Blackjack and Card Counting Forums - BlackjackInfo.com

  #11  
Old October 24th, 2011, 02:42 AM
zengrifter's Avatar
zengrifter zengrifter is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 10,532
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zengrifter View Post
No. The error rate would be no different, but the 2DTC is more accurate for betting than the more common 1/2DTC and 1DTC.
And possibly more comfortable to use.
  #12  
Old October 24th, 2011, 07:07 AM
NAP's Avatar
NAP NAP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Midwest
Posts: 108
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zengrifter View Post
No. The error rate would be no different, but the 2DTC is more accurate for betting than the more common 1/2DTC and 1DTC.
While I don't doubt the truthfulness of your statement, this seems counter-intuitive to me. Can you explain what makes it more accurate?
  #13  
Old October 24th, 2011, 02:07 PM
BJinNJ BJinNJ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: East Coast
Posts: 248
Default It's 'splained in...

Fred's book on pg. 200

You can use 1 deck and cut the indices in half.

This was OK'd to me by Fred.

BJinNJ
  #14  
Old October 24th, 2011, 04:46 PM
AussiePlayer AussiePlayer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 295
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NAP View Post
While I don't doubt the truthfulness of your statement, this seems counter-intuitive to me. Can you explain what makes it more accurate?
http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=8332
  #15  
Old October 24th, 2011, 06:10 PM
zengrifter's Avatar
zengrifter zengrifter is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 10,532
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NAP View Post
While I don't doubt the truthfulness of your statement, this seems counter-intuitive to me. Can you explain what makes it more accurate?
Yes Bluebook explains the improvement, but also sims done by QFIT, as well, I think. It is counter-intuitive that Snyder's 1/4DTC would be LESS accurate than Renzey's 2DTC, but once you grasp it you will see that the increase in per-decks-increment normalization also increases the adjustment GRANULARITY*. zg

*More is more. Bigger is better.

Last edited by zengrifter; October 24th, 2011 at 06:13 PM.
  #16  
Old October 24th, 2011, 06:17 PM
zengrifter's Avatar
zengrifter zengrifter is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 10,532
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AussiePlayer View Post
Thats the one. zg
  #17  
Old October 24th, 2011, 06:39 PM
Friendo's Avatar
Friendo Friendo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 330
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zengrifter View Post
It is counter-intuitive that Snyder's 1/4DTC would be LESS accurate than Renzey's 2DTC, but once you grasp it you will see that the increase in per-decks-increment normalization also increases the adjustment GRANULARITY*. zg
Yep.

On good stretches, the Mentor TC will spend a great deal of time between +5 and +30, and I adjust my bet ramp according to the rules: the same bet which I would make at +9 with S17 NSR will wait until +11 with H17 NSR. Playing indices are similarly precise.

You have larger numbers to work with, because the number of half-decks remaining scales to half the number of decks remaining, so the denominator is smaller during TC conversion.

One of the things which prevents me from moving to Halves, which I can also count, is the crudeness of the bet ramps and indices: you have basically -1 through +6 to work with, instead of -5 through +30 I work with using Mentor.

It makes little difference in the long run, since "all decisions are approximations," per Wong, but if you run bet ramps on CVCX for Halves (or High-Low) and Mentor, you'll see what I mean about the relative crudeness of 1DTC conversion.
  #18  
Old October 24th, 2011, 07:29 PM
NAP's Avatar
NAP NAP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Midwest
Posts: 108
Default

Thanks for the response guys. That actually makes sense now.

Congratulations, you've convinced me to look into switching to a 2DTC conversion.
  #19  
Old October 25th, 2011, 06:25 AM
Coyote's Avatar
Coyote Coyote is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Midwest
Posts: 377
Default

So, would you guys say there is a difference in the ease of use between Zen and Mentor? Seems to me that if I'm going to go with 2DTC I might as well go with Mentor.

Another question, how acceptable is Mentor for team play?
  #20  
Old October 25th, 2011, 08:04 AM
zengrifter's Avatar
zengrifter zengrifter is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 10,532
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coyote View Post
So, would you guys say there is a difference in the ease of use between Zen and Mentor? Seems to me that if I'm going to go with 2DTC I might as well go with Mentor.

Another question, how acceptable is Mentor for team play?
Mentor is FINE but if you already got the ZEN count down, ZEN w/ 2DTC would be a solid hybrid. zg
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:49 PM.


Forum Software vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005-2011 Bayview Strategies LLC