Prominent BJINFO Members in BJ INSIDER June

[zengrifter]

On a players 7-7 v Dealers 8 at a +10 TC what would you do?

I would chant "Nam Myōhō Renge Kyō" zg

 

[zengrifter]

lets help people here make some money playing rather debate how many cards one sees while playing a single deck game with 4 players at the table.

Ya, I second the motion. Pipe up yo...Let the Chibi-san know! zg

Ps - Anyone know what the "13.4 cards" was about? Chibi-san wanna know!

Nam Myōhō Renge Kyō
​

 

[mdlbj]

Ya, I second the motion. Pipe up yo...Let the Chibi-san know! zg

Ps - Anyone know what the "13.4 cards" was about? Chibi-san wanna know!

Nam Myōhō Renge Kyō
​

It was about the Hit 12 v 14. After reading partly through the link to the artcle about ken, I did not want to oay the 19.95 to finish it. So i thought that you could enlighten us.

 

[zengrifter]

It was about the Hit 12 v 14. After reading partly through the link to the artcle about ken, I did not want to oay the 19.95 to finish it. So i thought that you could enlighten us.

No, I finally read the article and didn't make the connection with
the 13.4 cards. What is it? Chibi-san wanna know! zg

 

[zengrifter]

No, I finally read the article and didn't make the connection with
the 13.4 cards. What is it? Chibi-san wanna know! zg

Can anyone fill me in? Explain the connection between Ken's compo-depend BS 12v4 and MDLBJ's "13.4 cards chibi-san" post?

Also, I made mention of "my revised BS" to always hit any 12v4 - any#decks - and MDLBJ misconstrued that to be count dependent.
What part of "BS" term does MDLBJ not understand?

And why would I say, for BSers, always hit ANY 12v4? zg

CHIBI-SAN WANNA KNOW! - Nam Myōhō Renge Kyō!​

Ps - Where is David Pom when I need him?

 

[mdlbj]

Maybe you can find the answers in your Buddhahood...ism.

 

[zengrifter]

Maybe you can find the answers in your Buddhahood...ism.

I gave up already and requesting someone else here to answer.

But in the meantime, what do you think of my BS alteration ALWAYS hit ANY 12v4? zg

 

[KenSmith]

Interesting Ken... There are an average 13.4 something cards delt out if there are 4 players at the table.. Lets see; if we were to educate people about true counts than this would not be a feature issue in the las vegas gas....Err whatever mag that wrote this. Let make it clear to those who seek the knowledge. 14 cards out means you have to use an simple side count or adjusted index play in single deck.

Its that easy.

not to Bust on your accomplisments, you are the foremost expert on Tourny play but lets keep it real for the newer generation.

I merely found it interesting that single deck basic strategy play actually misplays more 12v4's than not. My article isn't meant to be practical or useful, but more of an observation.

I find the whole concept of "composition dependent" play to be a useless exercise in most cases. If you know enough about the game to be aware of these differences, you're already using a count adjusted strategy anyway.

Of course, there are exceptions. I recently played in a single deck shuffle-every-hand situation where knowing all the composition dependent plays eeked out a slightly better return on a strong EV play. As long as it didn't slow down my play, it was helpful to know things like
that I should hit A69vT but stand with A78vT.

 

[mdlbj]

I gave up already and requesting someone else here to answer.

But in the meantime, what do you think of my BS alteration ALWAYS hit ANY 12v4? zg

I would hit only if the count was 0. Always hit? Again its a fraction of a percent difference; do what you will.

As for what Ken states in his post, I believe that one should eek out every bit of EV from the game; thats why we count.

Single deck or 6 decks, one should play as perfectly as possible. Maybe its time to update the BS charts on blackjackinfo.com?

If we were to ignore composition dependence, then there would be no need for the TC or counting for that matter.

What am I missing ZG? < ---- asked with genuine curiosity.

Its hard to imagin that Ken would not be counting even on a shuffle every hand game.

 

[zengrifter]

If we were to ignore composition dependence, then there would be no need for the TC or counting for that matter.

Another "SAY WHAT?" is in order.

What am I missing ZG? < ---- asked with genuine curiosity.

You are missing: What does "13.4 cards", your original point, have to do with Ken's 12v4 article. Are you going to tell us or am I going to have to ask David Pom and Scott/P21?

Its hard to imagin that Ken would not be counting even on a shuffle every hand game.

Considering that Ken does NOT count, period, in most of the important tourneys he plays, it would be hard to imagine that he would count that game. zg

 

[mdlbj]

Another "SAY WHAT?" is in order.

