I'm read Blackjack for Blood. I've already learned Basic Omega II but would like to move on to advanced. Looking at the indices I am confused. On some combinations I see a "S" for stand or an "H" for hit - okay I get this. But on others I see -21 or +5 what is mean by the negative or positive numbers indicated. Do I hit, stand, what??
AOII Indicies
- Thread starter Nina
- Start date
numbers
for the hit/stand tables, you hit if below the number, else you stand if at or above the number.
for the splits and doubles, just remember: DO NOT split/double if below (unless otherwise stated). so, if the number for a split table is 5, don't split if below 5. if it's for a double, then don't double if below the number. there's a caveat: usually for 8,8 you would NOT SPLIT IF AT OR ABOVE the number.
Please go back and review pgs 128-146 for clarification. Also note that there's a heiarchy: splits take precedence over doubles and doubles take precedence over hits.
for the hit/stand tables, you hit if below the number, else you stand if at or above the number.
for the splits and doubles, just remember: DO NOT split/double if below (unless otherwise stated). so, if the number for a split table is 5, don't split if below 5. if it's for a double, then don't double if below the number. there's a caveat: usually for 8,8 you would NOT SPLIT IF AT OR ABOVE the number.
Please go back and review pgs 128-146 for clarification. Also note that there's a heiarchy: splits take precedence over doubles and doubles take precedence over hits.
You will
Single deck games can give you enormous index numbers which is one of the things that makes SD more challenging- more indexes worthwhile to learn.
There are different indexes for single deck and multiple deck! Also different Basic Strategy. So you will have to make sure you have your charts straight when learning these numbers.
Single deck games can give you enormous index numbers which is one of the things that makes SD more challenging- more indexes worthwhile to learn.
There are different indexes for single deck and multiple deck! Also different Basic Strategy. So you will have to make sure you have your charts straight when learning these numbers.
Disagree......
Playing indicies in BJfB are TC's, i.e. do NOT need to memorize different #'s for SD, DD, etc......do have to convert RC's to TC's.
Many, including myself, get confused because Carlson lists Betting Indicies for MD games, or SD for that matter (by 1/4-Deck), in RC's.
Hope this helps.
phantom007.
Playing indicies in BJfB are TC's, i.e. do NOT need to memorize different #'s for SD, DD, etc......do have to convert RC's to TC's.
Many, including myself, get confused because Carlson lists Betting Indicies for MD games, or SD for that matter (by 1/4-Deck), in RC's.
Hope this helps.
phantom007.
KO vs AOII
AOII is better, but ZG is suggesting that you learn a simpler count. I disagree that KO is the way to go because it's based on the running count. That means you should learn different index numbers for different deck games, lest you want your performance to suffer a little more. ZG made an earlier suggestion that I agree with: use Hi-Lo Lite (Snyder's Blackbelt in Blackjack). This way, you only have to learn 1 set of index numbers. Usually the harder the system, 1) the slower you'll count 2) the harder it is to learn and 3) the more likely you'll make mistakes. Hi-Lo Lite is not without some benefits: 1) rounded matrix, 2) "upgradeable"--shuffle-tracking and such. All in all, it depends on you. If you want to play strictly SD and you have an aptitude for numbers, then maybe AOII is the one for you. If, however, you want something a little weaker (which you can make up for in more hours and less headaches), then maybe KO or Hi-Lo Lite is the way to go.
AOII is better, but ZG is suggesting that you learn a simpler count. I disagree that KO is the way to go because it's based on the running count. That means you should learn different index numbers for different deck games, lest you want your performance to suffer a little more. ZG made an earlier suggestion that I agree with: use Hi-Lo Lite (Snyder's Blackbelt in Blackjack). This way, you only have to learn 1 set of index numbers. Usually the harder the system, 1) the slower you'll count 2) the harder it is to learn and 3) the more likely you'll make mistakes. Hi-Lo Lite is not without some benefits: 1) rounded matrix, 2) "upgradeable"--shuffle-tracking and such. All in all, it depends on you. If you want to play strictly SD and you have an aptitude for numbers, then maybe AOII is the one for you. If, however, you want something a little weaker (which you can make up for in more hours and less headaches), then maybe KO or Hi-Lo Lite is the way to go.
KO Indices
That's strange.. I'm looking at the KO book right now and it looks like the indices are different (pgs 162-165). Some of those numbers look VASTLY different (10+ point differential--hard 16 vs 10). Looks like the majority of the numbers are different. Even the preferred index has adjustments based on deck (pg 86). Did I miss something?
That's strange.. I'm looking at the KO book right now and it looks like the indices are different (pgs 162-165). Some of those numbers look VASTLY different (10+ point differential--hard 16 vs 10). Looks like the majority of the numbers are different. Even the preferred index has adjustments based on deck (pg 86). Did I miss something?
You are looking at full system
which they do not even recommend. The reason to KO is it is easy so you can play longer with less mistakes. KO and Snyder and maybe others write that mistakes take away more profit than super strong system brings in. Look at preferred strategy chart with A, B, C in it. That is what I am talking about.
which they do not even recommend. The reason to KO is it is easy so you can play longer with less mistakes. KO and Snyder and maybe others write that mistakes take away more profit than super strong system brings in. Look at preferred strategy chart with A, B, C in it. That is what I am talking about.
This may be true
but differences in playing strategy is not important at multideck. Betting is almost all of profit, not playing strategy changes. This is why index can be rounded up, down, with no effect in real time.
Maybe this is heresy here but I think some worry too much about these tiny things. As Wong says, any count will get money. The hard part is bet size and getting away with playing nonploppy. With simple system there is extra time at table, extra noticing of pit behavior, less mistakes and more profit in the end I think.
but differences in playing strategy is not important at multideck. Betting is almost all of profit, not playing strategy changes. This is why index can be rounded up, down, with no effect in real time.
Maybe this is heresy here but I think some worry too much about these tiny things. As Wong says, any count will get money. The hard part is bet size and getting away with playing nonploppy. With simple system there is extra time at table, extra noticing of pit behavior, less mistakes and more profit in the end I think.