.
    You'll pardon me, but that's ridiculous and completely inaccurate.

    Quote Originally Posted by aceside View Post
    The insurance index for a six-deck shoe should be +2.4.
    According to no one in the universe but you. The Hi-Lo insurance index for six decks is 3.0, and it isn't debatable.

    Don

  9. #74


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    I am not going to spend the day on this but I will state it clear. Hopefully Norm will read it and if not taking any action, at least he will have the "temperature of the water" for what I believe the average forum reader that I am.

    This aceside poster writes so much garbage numbers here that except for confusing any newbie, it serves absolutely nothing, zero, niet, rien, etc.

    So, anytime I see his appearance on a thread, I just skip it.
    Some other times, I will only look for Don or Gronbog answers to see how far in the woods was aceside.... again.

    This place is a leading site in BJ authority and aceside is the type of poster that can drag it to the municipal dump.
    G Man

  10. #75
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,461
    Blog Entries
    59


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Yes, moved to the Disadvantage Forum.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  11. #76
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    1,154


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    You'll pardon me, but that's ridiculous and completely inaccurate.



    According to no one in the universe but you. The Hi-Lo insurance index for six decks is 3.0, and it isn't debatable.

    Don
    Somebody complained my numbers, but trust my numbers. I am correct on this number.

  12. #77
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    1,154


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Gronbog View Post
    This, sometimes substantial, change in (dis)advantage is the entire reason for the existence of index numbers.

    You really need to stop posting erroneous hard numbers as if they are facts and as if you are an authority on these subjects.
    I am not an authority, but I provided the numbers, whereas nobody else provided any of these numbers. Anyway, I trust you!

  13. #78


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by aceside View Post
    Somebody complained my numbers, but trust my numbers. I am correct on this number.
    2.4 is only correct if you’re calculating double deck.

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. early surrender vs 10, late surrender vs A,house edge is?
    By kk7778 in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 11-05-2020, 01:53 AM
  2. Early surrender vs ace
    By Nitram in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-26-2020, 08:38 PM
  3. Early surrender
    By Nitram in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-22-2020, 01:39 PM
  4. Mr.Pro: Early Surrender
    By Mr.Pro in forum International Scene
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-25-2003, 07:45 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.