Add 7m9c to HL to improve betting and surrender

[seriousplayer]

Point made and sorry for my mistake.

I asked Gronbog to take out 7,7 v 8 DAS as one of the top strategy changes for HL w 7m9c. I put in in there because It increased CC of HL by 37% for this play. But it occurs too infrequently to be included in the top HL v 7m9c strategy changes.

So if Gronbog has not done the sims yet, I asked him to stick to the top 6 strategy changes and the correction for HL betting that I mentioned first. I should have stuck with what I first said. Thanks for making this point about the infrequent occurrence of 7,7 v 8 DAS.

So here is what is being simulated then:

1 brc = betting running count = HL + (1/2)*(7m9c)

2 Six most important playing strategy changes

a Surrender 8,8 v T DAS if HL + 2*(7m9c) >= 2*dr
b Surrender hard 14 v 9 if HL + 2*(7m9c) >= 6*dr
c Surrender hard 14 v T if HL + 2*(7m9c) >= 3*dr
d Surrender hard 14 v A if HL + 2*(7m9c) >= 6*dr
e Surrender hard 13 v T if HL + 2*(7m9c) >= 7*dr
f Stand hard 14 v T if HL + 3*(7m9c) >= 9*dr

3 All other strategy changes use stand-alone High Low.
If psrc = playing strategy running count = HL + k*(7m9c) then k = 0 for all other strategy changes other than those in (1) and (2) above.

If this works out then the beauty of this is that a HL player can continue to use the HL count with these few correction patches, like band aids, to the HL count. No need to learn any new system or indices except for the top six mentioned above and correction for betting.

Sorry for including 7,7 v 8 DAS as a top HL w 7m9c strategy change. I stand corrected.

Didn't Don said not to explain math to him?? You don't listen. Instead you can say "Sorry for including 7,7 v 8 DAS as a top HL w 7m9c strategy change. I stand corrected". You don't know what stop means. You can keep annoying us but the answer is still going to be the same.

What I said about your system was that it will not rival Hi-Opt II, as you claimed it would.

Don

That's correct!!!

[Counting_Is_Fun]

He will never stop, it's just the same as his KO posts from before. How can such a a mathematician not be able to do his own sims? And no bjananlyst I am not asking for a response.

[seriousplayer]

How can such a a mathematician not be able to do his own sims?

Incompetencies!! He got to start reading up on how to do his own sims. I am willing to bet he can't do mental math, also!

[bjanalyst]

Incompetencies!! He got to start reading up on how to do his own sims. I am willing to bet he can't do mental math, also!

Please stop with the insults. That is not polite.

It is one thing to attach my system, but another to attack me personally. I don't attqack you personally so I do not expect you to attack me personally.

I have asked that everhyone wait for the sime results. Then you can go an attack my system if the results warrant it, but again no peronsal attacks.

And I would like to point out camouflaged plays with these 7m9c adjustments to HL.

My friend called ne and said he just got a temporary back off. He was playing for 7 hours. Probably too long in one casino. This casino deal 7.5 out of 8 decks.

Besides bet spread, insurance and splitting Tens, he told me that the pit also looks for surrender plays.

So here is where these surrender plays may help. The casinos use HL to catch counters.

Suppose you have hard 14 v T and the tc(HL) = 7. The casino knows you should be surrendering this at tc(HL) or 2 or 3. And at tc(HL) = 7 you would be definitely surrendering. So the casino sees you surrendering hard 14 v T at tc(HL) = 7 and use it as part of their assessment that you are a counter.

Now the modified play using HL w 7m9c for surrendering hard 14 v T is HL + 2*(7m9c) >= 3*dr then surrender.

