Okay, stop reading all those other silly posts I sent about SD and luck.
I have a little time and broke out Sanford Wongs Professional Blackjack and on page 59 his entries on the hi low stand table are the same as Ustons UAPC numbers from p112 if Million Dollar Blackjack. The soft 15,16 vs. 9,10 very close too. Wongs hard doubling of 10 @ 4 vs 10 and A (p57) roughly correlate to Ustons repective +5 and +6 True counts for the same operations.
I could go on but the real head-banger is that Uston uses a divisor of one-half deck in making your TC while Wong uses a full deck. I went back and re-read Uston to make sure.
They are both balanced counts so they should be very close so from whence does this discrepancy arise? The dreaded ten split is at TC 6, 5 and 4 per Wong and Uston is close at 7,5 and 5 vs. the 4,5 and 6. What gives?
I am all wrong. I figured it out, it iis the value you assign to the cards being half as large in hi-low. Me be mistaken.
I have a little time and broke out Sanford Wongs Professional Blackjack and on page 59 his entries on the hi low stand table are the same as Ustons UAPC numbers from p112 if Million Dollar Blackjack. The soft 15,16 vs. 9,10 very close too. Wongs hard doubling of 10 @ 4 vs 10 and A (p57) roughly correlate to Ustons repective +5 and +6 True counts for the same operations.
I could go on but the real head-banger is that Uston uses a divisor of one-half deck in making your TC while Wong uses a full deck. I went back and re-read Uston to make sure.
They are both balanced counts so they should be very close so from whence does this discrepancy arise? The dreaded ten split is at TC 6, 5 and 4 per Wong and Uston is close at 7,5 and 5 vs. the 4,5 and 6. What gives?
I am all wrong. I figured it out, it iis the value you assign to the cards being half as large in hi-low. Me be mistaken.