-
Curious: Re: yes
> That's why the TC would be plus 4 (8 divided
> by 2).
So, you start your RC at +8 and there are 2 decks remaining. Now, half deck is gone and 5 high cards are out. According to your hypo the TC should be (8-5)/(2-0.5) = 3/1.5 = +2, right?
Regards,
Curious
-
Phil: counting system
> What would be the best way of shuffle
> tracking this game? Bearing in mind I'm
> playing a 3 level count with a side count of
> aces.
are you using ken ustons APC? i use this one too
curious,
Phil
-
bill baggins: that's right *NM*
-
Curious: that's wrong
The correct answer is +2.94. I thought you were going to answer that which is a common mistake among shuffle trackers. Try to read something about the NRS formula and you'll understand why the answer is +2.94 and not +2.
Regards,
Curious
-
bill baggins: reading (but not necessarily understanding!) now *NM*
-
Cacarulo: Re: reading (but not necessarily understanding!) n
Read the following article:
Statman
Sincerely,
Cacarulo
-
bill baggins: Re: reading (but not necessarily understanding!) n
> Read the following article:
> Statman Sincerely,
> Cacarulo
Thanks, but is there any explanation for those of us that while not being totally mathematically challenged, would not be prime candidates for MIT either?
Regards,
Bill B.
-
Cacarulo: Re: reading
> Thanks, but is there any explanation for
> those of us that while not being totally
> mathematically challenged, would not be
> prime candidates for MIT either?
Unfortunately, there's no simple explanation. Theory is Theory
Sincerely,
Cacarulo
-
Don Schlesinger: Re: reading (but not necessarily understanding!) n
> Thanks, but is there any explanation for
> those of us that while not being totally
> mathematically challenged, would not be
> prime candidates for MIT either?
You have to accept the math, Bill, but the layman's explanation is very simple. You make an estimate based on the best information you THINK you have. Then, the cards start to fall. And, when they fall in a manner that suggests that, quite probably, your slug is not composed the way you thought it was, you make a mid-slug adjustment, on the fly, to take advanatage of what is now a BETTER estimate of the composition of the cards that you're about to play.
Make sense?
Don
-
Mister M: Re Examples
Perhaps you can give a few simplified examples then?.
-
Don Schlesinger: Re: Re Examples
> Perhaps you can give a few simplified
> examples then?
I'm sorry, but I thought the original post gave such an example. What, exactly, are you looking for?
No matter what example is offered, it will have to apply the formula, which is what I thought we were trying to avoid.
Don
-
Mister M: Re: Re Examples
> I'm sorry, but I thought the original post
> gave such an example. What, exactly, are you
> looking for?
I think the poster stated that he did not understand the math involved in the nrs formula and therefore was seeking a simplified approach. no?
Perhaps the poster would care to ask a specific question re; the formula?.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Bookmarks