Please help a newbie

[Sharky]

...Your problem is that you’re so intent on busting my chops...

don't flatter yourself Freightypants....as you are well aware, you are nothing more then a 'pimple on my ass'

AFWIW:
- I do not have the time, nor desire, to read every post...I simply peruse and when I see something awry - often times from you, which is prob explains your 'issue' - I may comment
- you are the one who responded, like, 5x on my comment...oftentimes in succession - not doubt you are the 'undisputed king of successive posts'...must have some ADD...bet you are a real joy at home...do you sit in the corner ''talking to yourself all day"???
- your own words, as in my post are 8k br, quit for a month after losing 500...hmmm
- I see you use the term 'theoretical' br...of which I am not familiar as my br is real, cold, hard, cash

good luck!

[BoSox]

You're not interpreting the index correctly. When you see zero for 12 v. 4, it means STAND if the TC>=0. If you must express it as when to hit, then it's hit if TC<0.

Don

Thanks Don I had my head up my ass when I said that as I do play it the way you said.

It's a hand most players use the RC for. Hit on any negative RC else stand.

Yes, Don said the same thing.

[refinery]

Yes, Don said the same thing.

Are you sure? Quote it if you're so sure.

[Counting_Is_Fun]

Are you sure? Quote it if you're so sure.

LOL refinery I kind of like your style.

[DSchles]

This is the thread. I’ve pulled it up for all to peruse. Enjoy.

Apparently not.

Stop the sniping. Stick to blackjack.

Don

[Countess J]

Thanks Don I had my head up my ass when I said that as I do play it the way you said.




Yes, Don said the same thing.

And the same would be true -- that you can use the RC instead of TC -- for 16 v 10, which, like 12 v 4, is to be hit only in negative counts? Because any negative number divided by a positive number equals a negative number?

[BoSox]

And the same would be true -- that you can use the RC instead of TC -- for 16 v 10, which, like 12 v 4, is to be hit only in negative counts? Because any negative number divided by a positive number equals a negative number?

I am glad you brought this up again as I never did correct my previous statement that I said the Refinery's quote was the same thing as what Don S said. Don's was referencing a true count and refinery was stating a running count so I was wrong.

[BoSox]

And the same would be true -- that you can use the RC instead of TC -- for 16 v 10, which, like 12 v 4, is to be hit only in negative counts? Because any negative number divided by a positive number equals a negative number?

No, composition dependent basic strategy comes into play based on the number of decks used and whether the game is S17 or H17. So there are times when the true count is zero where you would hit a 12 vs a 4 up card. Such as in a S17 6 deck game, or less and your two card 12 has a ten value card in it requiring you to hit.

[Freightman]

No, composition dependent basic strategy comes into play based on the number of decks used and whether the game is S17 or H17. So there are times when the true count is zero where you would hit a 12 vs a 4 up card. Such as in a S17 6 deck game and your 12 has a ten value card in it requiring you to hit.

Good point, and subtle.

[DSchles]

Good point, and subtle.

Subtle, but wrong. "Composition-dependent" and "counting" shouldn't be combined in the same sentence!

Don

[Freightman]

Subtle, but wrong. "Composition-dependent" and "counting" shouldn't be combined in the same sentence!

Don

Generally speaking, you’re correct - but not always. Consider, as an example, certain 3 card 16 combinations v dealer 10, when it is correct to hit versus stand - or 2 card 16 v dealer 10 in positive counts where it is correct to hit versus stand (when surrender is not available)

[BoSox]

Subtle, but wrong. "Composition-dependent" and "counting" shouldn't be combined in the same sentence!

Don

Using some composition-dependent plays on borderline calls has helped me more than hurt me over the years. One play in mind that I like to sometime use "from your book" is the 15 vs 10 up, where my 15 has a 8 and 7 in the 6 deck S17 game that also has late surrender that I mostly play. Just knowing some of these plays may cause an ever so slight pause in making the decision when they appear. I realize that newer players should just stick with the count for making decisions, so that was bad on my part. Although, your above quote was not in fact correct for the way it reads, I did not combine the two terms in the same sentence.

[DSchles]

"Generally speaking, you’re correct - but not always. Consider, as an example, certain 3 card 16 combinations v dealer 10, when it is correct to hit versus stand"

Yet again, you're confusing C-D BS with counting. Unless you're incorporating side counts -- which is not this discussion -- it doesn't matter what you're holding. You play the hand by the count.

"or 2 card 16 v dealer 10 in positive counts where it is correct to hit versus stand (when surrender is not available)."

Same response. It's never correct to stand on two-card 16 vs. T in positive counts unless you're also side-counting. And that wasn't the discussion.

Don