Best part about Wonging out!

B

BrianCP

Well-Known Member
#21
#21
I'm going to compare cards to electrons here. Electrons move in waves of probability. They only have a certain chance of being in a place. Some of these places are more likely than others, but they are not certain. However, when you observe the electron, it is forced to collapse into of the possible locations it could be in.

Cards are the same way. When you only see the identical backs of the cards, there is only a certain probability of the cards being a given value. If a card is removed from play that you did not observe, it still only has that probability of having that value. The probability of a given value for any card left in play has not changed.
 
S

Shoofly

Well-Known Member
#22
#22
BrianCP said:
I'm going to compare cards to electrons here. Electrons move in waves of probability. They only have a certain chance of being in a place. Some of these places are more likely than others, but they are not certain. However, when you observe the electron, it is forced to collapse into of the possible locations it could be in.

Cards are the same way. When you only see the identical backs of the cards, there is only a certain probability of the cards being a given value. If a card is removed from play that you did not observe, it still only has that probability of having that value. The probability of a given value for any card left in play has not changed.
Click to expand...
I see the difference as KNOWING a card is out of play as opposed to ASSUMING the probability that it is out of play.
 
R

Renzey

Well-Known Member
#23
#23
Shoofly said:
I agree that on a +12 count, if you missed 20 cards, you would have to assume the count was still positive and act accordingly. However, the example was for a +3 count, and in that instance, missing 20 cards could change the count considerably.
Click to expand...
Okay, so you're in a +3.5 TC shoe, and miss the next 20 cards. You stay in the shoe and the dealer's up-card is an Ace on the next hand. The rest of the board is 10/3, 10/4, 10/6 and 4/8.

Question #1: Which card is more likely to be a 10?
..........A) the first one of the 20 that you missed?
..........B) the last one of the 20 that you missed?
..........C) the dealer's hole card?

Question #2: Should you take Insurance?
 
M

MangoJ

Well-Known Member
#25
#25
Shoofly said:
I see the difference as KNOWING a card is out of play as opposed to ASSUMING the probability that it is out of play.
Click to expand...
Brian was explaining that there is no difference in the following situations
to the cards relative compositions

(1) knowing that a card of unknown value has been removed.
(2) not knowing that a card of unknown value has been removed.

The only knowledge you gain in (1) compared to (2) is a decreased number of cards. Card distribution itself remains the same.
 
B

Billy C1

Well-Known Member
#26
#26
Renzey said:
Okay, so you're in a +3.5 TC shoe, and miss the next 20 cards. You stay in the shoe and the dealer's up-card is an Ace on the next hand. The rest of the board is 10/3, 10/4, 10/6 and 4/8.

Question #1: Which card is more likely to be a 10?
..........A) the first one of the 20 that you missed?
..........B) the last one of the 20 that you missed?
..........C) the dealer's hole card?

Question #2: Should you take Insurance?
Click to expand...
Question #1-----------equal chances for A, B and C
Question #2------Yes

BillyC1
 
S

Shoofly

Well-Known Member
#27
#27
MangoJ said:
Brian was explaining that there is no difference in the following situations
to the cards relative compositions

(1) knowing that a card of unknown value has been removed.
(2) not knowing that a card of unknown value has been removed.

The only knowledge you gain in (1) compared to (2) is a decreased number of cards. Card distribution itself remains the same.
Click to expand...
The composition of the deck has indeed changed. That the direction or extent of the change is unknown to us does not alter that fact. That is why I would not continue playing the shoe.
 
R

Renzey

Well-Known Member
#30
#30
Shoofly said:
The composition of the deck has indeed changed. That the direction or extent of the change is unknown to us does not alter that fact. That is why I would not continue playing the shoe.
Click to expand...
Put another way, when you're in a +3.5 TC shoe, it means that the full remainder of cards, including those behind the cut card are just about 34% Tens. What if the dealer suddenly pulls out the next 20 cards, puts them in the rear of the shoe, and then moves the cut card back towards the rear by 20 cards.

A -- What has changed?
B -- Should you continue to play?
 
D

Dopple

Well-Known Member
#32
#32
It is important to be sure to ask the dealer to be excused before you leave the table. You should also clarify if you are making a phone call, getting a snack or going to the bathroom.

Both the dealer and the players should know why you are leaving and when you will return.
 
