Ace Tracking - my new trick....
- Thread starter zengrifter
- Start date
I can see how that might help, but loses a bit of efficiency
I don't know, if the dealer is dropping so many cards that I can expect those two aces to stick together through the shuffle, I'd probably not be tracking at that table. I'm into dealers with obsessively perfect riffles for this activity. But that's for the shoe game, where single-key gives you only a small advantage at 6D and not playable at 8D, you really need double-key for that. The pitch shuffles I'm familiar with, there are too many strips, and every time the dealer breaks the deck as in a strip or a cut, they break sequences, and if they break the deck after a riffle the probability of breaking a sequence is doubled, after 2 riffles it is quadrupled, etc.
But this is all basic tracking, where you rely on perfection and repeatability. They say there are advanced guys who can exploit sloppy shuffles for a much greater advantage but I'm not up to that yet. I'm guessing you are, though!
I don't know, if the dealer is dropping so many cards that I can expect those two aces to stick together through the shuffle, I'd probably not be tracking at that table. I'm into dealers with obsessively perfect riffles for this activity. But that's for the shoe game, where single-key gives you only a small advantage at 6D and not playable at 8D, you really need double-key for that. The pitch shuffles I'm familiar with, there are too many strips, and every time the dealer breaks the deck as in a strip or a cut, they break sequences, and if they break the deck after a riffle the probability of breaking a sequence is doubled, after 2 riffles it is quadrupled, etc.
But this is all basic tracking, where you rely on perfection and repeatability. They say there are advanced guys who can exploit sloppy shuffles for a much greater advantage but I'm not up to that yet. I'm guessing you are, though!
How about this alternative?
When one of the cards in your hand is an ace, and your neighbor's last card is an ace, arrange the cards in your hand so that when picked up your ace and your neighbor's will be together. You should get twice as many connected aces this way without sacrificing the powerful play of splitting aces. This is all assuming the dealer picks up the cards in a predictable manner.
When one of the cards in your hand is an ace, and your neighbor's last card is an ace, arrange the cards in your hand so that when picked up your ace and your neighbor's will be together. You should get twice as many connected aces this way without sacrificing the powerful play of splitting aces. This is all assuming the dealer picks up the cards in a predictable manner.
Just wondering ..
.. no sims here, just rambling.
I'd ask .. 'are you ST'ing and do you do it well?'
If no, I'd split them, no question. To many things can go wrong between here and there. You might spread to two hands (I think Snyder finally came down on NOT spreading to catch the Ace, but that's another matter) and then miss them altogether, the dealer could catch one of them, the count may not be any better than it is now.
ST'ing? Maybe I'd send them on in a negative count.
: the count would have to be really negative. Don't know what 'really negative' means but maybe say, TC -4 or more.
: are you comfortable with the dealer, the shuffle, and your ability in this instance?
: sense the count is now negative (the slug these Aces are in could be very positive) and you are able to isolate and work that slug and it's partner; do you know what partner is gonna look like? You probably should before giving up the two Aces in hand I'd think.
Someone suggested positioning your 'played' Ace such that it matches the guy next to you. I don't get to touch many cards in the games I play and then only SD. If you can ST SD, you have my respect. I assume we are talking about a shoe game here.
It's a good question. Not splitting Aces would be hard to do. Hopefully someone knows the answer. If you get it privately, would you be kind enough to email it to me?
Good luck.
.. no sims here, just rambling.
I'd ask .. 'are you ST'ing and do you do it well?'
If no, I'd split them, no question. To many things can go wrong between here and there. You might spread to two hands (I think Snyder finally came down on NOT spreading to catch the Ace, but that's another matter) and then miss them altogether, the dealer could catch one of them, the count may not be any better than it is now.
ST'ing? Maybe I'd send them on in a negative count.
: the count would have to be really negative. Don't know what 'really negative' means but maybe say, TC -4 or more.
: are you comfortable with the dealer, the shuffle, and your ability in this instance?
: sense the count is now negative (the slug these Aces are in could be very positive) and you are able to isolate and work that slug and it's partner; do you know what partner is gonna look like? You probably should before giving up the two Aces in hand I'd think.
Someone suggested positioning your 'played' Ace such that it matches the guy next to you. I don't get to touch many cards in the games I play and then only SD. If you can ST SD, you have my respect. I assume we are talking about a shoe game here.
It's a good question. Not splitting Aces would be hard to do. Hopefully someone knows the answer. If you get it privately, would you be kind enough to email it to me?
Good luck.
Re: My logic
So you have two Aces in your hand now and the count is a little minus; granted they are split Aces.
You send them to the next hand on a 50% chance of catching them on two different boxes with a count that may be ever bit as negative as it is now.
Seems to me a poor risk; but I could be wrong.
My only reference to ST'ing was looking for a known opportunity to employ them in the next shuffle when you know the count s/b positive.
By the way, I'm sure there is an index for hitting Ace/Ace; do you know it?
So you have two Aces in your hand now and the count is a little minus; granted they are split Aces.
