See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 40 to 52 of 53

Thread: I18 Index Clarification

  1. #40


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    slightly below the index number if you’re doing it on someone else’s hand? They will put up half, and I do the other half.
    doubling 10 v 10 is slightly negative off the top, returning -.0086 or a loss of .8% of your bet (1/120 or so). So yes, this would be a +EV scavenger double slightly below the index, in fact it probably only takes the count to be slightly positive before you can make money with this play.

  2. #41


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Meistro123 View Post
    doubling 10 v 10 is slightly negative off the top, returning -.0086 or a loss of .8% of your bet (1/120 or so). So yes, this would be a +EV scavenger double slightly below the index, in fact it probably only takes the count to be slightly positive before you can make money with this play.
    Unless you are playing with an unlimited bank I do not think players should be looking " for below index plays" for all that extra variance on essential coin flips, especially on that 10vs10 double.

  3. #42


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by BoSox View Post
    Unless you are playing with an unlimited bank I do not think players should be looking " for below index plays" for all that extra variance on essential coin flips, especially on that 10vs10 double.
    The Dipshit, who originally raised the issue, instead of being Mr. Contrary on this point, actually brought up an interesting issue. Of course, he's too stupid to realize it.

    Think about scavenging your tablemates proper (and sometimes improper) surrender, and the math to support that. There's math to support the below index 10 on 10 double. Understand that the scavenger is not at risk on the original bet..

  4. #43


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Thanks, freighter for the insight. Where I primarily play no betting of any kind is allowed on someone's else's hand. It is forbidden with an explanation that the house considers its team play, and the dealers themselves enforce it. Of course they still expect tips.
    Last edited by BoSox; 06-16-2018 at 03:27 PM.

  5. #44


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    I’m new so I’ll ask... Tarzan, what’s your count system? I appreciate your contribution to this thread.

  6. #45


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Freightman View Post
    Assuming hi lo, the main tables you are interested in start at about page 252.
    Book arrived today.. nailed it with page 252.

    Although I couldn’t help but chuckle after the first paragraph. According to so many on this board, you can’t make money without knowing your deviations... which I can understand. Are deviations more valuable due to poor rules?

  7. #46


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Sharpe View Post
    Book arrived today.. nailed it with page 252.

    Although I couldn’t help but chuckle after the first paragraph. According to so many on this board, you can’t make money without knowing your deviations... which I can understand. Are deviations more valuable due to poor rules?
    Don't forget 21forme's page 46 bookmark. Also, Early and Late surrender tables, I think starting page 92.

    You can still make money without index play. However, you're earnings will be enhanced, give or take, 20-30% by good index play. Take your very first due you can get.

  8. #47


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    I'm sure the number is in BJA3, but as I recall, in a shoe game, index play is responsible for about 20% pf your EV. The other 80% comes from betting with the count. Also, 50% of your gain from index play comes from INS alone, so each of the other 17 indices individually add a very small amount. If you're new at this, don't sweat it. It will come with time. I probably know 100-150 indices at this point. I know they add very little, but I've been doing this for a long time and it just makes the game more interesting.

  9. #48
    Senior Member Tarzan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Atlantic City
    Posts
    1,013


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Sharpe View Post
    I’m new so I’ll ask... Tarzan, what’s your count system? I appreciate your contribution to this thread.
    It's not publicly disclosed, relatively complex, not exactly most people's cup of tea, and has gotten its fair share of criticisms. A lot has been covered on old posts about it without having to clog up this thread with any of it. In the card counting section I've demonstrated some of the "nuts and bolts" of it. It was brought up here to demonstrate that if you look close enough and really split hairs, you can mathematically prove out that the index can move dependent upon the no. of decks remaining for some hands, whereas on others it remains unchanged using a composition dependent index.

    The lesson to be learned from this thread is that playing slightly risk averse is going to work out a heck of a lot better for you than deviating from basic strategy short of the index and that your index might not be as spot on as you think it is compared to a compositionally dependent generated index, so being ahead of it is better than being short of it.

    I'm going to be on the road for a week or two, or whatever it works out to... have fun and play nice while I'm gone.
    Last edited by Tarzan; 06-16-2018 at 09:42 PM.

  10. #49


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Sharpe View Post
    I’m new so I’ll ask... Tarzan, what’s your count system? I appreciate your contribution to this thread.
    Damn, another newb who does not search the threads. Just search the threads for threads started by Tarzan. I am not intending to be curt, but really?
    "Your honor, with all due respect: if you're going to try my case for me, I wish you wouldn't lose it."

    Fictitious Boston Attorney Frank Galvin (Paul Newman - January 26, 1925 - September 26, 2008) in The Verdict, 1982, lambasting Trial Judge Hoyle (Milo Donal O'Shea - June 2, 1926 - April 2, 2013) - http://imdb.com/title/tt0084855/

  11. #50


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarzan View Post
    It's not publicly disclosed, relatively complex, not exactly most people's cup of tea, and has gotten its fair share of criticisms. A lot has been covered on old posts about it without having to clog up this thread with any of it. In the card counting section I've demonstrated some of the "nuts and bolts" of it. It was brought up here to demonstrate that if you look close enough and really split hairs, you can mathematically prove out that the index can move dependent upon the no. of decks remaining for some hands, whereas on others it remains unchanged using a composition dependent index.

    The lesson to be learned from this thread is that playing slightly risk averse is going to work out a heck of a lot better for you than deviating from basic strategy short of the index and that your index might not be as spot on as you think it is compared to a compositionally dependent generated index, so being ahead of it is better than being short of it.

    I'm going to be on the road for a week or two, or whatever it works out to... have fun and play nice while I'm gone.
    Darn, on the road, and not on the open waters. That must be a real downer for you, knowing how much you enjoy sailing. On the other hand, if you are going to spend time with family, hope you can enjoy them for awhile. Take care Tarzan, and stay safe!
    "Your honor, with all due respect: if you're going to try my case for me, I wish you wouldn't lose it."

    Fictitious Boston Attorney Frank Galvin (Paul Newman - January 26, 1925 - September 26, 2008) in The Verdict, 1982, lambasting Trial Judge Hoyle (Milo Donal O'Shea - June 2, 1926 - April 2, 2013) - http://imdb.com/title/tt0084855/

  12. #51


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Galvin View Post
    Damn, another newb who does not search the threads. Just search the threads for threads started by Tarzan. I am not intending to be curt, but really?
    I read Tarzan’s post right above yours where he mentions his count is explained in past threads. Thanks for throwing in your 2 cents as well... it was needed!

  13. #52
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Sharpe View Post
    I read Tarzan’s post right above yours where he mentions his count is explained in past threads. Thanks for throwing in your 2 cents as well... it was needed!
    There is a lot of good stuff in past threads and the archives from other sites. I am not sure how much is available without a subscription.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Hi-Lo Clarification.
    By Diogenes in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-15-2018, 08:35 PM
  2. pm: One more clarification..
    By pm in forum Blackjack Beginners
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-28-2004, 12:12 PM

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.