Importance of the Ace/Ace Adjustment

How much is the EOR of the ten altered by the removal of an ace.

Scenario: The game is double deck, one deck remains, the Hi-Low RC/TC= +8, no aces remain. We'll assume a betting ramp of(This betting ramp has been stretched out a bit for trivial purposes.):

+1= 1 unit
+2= 2 units
+3= 4 units
+4= 6 units
+5= 8 units
+6= 10 units
+7= 12 units
+8= 14 units

What bet should be made?

Should I simply subtract 4 from my TC because the deck is 4 aces deficit? Or should I be betting less because the potential of getting a blackjack is completely eliminated?

CVData seems to have a spot where you can manipulate the contents of the deck. Under the Payoffs tab, there is a box named Shoe Contents at the lower right-hand corner. I never tried this, so it's your better interest to look through the manual or contact QFIT.

If we were to be sure of no ace what-so-ever, the strategy probably should be modified and the casino edge from the top would be different as well.
For one thing, there won't be any soft hands. It also renders more likelihood of hard hands and pairs, no blackjack as you mentioned, Insurance, RSA and BJ pays 6:5 rules become irrelevant. In other words, it rather appropriate to evaluate the situations that arise in this game with a different counting strategy as if you were to evaluate a different game than using Hi-Lo system; using Hi-Lo would be like using criteria for evaluating pasta when in fact you're eating pizza. After all, this game has no BJ. To quote Bernie Mac from Ocean's Eleven, "You might as well call it White Jack!"

On the bright side, however dark BJ could be with no ace, if we assume that the penetration remains the same regardless of 8 missing cards, the penetration is 8 cards deeper, which probably doesn't help much. In short, you should run a sim. Numbers are better than words... except when you propose I guess.

Perhaps it time to further my CV investments, as of now I only have CVBJ and CVCX.

When I initially made this post I had considered stating a non-ace-reckoned primary count, but stuck with high-low simply because it's what I use. I don't even side count ace's as I realize the gain is quite minimal.

I do, however, make mental notes of significant changes in deck composition that my count does not take into account, such as ace or 7,8,9 density, or excess 4's,5's. I fairly often make intuitive betting and playing decisions based on this information.

It would be interesting to me to see the difference between having one remaining ace and no ace's at all compared to the difference between one ace and two ace's, and as I had initially asked how much the EOR of the ten changes in corralation to the removal of the ace.

Using CVdatas, efficency calculator, the highest, hi-los, BC, gets, is when tagging, the ace @ -1.25, which brings it from .97 to .9725. So with four extra aces played(8 total), you would subtract a additional 2 point, from your RC, which of course, would of been, only 2 less of a TC, in your case. Thats because hi-lo already reckons the ace, @ -1. 8x.25=2

Note, that yes there is a conflict of interest here, because, you could either go by total aces played or the surplus. So the answer is both -1(4xtra) and -2(8total), depending which angle you look at it from.

Of course, at which TC, you ramp your bets, should depend on the rules your playing against.

I'm not quite sure if you are critisizing my excessive use of comma's.

Perhaps I'm making this too difficult.. What I'm trying to figure out is if the ten loses its value when the deck is depleted of ace's, if so, by how much?

Nah, jj has always liked to use a lot of commas.

Oh, my apologies then, wasn't trying to be rude.

Aces should be counted separately in order to translate the information regarding how many aces remain in relation to the rest of the cards into an applicable one.

I'm under the impression that you are looking for a counting strategy with a higher PE. Higher level counting strategies as well as some level I strategies offer higher PE. I'm not in a position to suggest one for you.
http://qfit.com/card-counting.htm may give you some ideas. Or maybe you can come up with your own.


The only way I can think of doing this without incessantly plugging numbers to calculate the advantage mathematically is doing sims over and over continuously modifying the content of the shoe. Employing MRI slice may make the process faster. I think you should talk to QFIT.