I18 v Collin's Deviations

[Krainn]

Hey guys,

Im going to assume that you know who Collin from BJA is. My question is, why does the I18 include a deviation that Collin's blackjack card counting app does not? The I18 says that when you hold a 13 and the dealer is showing a 3, you stand at or above a TC of -2 and hit otherwise. However, Collin's app has no such variation in his strategy tables. I understand that different games with different rules and different deck numbers have slightly different indices, but isn't one of the I18 plays big enough to be applicable to all games?

Some help would be most appreciated!

 

[Meistro]

e I18 says that when you hold a 13 and the dealer is showing a 3, you stand at or above a TC of -2 and hit otherwise.

I hit 13 v 3 and v 2 in any negative count. I doubt that it matters much but I'm curious which is actually correct as born out by simulation. I stand 12 vs 3 at TC +2 and stand 12 vs 2 at TC +3.

 

[DSchles]

Hey guys,

Im going to assume that you know who Collin from BJA is. My question is, why does the I18 include a deviation that Collin's blackjack card counting app does not? The I18 says that when you hold a 13 and the dealer is showing a 3, you stand at or above a TC of -2 and hit otherwise. However, Collin's app has no such variation in his strategy tables. I understand that different games with different rules and different deck numbers have slightly different indices, but isn't one of the I18 plays big enough to be applicable to all games?

Some help would be most appreciated!

13 v. 3 is the very last of the I18, meaning it is the least important. The reasons are: a) you have a minimum bet out when you make the departure (shouldn't even be at the table, if possible), and b) true counts of -3 or lower don't occur all that frequently.

Bottom line: you'll have to ask Colin why he didn't include it, but knowing this index isn't going to make you rich!

Don

 

[DSchles]

I hit 13 v 3 and v 2 in any negative count. I doubt that it matters much but I'm curious which is actually correct as born[e] out by simulation. I stand 12 vs 3 at TC +2 and stand 12 vs 2 at TC +3.

Count? Source of your indices? If Hi-Lo, multi-deck, standing indices (floored) for 13 v. 2 and 3 are, respectively, -1 and -2. So, "hitting in any negative count" isn't correct.

Don

 

[Meistro]

Count is hi lo, source is Stanford Wong's Blackjack Secrets. He lists the indexes as 0 for 2 and -1 for 3 (presumably he means stand 13 vs 2 at tc 0 or higher and 13 v 3 at tc -1 or higher). Probably that info is dated, I appreciate the correction Don.

 

[Meistro]

Anyway, as Arnold Synder's hi-lo lite system demonstrates, exact index precision is not critical.

 

[DSchles]

Count is hi lo, source is Stanford Wong's Blackjack Secrets. He lists the indexes as 0 for 2 and -1 for 3 (presumably he means stand 13 vs 2 at tc 0 or higher and 13 v 3 at tc -1 or higher). Probably that info is dated, I appreciate the correction Don.

See top of p. 254 of Pro BJ, where Wong explains how, in later works, his methodology resulted in adding 1 to all negative indices (I might add: to the great consternation of the entire blackjack-playing community, who wishes he had never done this).

Don