So we know that tc(HL) = 7 here or HL = 7*dr If HL + 2*(7m9c) < 3*dr you will hit this instead of surrendering

Hit instead of surrendering hard 14 v T if:
HL + 2*(7m9c) < 3*dr
7*dr + 2*(7m9c) < 3*dr
7m9c < (-2)*dr

So in this case tc(HL) = 7 and casino would expect you to surrender hard 14 v T and then conclude that you are a counter. But if 7m9c < (-2)*dr then you hit hard 14 v T. You are hitting hard 14 v T instead of surrendering with a tc(HL) = 7 and your maximum bet out. You are making the correct play but the casino, who I am sure are not keeping a 7m9c to add to the HL, thinks, based on the HL count alone, that you made a big mistake and this may buy you some extra playing time.

[Counting_Is_Fun]

Please stop with the insults. That is not polite.

It is one thing to attach my system, but another to attack me personally. I don't attqack you personally so I do not expect you to attack me personally.

I have asked that everhyone wait for the sime results. Then you can go an attack my system if the results warrant it, but again no peronsal attacks.

And I would like to point out camouflaged plays with these 7m9c adjustments to HL.

My friend called ne and said he just got a temporary back off. He was playing for 7 hours. Probably too long in one casino. This casino deal 7.5 out of 8 decks.

Besides bet spread, insurance and splitting Tens, he told me that the pit also looks for surrender plays.

So here is where these surrender plays may help. The casinos use HL to catch counters.

Suppose you have hard 14 v T and the tc(HL) = 7. The casino knows you should be surrendering this at tc(HL) or 2 or 3. And at tc(HL) = 7 you would be definitely surrendering. So the casino sees you surrendering hard 14 v T at tc(HL) = 7 and use it as part of their assessment that you are a counter.

Now the modified play using HL w 7m9c for surrendering hard 14 v T is HL + 2*(7m9c) >= 3*dr then surrender.

So we know that tc(HL) = 7 here or HL = 7*dr If HL + 2*(7m9c) < 3*dr you will hit this instead of surrendering

Hit instead of surrendering hard 14 v T if:
HL + 2*(7m9c) < 3*dr
7*dr + 2*(7m9c) < 3*dr
7m9c < (-2)*dr

So in this case tc(HL) = 7 and casino would expect you to surrender hard 14 v T and then conclude that you are a counter. But if 7m9c < (-2)*dr then you hit hard 14 v T. You are hitting hard 14 v T instead of surrendering with a tc(HL) = 7 and your maximum bet out. You are making the correct play but the casino, who I am sure are not keeping a 7m9c to add to the HL, thinks, based on the HL count alone, that you made a big mistake and this may buy you some extra playing time.

Seriousplayer nor anyone else attacked you personally.
And as has already been asked many times, why don't you just wait for the sim results?
Or just do them yourself?
And none of us care about the sim results.

[bjanalyst]

Seriousplayer nor anyone else attacked you personally.
And as has already been asked many times, why don't you just wait for the sim results?
Or just do them yourself?
And none of us care about the sim results.

I am talking about camouflaged play to prolong your playing time at a casino. This has nothing to do with the simulation results.

This camouflaged play is a side benefit of the 7m9c in addition to increasing SCORE. If 7m9c is negative enough then when you have large bets out you will be hitting hard 14s and 13s instead of surrendering which is what casinos would expect a counter to do.

Also you should not speak of others, speak for yourself that you do not care about sim results and let others apeak for themselves also..

And if you do not care about the sim results, why are you even monitoring this post?

[Tarzan]

There is that little issue of frequency of the hand that Don brought up, but in the case of 7,7vs8 at TC-1 (in an even distribution), the difference between hitting and splitting is like .000011! This is an inconsequential hand, near last on the list to be worrying about. The other total mindfuck involved is that (for DAS) the (3,4) are more critical than what is going on with (7,9). Nowhere does he bring this up and despite his pain in the balls elaborate adjustments, what he's got is not perfect play. I would have to look if BJAnalyst mentioned anything about the surrender index for this hand, but it's as I've mentioned before, the practical application factor with his stuff, it kind of sucks. Building upon KO, Hi-Lo, adding stuff to it doesn't pan out if you want the ultimate. If the foundation of what you are doing is weak, regardless of the structure you are trying to build on top of it, the finished product can fall short of the mark. I started off trying to build upon Hi-Lo, adding things to it, and quickly realized the issues with any practical application of what I was trying to do. What I ending up with was completely unrelated to anything resembling Hi-Lo.

