Don,
I have been told that Wong's indices for SD and Multiple Deck games published in Professional Blackjack have errors. Would you be able to provide me the corrections in those indices for
a) S17 MultiDeck game
b) H17 Multideck game
I also assume that for DD ,the indices published for MultiDeck can be used.
regards
waugh
> Don,
> I have been told that Wong's indices for SD and
> Multiple Deck games published in Professional
> Blackjack have errors. Would you be able to provide me
> the corrections in those indices for
> a) S17 MultiDeck game
> b) H17 Multideck game
The "errors" are mostly just differences in the manner that the indices have been generated. Wong switched his methodology with the 1994 edition, and that caused most of the negative indices to change by one. Unfortunately, this caused a lot of confusion.
One error I have pointed out over the years is surrender of 8,8, v. 10, but it depends on what version of the book you have, since I believe it was corrected in later editions. They should be +1 and +2 (ndas, das) and not the zero that he gave for a long time.
>> I also assume that for DD ,the indices published for
> MultiDeck can be used.
Yes, for the most part, they are identical.
If you have BJA3, the p. 213 indices generated by Norm, using flooring, are very accurate.
Don
Don,
THanks a lot for your response.
I have the latest edition (2005 reprint of the 1994 edition) of Prof Bjack. I also have the latest BJA3 written by you. When I checked for 8,8 versus 10 for surrender, the index is +1. (for 4D S17 as well as 4d H17)THere is no mention of DAS or NDAS.
I have listed a comparison of the indices of BJA3 and SW.There still seems to be differences. Shall I go ahead and use your indices?
One assumption: A count of 2.8 would be 2 while a count of -1.3 would be -1, and -0.6 would be 0 . I hope the same holds for your indices. The positive values get truncated while the negatives get raised to the next higher value.
Don SW
6D 2D 6D 2D
Ins 3 3 3 2.4
16V9 5 5 5 5
16V10 0 0 0 0
15V10 4 4 4 4
13V2 -1 0 0 0
13V3 -2 -2 -1 -1
12V2 4 4 3 3
12V3 2 2 2 2
12V4 0 1 0 0
12V5 -1 -1 -1 -1
12V6 -1,-3 0,-3 0 0
11VA 1,-1 0,-2 1,0 1,0
10V10 4 4 4 4
10VA 4,3 3,2 4,3 4,3
9V2 1 1 1 1
9V7 4 3 3 3
1010V5 5 5 5 5
1010V6 5 5,4 4 4
Surr
15V9 2 2 2 2
15V10 0 0 0 0
10,5VA 15VA 2,-1 1,-2 1,-1 1,-1
9,6VA 2,-1 1,-2 2,0 2,0
87VA 2,-1 1,-2 2,0 2,0
14V10 3 3 3 3
Please advise.I am making my first ever Vegas trip on Friday 16th Jan having played a few times in AC .
regards
waugh
> Thanks a lot for your response.
> I have the latest edition (2005 reprint of the 1994
> edition) of Prof Bjack. I also have the latest BJA3
> written by you. When I checked for 8,8 versus 10 for
> surrender, the index is +1. (for 4D S17 as well as 4d
> H17)THere is no mention of DAS or NDAS.
Wong changed it from 0 to +1 at my behest. But, he doesn't state that it is for NDAS. It is higher (+2) for DAS.
> I have listed a comparison of the indices of BJA3 and
> SW.There still seems to be differences. Shall I go
> ahead and use your indices?
Yes.
> One assumption: A count of 2.8 would be 2 while a
> count of -1.3 would be -1, and -0.6 would be 0.
Wrong assumption. The BJA3 indices are floored. All numbers are rounded down to the next-lowest integer.
> I hope the same holds for your indices.
No, it doesn't. See above.
> The positive
> values get truncated while the negatives get raised to
> the next higher value.
That is to say, they all get truncated! But, my numbers are all floored. We don't use truncating because it doubles the size of the zero TC "bin." Not very accurate that way.
You quote Wong as furnishing 2D indices, below, but Wong has never given 2D indices.
> Don SW
> 6D 2D 6D 2D
> Ins 3 3 3 2.4
> 16V9 5 5 5 5
> 16V10 0 0 0 0
> 15V10 4 4 4 4
> 13V2 -1 0 0 0
> 13V3 -2 -2 -1 -1
> 12V2 4 4 3 3
> 12V3 2 2 2 2
> 12V4 0 1 0 0
> 12V5 -1 -1 -1 -1
> 12V6 -1,-3 0,-3 0 0
> 11VA 1,-1 0,-2 1,0 1,0
> 10V10 4 4 4 4
> 10VA 4,3 3,2 4,3 4,3
> 9V2 1 1 1 1
> 9V7 4 3 3 3
> 1010V5 5 5 5 5
> 1010V6 5 5,4 4 4
> Surr
> 15V9 2 2 2 2
> 15V10 0 0 0 0
> 10,5VA 15VA 2,-1 1,-2 1,-1 1,-1
> 9,6VA 2,-1 1,-2 2,0 2,0
> 87VA 2,-1 1,-2 2,0 2,0
> 14V10 3 3 3 3
> Please advise.I am making my first ever Vegas trip on
> Friday 16th Jan having played a few times in AC .
Use flooring, and use the p. 213 indices from BJA3.
Don
Thanks Don.
regards
waugh
So flooring just means if the actual index number is 1.6, it's listed as 1, right? Where can I find the I-18 indices to one decimal place? I tried simming it on CVData as well as on SBA with mediocre results. I must be doing something wrong.
> So flooring just means if the actual index number is
> 1.6, it's listed as 1, right? Where can I find the
> I-18 indices to one decimal place? I tried simming it
> on CVData as well as on SBA with mediocre results. I
> must be doing something wrong.
I guess Norm can answer, but try giving all the count tags as ten times what they are for Hi-Lo, and then, when you get an answer of, say, 38 for an index, you'll know that it's 3.8 for regular Hi-Lo.
Don
There is no such thing as indexes to tenths of a point accuracy. Change the penetration by a few cards or number of players, and the answers would be different. It's a myth.
> So flooring just means if the actual index number is
> 1.6, it's listed as 1, right? Where can I find the
> I-18 indices to one decimal place? I tried simming it
> on CVData as well as on SBA with mediocre results. I
> must be doing something wrong.
Posting Permissions
-*-
Bookmarks