RPC True count

[theclash230]

Am i right in saying that by using the Revere point counting system, you work out the true count every 1/2 deck and not every full deck like most other counts?

I've read somewhere that you can double the indices so i think this means if you have a running count of 5 with 5.5 decks left that = 0.909 then you can double it and make it 10 / 11 = 0.909. would you then round this up to 1?

Is there a way of working it out every full deck to make life easier or would this not work?

Please can anyone tell me if theres an easier way to work out the true count using the RPC system.

thanks.

 

[boneuphtoner]

Hi,

I have been wondering the same thing, but instead of RPC, I'm talking about the very similar Zen count. For shoe play, I think you would do just fine using plain old count per whole deck. I'm not so sure about pitch games (see my related thread), but my sims look promising.

I'm looking forward to reading the replies here.

 

[bjcount]

Am i right in saying that by using the Revere point counting system, you work out the true count every 1/2 deck and not every full deck like most other counts?

I've read somewhere that you can double the indices so i think this means if you have a running count of 5 with 5.5 decks left that = 0.909 then you can double it and make it 10 / 11 = 0.909. would you then round this up to 1?

Is there a way of working it out every full deck to make life easier or would this not work?

Please can anyone tell me if theres an easier way to work out the true count using the RPC system.

thanks.

1)
Since there are many opinions on rounding, flooring, or truncating the indices... I'm in the camp to "floor" the indices. So if you had a TC of 0.909 I would consider it a TC 0.
Definitions according to Qfit:
True Count Division

Ø Round - After the True Count calculation, round fractions to the closest integer. Round up if exactly between two integers.

Ø Truncate - For positive numbers, round down and for negative numbers round up.

Ø Floor - Rounds a number down.

Ø Statistical Round - Round to the closest even integer if exactly between two integers.

2)
When it's refered to as doubling the indices, what your doing is doubling the indices in the tables enabling you to divide by 1dtc conversion instead of by 1/2's.
So if the 1/2dtc index for DD 9 vs 7 = TC+5 than the 1dtc index for this hand becomes TC+10.

One note, when doubling the indices some indices will not be as accurate as when regenerated using 1dtc. Does it matter... not that much.
For example: If the actual index created using 1/2dtc was +2.86 the floored index become +2. Not knowing that the true number was 2.86, your now doubling + 2 to becomes +4 when the more accurate number is 5.72 or TC+5 when floored. Is it going to hurt you in the long run not knowing this? So little thats it not anything to worry about. So the thought goes just double the indices in the tables.

3) Your example :
I've read somewhere that you can double the indices so i think this means if you have a running count of 5 with 5.5 decks left that = 0.909 then you can double it and make it 10 / 11 = 0.909. would you then round this up to 1?
This is not correct, your doubling the RC not the index number in the chart. By doubling the RC your changing the card tags for the strategy. Plus your not changing the 1/2dtc to 1 deck the correct answer per your example if you doubled the indices would be RC+5 / 5.5 decks = TC 0.909 and then floored is still TC= 0 (using the original 1/2dtc, RC+5/11= TC 0.45 floored = TC 0)

To make it easier, just double the indices in the tables, and use 1dtc conversion. This will also change your betting strategy as it creates additional TC integers to ramp your bet with.

Use the new search feature Ken added and look up Betting Granularity, this will explain the last sentence above.

Hope this helps.

BJC

 

[bjcount]

Hi,

I have been wondering the same thing, but instead of RPC, I'm talking about the very similar Zen count. For shoe play, I think you would do just fine using plain old count per whole deck. I'm not so sure about pitch games (see my related thread), but my sims look promising.

I'm looking forward to reading the replies here.

Same applies here, there are many threads with Zen indices for use with 1dtc.


BJC

 

[bj bob]

Am i right in saying that by using the Revere point counting system, you work out the true count every 1/2 deck and not every full deck like most other counts?

Yes, that's right.

I've read somewhere that you can double the indices so i think this means if you have a running count of 5 with 5.5 decks left that = 0.909 then you can double it and make it 10 / 11 = 0.909. would you then round this up to 1?

Is there a way of working it out every full deck to make life easier or would this not work?

Please can anyone tell me if theres an easier way to work out the true count using the RPC system.

thanks.

You can go and do all that if you want: however, I can save you all lot of time and work since our very own resident chimp, AutoMonk, has already produced a streamlined version of RPC complete with all the indices. It's called the Ben Franklin Count and can be found right here on the forum. Either use the search function or look it up in the Card Counting section under "stickies".

 

[boneuphtoner]

Same applies here, there are many threads with Zen indices for use with 1dtc.

BJC

Not only do I think that count per whole deck true count works well for shoes, my sims show that it works well using only whole numbers as the divisor...if there are between 2-3 decks left in a shoe game, I will round to whichever is the closest and divide by either 2 or 3, as opposed to dividing by 2.5.

 

[zengrifter]

Am i right in saying that by using the Revere point counting system, you work out the true count every 1/2 deck and not every full deck like most other counts?

This is incorrect, though a common misunderstanding. While the TC is arrived at by dividing RC by remaining 1/2D... "HOW OFTEN" you do it is also a
function of how deep you are. Someone please elaborate for him. zg

 

[theclash230]

thanks people, youv'e helped me understand it abit more but im still confused about the true count.

bjcount,thanks for all the info. You say that i just have to double the indicies in the tables. Sorry but im not sure exactly which tables your on about. Do you mean

A 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 T = A 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 T ????
-2 1 2 2 2 2 1 0 0 -2 -4 2 4 4 4 4 2 0 0 -4


Zengrifter, im confused lol whats the right answer because iv got people saying its right and you saying its not. do you advise doubling the indices and working it out every deck?

thanks

 

[kewljason]

Since the RPC has peeked your interest theclash230, you may want to check out the portion of Norm's new book which refers to the Felt count, which is based on RPC.

 

[bjcount]

thanks people, youv'e helped me understand it abit more but im still confused about the true count.

bjcount,thanks for all the info. You say that i just have to double the indicies in the tables. Sorry but im not sure exactly which tables your on about. Do you mean

A 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 T = A 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 T ????
-2 1 2 2 2 2 1 0 0 -2 -4 2 4 4 4 4 2 0 0 -4


Zengrifter, im confused lol whats the right answer because iv got people saying its right and you saying its not. do you advise doubling the indices and working it out every deck?

thanks

Your doubling the card tags in your example above, do not double these.
You want to double the playing decision indices, those are the numbers in the tables "your hand v s dealers up card".

ZG's "how often" may be refering to how often you will need to recalculate the TC especially in a deeply dealt game where just one round with a few players toward the end of the shoe/deck can make big moves in the TC. That also doesn't include the times you'll need the current TC for playing decisions, betting decisions, insurance, etc..

You need to read more before you make your decision just based on your confusion between card tags and playing indices.

BJC