[DSchles]

Nice post. Nice to hear from you again. And, of course, what you write is 100% accurate.

Happy Holidays, my friend.

Don

[bjanalyst]

. What I ending up with was completely unrelated to anything resembling Hi-Lo.

I asked Gronbog to take out 7,7 v 8 DAS from the top HL w 7m9c playing strategy adjustments. I should have never put this into the top strategy changes. I have already conceded that point multiple times.

So there are just top 6 playing strategy adjustments and an adjustment to the HL to get brc = betting running count = HL + (1/2)*(7m9c).

So 90% of the time you are using the HI-Low with just a betting adjustment and 6 playing strategy adjustments.

So except for these six playing strategy adjustments and betting adjustment you are using the Hi-Lo. No new indices or strategies to consider other than the 7 mentioned above.

So this is a far cry from ending up with "something that unrelated to or anything resembling the Hi-Lo"

So we are just waiting for the sims results now.

[Stealth]

Please stop with the insults. That is not polite.

It is one thing to attach my system, but another to attack me personally. I don't attqack you personally so I do not expect you to attack me personally.

I have asked that everhyone wait for the sime results.

What is highly impolite is asking others to do work on your mental masturbations in an attempt to prove their validity.

If you have a system that you think you have discovered that is new and more effective than the myriad of 2 level counts available (and simmed) then put in the work and buy the software to sim them and then come to the forum with EVIDENCE, not speculation.

I am not being impolite to ask you to be a responsible adult.

[seriousplayer]

I am talking about camouflaged play to prolong your playing time at a casino. This has nothing to do with the simulation results.

You talked about camouflaged play? Where? All I see was you talking about adding 7m9c to Hi-lo for people that refuse to switch to level 2 or 3 card system.

This camouflaged play is a side benefit of the 7m9c in addition to increasing SCORE. If 7m9c is negative enough then when you have large bets out you will be hitting hard 14s and 13s instead of surrendering which is what casinos would expect a counter to do.

At the same time 7m9c also negatively affect the SCORE because it is well known that counting the 9 as a negative card has a harmful effect on insurance. Insurance gains most of the EV. Why don't your count system address that issue?

Also you should not speak of others, speak for yourself that you do not care about sim results and let others apeak for themselves also..

And if you do not care about the sim results, why are you even monitoring this post?

Honestly, I don't care about the sim results also. Because this thread keeps coming up as the latest post.

[bjanalyst]

What is highly impolite is asking others to do work on your mental masturbations in an attempt to prove their validity.

If you have a system that you think you have discovered that is new and more effective than the myriad of 2 level counts available (and simmed) then put in the work and buy the software to sim them and then come to the forum with EVIDENCE, not speculation.

I am not being impolite to ask you to be a responsible adult.

Make things as simple as possible but no simpler.

So I added a simple level one count, counting only two ranks and neither of those ranks are in the HL count either, which makes it even simpler to keep track of.

So you are now just keeping track of two integers. If you have problems with remembering two integers then I cannot help you.

And the fact that you are even mention level 2 and level 3 counts to compare to HL w 7m9c shows me that you really do not understand what I am doing.

The difference between keeping the HL w 7m9c and a level 2 count is that in a level 2 count the tag values of all ranks are fixed for all playing strategy situations.

With HL + k*(7m9c) the tag values of the 7 and 9 are variable depending on the value of "k". When k = 1/2 for betting you have a level 2 count. Same as when k = 2 for the surrender situations, another derived level 2 count but a far different level 2 count than for betting. And for standing on hard 14 v T use psrc = KO + 3*(7m9c) >= 9*dr and you have a level 3 count. And when k = 0 you have the HL level one count. So you have a lot of flexibility by using HL + k*(7m9c)

Furthermore doing sims is very difficult to do and requires specialty training and software and years to perfect. It is not by any means easy to do.