You are missing: What does "13.4 cards", your original point, have to do with Ken's 12v4 article. Are you going to tell us or am I going to have to ask David Pom and Scott/P21?


Considering that Ken does NOT count, period, in most of the important tourneys he plays, it would be hard to imagine that he would count that game. zg

Ken got what I was talking about with the 13.4. And who is David Pom? And Ken does not count? Thats news to me.

 

[zengrifter]

Ken got what I was talking about with the 13.4.

Maybe I'm the only one who doesn't get it? zg

Ps - Ken, pipe up yo! Chibi-san wanna know! Nam Myōhō Renge Kyō!

 

[KenSmith]

Its hard to imagin that Ken would not be counting even on a shuffle every hand game.

What I did in that game was better than counting. I was playing virtually every hand computer perfectly. Any counting indexes are still estimates. In a situation where they shuffle a single deck every hand, just learning the absolute multi-card composition dependent plays is stronger than counting.

Still, it's worth pointing out that I was only gaining about another 0.05% or so over just plain basic strategy. (That number is from memory and likely inaccurate, but it's not wrong by too much.)

And Ken does not count? Thats news to me.

I've often stated that in tournament play I rarely count. Near the end of the round, I never count. I'm far too busy with more important details in tournaments than to waste mental effort counting. The benefits of knowing the count are far less than the benefits of knowing every bankroll at the table. I can't do both.

Now, outside tournaments, that's entirely another kettle of fish.

Maybe I'm the only one who doesn't get it? zg

Ps - Ken, pipe up yo! Chibi-san wanna know!

mdlbj's talk about 13.4 just meant that if you're playing a single deck game with 4 players, you'll have plenty of cards to look at to make a better decision on whether to hit your 12v4, even on the first round.

Quite true, and as I mentioned in a previous reply, more practical than knowing the facts I presented in this month's article.

Hey, monthly topics are hard to come by. :laugh: Ya gotta let me get by with some fluff sometimes! I'm busy these days. Every month I ask myself why I'm wasting time writing when I could be playing.

 

[zengrifter]

mdlbj's talk about 13.4 just meant that if you're playing a single deck game with 4 players, you'll have plenty of cards to look at to make a better decision on whether to hit your 12v4, even on the first round.

Thats it?!? Chibi-san not so smart. zg

 

[zengrifter]

mdlbj's talk about 13.4 just meant that if you're playing a single deck game with 4 players, you'll have plenty of cards to look at to make a better decision on whether to hit your 12v4, even on the first round.

Question for QFIT: How much extra value can be gleaned by counting 1/4D of 1D for play decision only?
(This answer will tell us if MDLBJ's "13.4 cards" comment has any relevancy whatsoever). zg

 

[KenSmith]

One last try...
mdlbj's point was that knowing how to use index plays is going to be more valuable than knowing composition dependent plays, even in the first round of a single deck game. (assuming 4 players at the table).
The magnitude of the value isn't important. I don't need a sim to know he's right.

 

[zengrifter]

One last try...
mdlbj's point was that knowing how to use index plays is going to be more valuable than knowing composition dependent plays, even in the first round of a single deck game. (assuming 4 players at the table).
The magnitude of the value isn't important. I don't need a sim to know he's right.

Was that his point? If it was it was entirely out of context considering that the 12v4 article referred to TOURNEY play where there is little to be gained from counting.

Now IF that assertion is correct, how would it stack against composition-based BS tethered to the 3/4D level?

Lastly, doesn't anyone wish to challenge my assertion that I'd arbitrarly change BS to any12v4 = HIT? zg

 

[Canceler]

Lastly, doesn't anyone wish to challenge my assertion that I'd arbitrarly change BS to any12v4 = HIT?

Not me, because I've recently acquired enough knowledge to become dangerous!

For KO full, the 6D index for standing on 12 vs 4 is -7. I have a sim showing the KO count spends 64% of its time below -7. So, I'll go along with you. How about that?

 

[zengrifter]

Not me, because I've recently acquired enough knowledge to become dangerous!

For KO full, the 6D index for standing on 12 vs 4 is -7. I have a sim showing the KO count spends 64% of its time below -7. So, I'll go along with you. How about that?

Maybe you're too easy! zg

 

[mdlbj]

Its a subconscious thing for me to count, tourny play or free play. I always count.

Index plays are something one should be accustomed to weather its CE adjusted or the standard index play for the game your targeting.

The MIT guys had a little something going, its not just another story, its a system that made some serious cash.

Forget the movie, get to know someone who experienced it, then make your judgments.

Johnny Chan can speak to this. And yes ZG, it was in the first sentence of the post you presented to the readers of the post at the start of this thread.