Balanced counts vs. unbalenced counts!

[vking58]

I was introduced to the wonderful unbalenced counts today, thanks to bji's blackjack calculator. a=1, 2=1, 3=2, 4=3, 5=4, 6=3, 7=3, 8=1 9= -1, and 10= -4.
I have sat down and played this at my home for four hours and find it quite amazing! The playing effiency if 19 percent above the plus minus count, but the betting corrilation is lower. I win more often, so why would my betting corrilation be lower!

Answer's to this and other thought's are greatly apprecitated

 

[assume_R]

Most people here would say that a level 4 count is quite unnecessary, and the count's complexity could decrease its utility compared to high low.

But in response to your specific questions:

Playing Efficiency (PE) measures if you'll be making the correct decision given the cards already in your hand.

Betting Correlation (BC) essentially is measuring the chance that you'll be getting a winning hand.

So BC aims to tell you if you think you're going to be dealt a winning hand (e.g. a blackjack) and to bet more. PE, on the other hand, will help you make the correct decision already given your hand and bet. In shoe games, especially, BC is much more important, because you really only need 1 or 2 deviations from basic strategy (the most important being insurance, following by standing on 16 vs 10).

 

[Sonny]

Is the ace supposed to be +1 or is that a typo?

-Sonny-

 

[zengrifter]

Is the ace supposed to be +1 or is that a typo?

Not a typo

 

[assume_R]

I suppose for high playing efficiency counts, an Ace, 2, and 3 affect a hand pretty similarly for your stiff hands, although for doubling 9's and 10's it would be better counted as negative.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

I suppose for high playing efficiency counts, an Ace, 2, and 3 affect a hand pretty similarly for your stiff hands, although for doubling 9's and 10's it would be better counted as negative.

Some very interesting things happen to the playing and betting EOR of the cards as the count changes.

For the playing decisions we make only at high counts, the ace tends to act like a high card and is best assigned a negative EOR. It acts like a low card on the decisions we make only at low counts. But when we are playing shoe, at low counts we are either away from the table or have a minimum bet down so we don't care too much about that aspect of the ace.

Betting EOR depends to a degree on playing efficiency because whether or not our hand is a winning hand depends on how well we play it. The textbook betting EOR assume basic strategy but we're doing better than that and it does make a measurable difference.

 

[vking58]

Is the ace supposed to be +1 or is that a typo?

-Sonny-

It is+1 the PE is slightly greater, however the bc is dramatically lower opposed to the ace being given a value or -1!

+1 PE 70%, BC 86%
-1 PE 67%, BC 93%

Those are rather quite new definitons for me so i dont know which would be better!

 

[vking58]

Some very interesting things happen to the playing and betting EOR of the cards as the count changes.

For the playing decisions we make only at high counts, the ace tends to act like a high card and is best assigned a negative EOR. It acts like a low card on the decisions we make only at low counts. But when we are playing shoe, at low counts we are either away from the table or have a minimum bet down so we don't care too much about that aspect of the ace.

Betting EOR depends to a degree on playing efficiency because whether or not our hand is a winning hand depends on how well we play it. The textbook betting EOR assume basic strategy but we're doing better than that and it does make a measurable difference.

So it would be better played by counting the ace alone and giving it a + or minus value according to weither the count is minus or positive!!!! Going on a limb here:laugh: But using it like that would better work for gams 4d or greater right! im half a newbie with severe sleep deprivation right now! I am dying to get the math on this!

@automonkey Note: Loved your ace statement! An ace is 1 or 11 so of course it can act as a low or high card and can be beneficial in both + and - counts! However giving it a count of minus one increase my BC so it will now be that! But what do you think with the ace being-1 and 10's -5! The BC IS Still above 90 and the PE jumps to 68! Does anyone know what my edge is with a two deck game on any of the three value changes! Also, if start the true count at -11 to balance the count out can I factor in a true countfor betting purposes! Or is there a concrete way to bet unbalanced counts!

 

[Deathclutch]

So it would be better played by counting the ace alone and giving it a + or minus value according to weither the count is minus or positive!!!! Going on a limb here:laugh: But using it like that would better work for gams 4d or greater right! im half a newbie with severe sleep deprivation right now! I am dying to get the math on this!

@automonkey Note: Loved your ace statement! An ace is 1 or 11 so of course it can act as a low or high card and can be beneficial in both + and - counts! However giving it a count of minus one increase my BC so it will now be that! But what do you think with the ace being-1 and 10's -5! The BC IS Still above 90 and the PE jumps to 68! Does anyone know what my edge is with a two deck game on any of the three value changes! Also, if start the true count at -11 to balance the count out can I factor in a true countfor betting purposes! Or is there a concrete way to bet unbalanced counts!

Just use Hi Opt 2 and save yourself 3 levels and get better stats.