But even if I knew how to do it, it would not be wise for me to.

You want independent verification that my system works. You should never take the system developers doing his own sims to prove his own work. You need independent verification.

Also Gronbog has been doing sims for 30 years. There is no way that I could come anywhere close to his expertise with sims even if I tried. I admit my limitations. I cannot do sims, period. So stop asking me to do sims.

Now it just remains to be seen on what the sim results are and if the extra work of keeping the 7m9c with the HL is worth it.

[lij45o6]

Make things as simple as possible but no simpler.

So I added a simple level one count, counting only two ranks and neither of those ranks are in the HL count either, which makes it even simpler to keep track of.

So you are now just keeping track of two integers. If you have problems with remembering two integers then I cannot help you.

And the fact that you are even mention level 2 and level 3 counts to compare to HL w 7m9c shows me that you really do not understand what I am doing.

The difference between keeping the HL w 7m9c and a level 2 count is that in a level 2 count the tag values of all ranks are fixed for all playing strategy situations.

With HL + k*(7m9c) the tag values of the 7 and 9 are variable depending on the value of "k". When k = 1/2 for betting you have a level 2 count. Same as when k = 2 for the surrender situations, another derived level 2 count but a far different level 2 count than for betting. And for standing on hard 14 v T use psrc = KO + 3*(7m9c) >= 9*dr and you have a level 3 count. And when k = 0 you have the HL level one count. So you have a lot of flexibility by using HL + k*(7m9c)

Furthermore doing sims is very difficult to do and requires specialty training and software and years to perfect. It is not by any means easy to do.

But even if I knew how to do it, it would not be wise for me to.

You want independent verification that my system works. You should never take the system developers doing his own sims to prove his own work. You need independent verification.

Also Gronbog has been doing sims for 30 years. There is no way that I could come anywhere close to his expertise with sims even if I tried. I admit my limitations. I cannot do sims, period. So stop asking me to do sims.

Now it just remains to be seen on what the sim results are and if the extra work of keeping the 7m9c with the HL is worth it.

There seems to be a lack of understanding on your part of what you are trying to do here.

The foundation of your understanding of blackjack is poor. The subtle nuances that the games offers can be easily found in many a literature. The main ones are The Theory Of Blackjack by Peter Griffin, and Blackjack Attack by Don Schlesinger. Both are a requite read for any 21 AP researcher!

Now, to better educate you on your lack of understanding concerning 21 itself, let us take a tour of the game (at its current face.) First, we need to have the numerical values to determine what it is we are to expect from 21. From there, we find the difference in these expectations for each rank removed from a full pack/shoe. We therefore have a beginning foundational understanding by way of the Effect of Removals:


https://web.archive.org/web/20090826...or/beor1ds.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20090106...or/peor1ds.htm

From here, we will then ask ourselves, "What is the 'best' way to articulate these values to be human-usable?" When someone invokes a sense of "best", we must think in terms of mathematical optimization!

Once you have read both books, and used the above data to compute new point values, you will be able to understand why many here deride your new "system". Simply put: the amount of work needed to gain the give EV of your system is negligible! You will then understand why some prefer to use a level 2 system, compromised systems, side counts, and secondary counts based on the given EOR's listed. You will understand better where your gains will be based on EXPECTED VALUES and *NOT ON CC!*

You can have a system as complex as Tarzan, but if it is as complex as Tarzan's and pails in comparison with respect to expectation, don't be surprised when others can't take you seriously over your claims. As baseless as many of your claims have been.

I have been *MORE* than nice to you for this post. Please take time to re-read it, digest everything, purchase the above books, and seriously consider going a different route.

If don't want to build/program a simulator, consider building a Combinatorial Analyser! A great academic exercise as well as an invaluable tool to have and modify as needed!