S

Shoofly

Well-Known Member
#33
#33
Renzey said:
Put another way, when you're in a +3.5 TC shoe, it means that the full remainder of cards, including those behind the cut card are just about 34% Tens. What if the dealer suddenly pulls out the next 20 cards, puts them in the rear of the shoe, and then moves the cut card back towards the rear by 20 cards.

A -- What has changed?
B -- Should you continue to play?
Click to expand...
A-Nothing
B-Yes
The unplayed cards are still in random order. If those 20 cards had been played, they would be out of the shoe and the shoe composition has been changed. The fact that we do not know how the composition has been changed means we are guessing if we ignore those cards.

Sorry to offend you rrwoods, but I missed the last go around and I find this interesting.
 
W

Waterrat

Member
#34
#34
BrianCP said:
I'm going to compare cards to electrons here. Electrons move in waves of probability. They only have a certain chance of being in a place. Some of these places are more likely than others, but they are not certain. However, when you observe the electron, it is forced to collapse into of the possible locations it could be in.
Click to expand...
I'm a total Newb at counting but even I know you don't need quantum mechanics to figure out anything about BJ :laugh:

WRat
 
R

Renzey

Well-Known Member
#36
#36
Shoofly said:
The unplayed cards are still in random order. If those 20 cards had been played, they would be out of the shoe and the shoe composition has been changed. The fact that we do not know how the composition has been changed means we are guessing if we ignore those cards.
Click to expand...
So if the dealer blindly puts those 20 cards in the rear of the shoe, you should still play the remainder -- but if he flashes them privately to somebody else, then puts them in the discard tray, you should not??? Please explain!
 
S

Shoofly

Well-Known Member
#37
#37
Renzey said:
So if the dealer blindly puts those 20 cards in the rear of the shoe, you should still play the remainder -- but if he flashes them privately to somebody else, then puts them in the discard tray, you should not??? Please explain!
Click to expand...
Because in the discard tray the cards are now out of play and not part of the random probabilities. Let's try it this way. Take those 20 cards off the top of the shoe. They contain 14 tens, 2 small cards, the rest neutral. The shoe is -2. The fact that we do not know it is -2 does not alter the fact that it is. The probabilities for the remainder of the shoe are based on -2. To enter the shoe at this point at 0 is to go forward with flawed expectations.
 
R

revrac

Well-Known Member
#38
#38
Shoofly said:
Because in the discard tray the cards are now out of play and not part of the random probabilities. Let's try it this way. Take those 20 cards off the top of the shoe. They contain 14 tens, 2 small cards, the rest neutral. The shoe is -2. The fact that we do not know it is -2 does not alter the fact that it is. The probabilities for the remainder of the shoe are based on -2. To enter the shoe at this point at 0 is to go forward with flawed expectations.
Click to expand...
Either way the cards are out of play whether they've been played or will never be played as they are behind the cut card. The optimal thing to do would be to assume those cards were added to the stack behind the cut card thus decreasing the penetration by that amount and adjust your TC to be based on remaining cards plus the 20 played but unseen cards.
 
B

Billy C1

Well-Known Member
#39
#39
Renzey said:
Put another way, when you're in a +3.5 TC shoe, it means that the full remainder of cards, including those behind the cut card are just about 34% Tens. What if the dealer suddenly pulls out the next 20 cards, puts them in the rear of the shoe, and then moves the cut card back towards the rear by 20 cards.

A -- What has changed?
B -- Should you continue to play?
Click to expand...
A-----Nothing
B-----Yes
 
R

rrwoods

Well-Known Member
#40
#40
Oh god dammit. Alright I'll bite.

What is the reason we divide by the number of decks behind the cut card?
Why is card counting effective at all? (Hint: information...)
If the dealer deals cards you don't see, what do we know about them?
If the dealer burns a card you don't see, what do you know about it?
If a new dealer comes in and burns half a deck, what do you know about it?

Why is whether a card has been played important? (Hint: it's not)

From a strictly mathematical perspective, why does it make sense to assume information you don't actually know?

[ i am not discounting the advantage of simplicity! if it's a small number of cards that have been unplayed, and you believe the simplicity of adjusting your count accordingly outweighs the mathematical advantage of not counting those cards, then adjust your count and keep going. all i'm saying is that you should realize that from a mathematical perspective, it's technically incorrect to do so. ]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top