You send them to the next hand on a 50% chance of catching them on two different boxes with a count that may be ever bit as negative as it is now.
Seems to me a poor risk; but I could be wrong.
My only reference to ST'ing was looking for a known opportunity to employ them in the next shuffle when you know the count s/b positive.
By the way, I'm sure there is an index for hitting Ace/Ace; do you know it?
No it's a good risk if you can do it
If you know one of your cards is going to be an ace your advantage for that hand is 40-50% depending on rules (D9 makes it worth less, RSA makes it worth more.) So with a 50% probability of accurately predicting the ace, your advantage is 20-25% for that hand. A hell of a lot more valuable than splitting aces with a low bet; even if the count is low it's still more valuable. You can use the same technique to steer an ace away from the dealer or lower your bet if he's going to get one anyway.
Problem is, with most pitch shuffles there are so many strips and cuts the chances of a sequence getting stepped on is so high that your prediction accuracy is less than 50%. One thing that can help is to also keep track of the pair of cards that went into the discards on top of the ace and it's keycard; if that sequence got stepped on by a strip or cut chances are the ace one didn't.
There is an index for splitting aces against dealer ace, I believe it's -5 in Hi-Opt II, S17 game.
If you know one of your cards is going to be an ace your advantage for that hand is 40-50% depending on rules (D9 makes it worth less, RSA makes it worth more.) So with a 50% probability of accurately predicting the ace, your advantage is 20-25% for that hand. A hell of a lot more valuable than splitting aces with a low bet; even if the count is low it's still more valuable. You can use the same technique to steer an ace away from the dealer or lower your bet if he's going to get one anyway.
Problem is, with most pitch shuffles there are so many strips and cuts the chances of a sequence getting stepped on is so high that your prediction accuracy is less than 50%. One thing that can help is to also keep track of the pair of cards that went into the discards on top of the ace and it's keycard; if that sequence got stepped on by a strip or cut chances are the ace one didn't.
There is an index for splitting aces against dealer ace, I believe it's -5 in Hi-Opt II, S17 game.
My observation of the past few months...
... is that the strips and cuts do NOT break the sequence as often as you would think. zg
----------------
"Problem is, with most pitch shuffles there are so many strips and cuts the chances of a sequence getting stepped on is so high that your prediction accuracy is less than 50%. "
... is that the strips and cuts do NOT break the sequence as often as you would think. zg
----------------
"Problem is, with most pitch shuffles there are so many strips and cuts the chances of a sequence getting stepped on is so high that your prediction accuracy is less than 50%. "
Comments
>Problem is, with most pitch shuffles there are so many strips and cuts the chances of a sequence getting stepped on is so high that your prediction accuracy is less than 50%.
I wrote a sim about this a while back. It showed that the typical riffle-riffle-strip-riffle-cut single-deck shuffle is highly ace-trackable. I won't say any more about the details, but as I recall I sent the info to ZG who has been having a good time. ZG uses *every* legal trick he knows to beat the game. He is a sight to see in action.
>Problem is, with most pitch shuffles there are so many strips and cuts the chances of a sequence getting stepped on is so high that your prediction accuracy is less than 50%.
I wrote a sim about this a while back. It showed that the typical riffle-riffle-strip-riffle-cut single-deck shuffle is highly ace-trackable. I won't say any more about the details, but as I recall I sent the info to ZG who has been having a good time. ZG uses *every* legal trick he knows to beat the game. He is a sight to see in action.
Simple Math
Simple Math - IF the edge for next hand with 100% Ace-prediction is 50%, then what-if we only have 20% (1 in 5) accuracy (20% x 50% = 10% edge) and we are spread to two hands (20%x50%/2 = 5%)
Therefore my bet-sizing never exceeds my standard max bet and may be smaller in a deep negative zone.
As for the broken sequences, they are not that frequent. The hardest part is remembering the key-card without losing the count. Anyone can observe this to be so in a 2D game. zg
Simple Math - IF the edge for next hand with 100% Ace-prediction is 50%, then what-if we only have 20% (1 in 5) accuracy (20% x 50% = 10% edge) and we are spread to two hands (20%x50%/2 = 5%)
Therefore my bet-sizing never exceeds my standard max bet and may be smaller in a deep negative zone.
As for the broken sequences, they are not that frequent. The hardest part is remembering the key-card without losing the count. Anyone can observe this to be so in a 2D game. zg
Ah OK, SD. Now I see
For some reason I was assuming DD. But SD eliminates a whole category of problems. and should be a lot better, assuming the same shuffle.
Is that the standard shuffle Downtown? Most of my SD experience has been in Reno and I recall the shuffles being a bit more complicated than that. Two sets of strips?
For some reason I was assuming DD. But SD eliminates a whole category of problems. and should be a lot better, assuming the same shuffle.
Is that the standard shuffle Downtown? Most of my SD experience has been in Reno and I recall the shuffles being a bit more complicated than that. Two sets of strips?