#### bronco60

##### Member
FLASH1296 said:
Semantic arguments are a waste of time; so removing the verbiage I shall stick to the numbers.

Thus, if you are playing a game with a House Edge of .3% and you add .1% you have inflated your disadvantage by 33%.

By this line of thinking, going from a game with 0.0 edge off the top to one with 0.1 edge off the top means you have "inflated your disadvantage" infinitely!

Which is senseless.

For a card counter, going from a game with to a game without soft double means making about .1 less money times aggregate bet, which is a useful amount but not a game-changing, massive figure.

For some kind of basic strategy player well yeah, you'll lose your money somewhat faster in the latter but so what? Either way, you're still a loser.

So are we talking about BS losers here, or card counters?

#### FLASH1296

##### Well-Known Member
If I was referring to a Basic Strategy player I would indicate same.

A card counter armed with a matrix of indices for Basic Strategy Departure plays will be making MORE soft doubles, (at opportune moments) than will a B. S. Player.

#### tthree

##### Banned
FLASH1296 said:
If I was referring to a Basic Strategy player I would indicate same.

A card counter armed with a matrix of indices for Basic Strategy Departure plays will be making MORE soft doubles, (at opportune moments) than will a B. S. Player.
For those who can't see the big picture soft doubling allows you to double many large bets as a counter that a BS player would not double. When you decide what a rule is worth for a counter if it affects your large bets more it is worth a lot more than to a BS player. You ramp your bets more to make up for the .19% or more that soft doubling may be worth to a counter the loss of soft doubling costs you even more with the larger spread. Flash is not quoting what the rule is worth to a counter because it depends on his spread. The larger the spread the more it is worth.

#### tthree

##### Banned
Flash is right about the most important skill being game selection.

I have been reading posts about horrible losing streaks. I have been lucky enough to avoid them. I have some isolated nightmare shoes but not the streaks. I think this is due to 2 factors. The strength of the system I use and more importantly the refusal to play crappy games. Tarzan continues to hammer this point home every time I see him. He plays a much more powerful system than I do yet he refuses to play crap games or poor penetration. I bet he has similar results at avoiding the huge downswings. Your most important skill is picking only the best games and never burning them by getting backed off or banned.

#### FLASH1296

##### Well-Known Member
tthree is correct and has stated it clearly, concisely, and comprehensively.

The best illustration of this factor references Late Surrender.

The value of L.S. is inversely proportional to the number of decks used.

It is worth considerably more in an 8 deck shoe than it is in a single deck game.

What is most noteworthy about the value of this option is that a basic strategist only
surrenders 4 hand-matchups in a S17 shoe game; while a Card Counter will avail himself
of surrendering on as many as 12 hand match-ups, especially if an advanced count with a
high "Playing Efficiency" is utilized, e.g. Zen, RPC, Mentor, Hi-Opt II, or AOII.

The value of L.S. is proportional to the "width" of the betting ramp (or "spread")
as the higher the True Count, the greater is the opportunity to correctly surrender
a hand. At the higher true counts the bets have grown in size.

To simplify the matter, Late surrender may be worth about .20% to a Basic Strategist,
but can (conceivably) be worth twice that !

#### bronco60

##### Member
FLASH1296 said:
tthree is correct and has stated it clearly, concisely, and comprehensively.

The best illustration of this factor references Late Surrender.

The value of L.S. is inversely proportional to the number of decks used.

It is worth considerably more in an 8 deck shoe than it is in a single deck game.

What is most noteworthy about the value of this option is that a basic strategist only
surrenders 4 hand-matchups in a S17 shoe game; while a Card Counter will avail himself
of surrendering on as many as 12 hand match-ups, especially if an advanced count with a
high "Playing Efficiency" is utilized, e.g. Zen, RPC, Mentor, Hi-Opt II, or AOII.

The value of L.S. is proportional to the "width" of the betting ramp (or "spread")
as the higher the True Count, the greater is the opportunity to correctly surrender
a hand. At the higher true counts the bets have grown in size.

To simplify the matter, Late surrender may be worth about .20% to a Basic Strategist,
but can (conceivably) be worth twice that !
Again, you are jumbling, confusing, and misstating various things here. LS is worth more in multideck *to the basic strategist*. For a counter, who is making large bets *far more frequently* and making LS decisions *far more frequently* in single deck games due to much greater count volatility, the rule is worth a great deal more.

And no, LS is worth much less than .20 off the top to a basic strategist.

Once again your claim that soft doubling, which LIKE OTHER RULES is employed more frequently to advantage by card counters, is some kind of very important issue demanding in its absence great pen or great spreads is not true.

#### tthree

##### Banned
bronco60 said:
Again, you are jumbling, confusing, and misstating various things here. LS is worth more in multideck *to the basic strategist*. For a counter, who is making large bets *far more frequently* and making LS decisions *far more frequently* in single deck games due to much greater count volatility, the rule is worth a great deal more.

And no, LS is worth much less than .20 off the top to a basic strategist.

Once again your claim that soft doubling, which LIKE OTHER RULES is employed more frequently to advantage by card counters, is some kind of very important issue demanding in its absence great pen or great spreads is not true.
Your bet spread is much smaller in SD if you know how to play more than 1 deck before getting thrown out. Your bets at 8 deck will be 4 or 5 times bigger when the added indices are in play. That is the biggest factor in where the rule is worth the most.

#### FLASH1296

##### Well-Known Member

Besides my having graduate study in statistics and 20 years of full-time
Professional Play, you imagine that your beliefs and conclusions
about the mathematics of BJ are superior to mine.

You need a goodly measure of humility.

Either that or some belated maturity.

Possibly both.

#### tthree

##### Banned
London Colin said:
Now that's what I call irony!
Flash knows his blackjack. He has earned respect of the noobs. He has earned my respect. Not many here have. I am sure quite a few more will over time. Still trying to separate the wheat from the chaff. When your knowledge is vastly superior it is hard to not be arrogant. I comes with the territory. Believe me I know I am often guilty of the same without intending to be. I have been lucky enough to have been mentored by the foremost experts in many, many fields of science. They all stay in touch with me because there are few people that they can have a stimulating conversation with. This keeps me on the cutting edge of the latest breakthroughs in these areas of science. By the way one is environmental science. These experts don't air their real feelings about their lack of belief in global warming. They feel they will find their job prospects affected. Once they retire they speak their minds. Not everyone that is arrogant has the knowledge. I know I have a lot more to learn but the experts here have helped me to teach myself and learn more than I thought possible in the amount of time I have been here. I would give Flash the respect he has earned. He takes the time to help lots of people and is very effective at getting you to understand concepts. He has a gift for teaching rarely seen in this world.

#### London Colin

##### Well-Known Member
tthree said:
When your knowledge is vastly superior it is hard to not be arrogant.
Most people at least make an effort, however. Flash seems to go out of his way to give offence.

#### tthree

##### Banned
London Colin said:
Most people at least make an effort, however. Flash seems to go out of his way to give offence.
It's rye humor.