Counting Aces

[MountainMan]

Any advice on methods or tricks for counting aces? I'm having a very hard time keeping two counts. MM

 

[Elhombre]

Any advice on methods or tricks for counting aces? I'm having a very hard time keeping two counts. MM

The human brain has two tabs, count the aces with your second tab.

When not able with chips in differnt ways, a higher chip with 10 aces,
a lower with 5 aces, a more low with 1 ace.

success Eh.:cool2:

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Any advice on methods or tricks for counting aces? I'm having a very hard time keeping two counts. MM

Use letters. Then put them on the D H L Package Transit Xpress where you know how many extra aces you have per deck.

You can also balance the aces against some other card(s), in which case you get two running counts. Add the two counts to get your count for betting, and use just the one without the aces to get the count for play & insurance.

 

[Deathclutch]

Then put them on the D H L Package Transit Xpress where you know how many extra aces you have per deck.

What do you mean by this part here?

 

[Automatic Monkey]

What do you mean by this part here?

D=4
H=8
L=12
P=16
T=20
X=24

So when you get to 4 decks dealt out and you're still at H, you know you have 2 extra aces per deck, time to give them the business! (Assuming you're using an ace-neutral main count.)

 

[FLASH1296]

What I have always found easiest to do in a DD game is to attach a letter to the count.

As each Ace is played you add the next letter in sequence - from A to H and use Z when NO ACES have been seen.

e.g. If in my head I am at 4B I know that my running count is +4 and I have seen 2 Aces. Each quarter deck is normalized at ONE (1) ACE. In this case, I have seen 1 deck. That would be 4 quarters and 4 Aces depleted would be normal, but I have only seen 2. So I am "rich" by 2 Aces. The R.C. and T.C. are the same as one deck has been viewed. NOW for betting purposes, (using Hi-Opt II), I add 2 x 2 = 4 to the count. As I am then at +8. I place a substantial bet.

Now I need to play my hands and SOME hands, (mostly doubles and splits), are effected by the Ace "richness" Most are not, and for them I MUST use indices keyed to +4, that is to say - the original unadjusted T.C..

So, for example, I play and I get Ace-8 The dealer shows a 4.
The Index of +4 is not enough to double this hand, [I need +7]
My adjusted Index of +8 is sufficient to double this hand. I do so.
The Pit Critter is grinning as he thinks that i am wildly overbetting AND misplaying my hands. He only knows Hi-Lo of course.

Another example: 7-7. The dealer flips over an 8. the extra Aces hurt as they are more beneficial to the dealer than they are to me. I am beyond the +3 that I would need to split here BUT here I must change direction and NOT add +4 for the Ace "richness" but SUBTRACT 4. Plus 4 and Minus 4 cancel each other out. I now play the hand as I would at a ZERO T.C.

If the dealer had a 6, I'd split my 7's with glee because the extra Aces make my potential 18's powerful against the dealer's likely 17.

A bit later things change. You are again at the one deck of two penetration point (keeping this simple) and your count is +8H The "H" tells me that there are no more Aces available until the shuffle (and sets up a nice shuffle-tracking scenario as well)

Ordinarily TC +8 would call for a Max bet (or nearly so), but with ALL 8 Aces played, the count is adjusted by [2] x [−2] = −8. Ergo +8 + [-8] = 0

In spite of the pit critter's counting along with you and imagining that you ought to be betting a few units, you bet the minimum, or Wong-Out.
Good and effortless camo'

You now have a neutral count and your doubles on eleven are enhanced because you cannot get an Ace for an ugly 22; your doubled 10's, 9's, and 8's are weakened for obvious reasons. Your (better) soft doubles are weaker than usual. The dealer's Faces and 9's, and 8's become less threatening. Your splits tend to be weaker for 6-6, 7-7, 8-8, and 9-9.

SO … where the Aces are helpful you will adjust your play to a True Count of +16 and where they are detrimental to you (because the lack of them assists the dealer) you would use an adjusted T.C. of 0

 

[Jack_Black]

I'm pretty dumb. I just count on my fingers or use chips.


Of course, keep your counting hand under the table. and Of course, don't be obvious about stacking your chips for the ace count, but I really think it would be hard to blow that cover since, most people fiddle with their chips anyway.

 

[Deathclutch]

What I have always found easiest to do in a DD game is to attach a letter to the count.

As each Ace is played you add the next letter in sequence - from A to H and use Z when NO ACES have been seen.

e.g. If in my head I am at 4B I know that my running count is +4 and I have seen 2 Aces. Each quarter deck is normalized at ONE (1) ACE. In this case, I have seen 1 deck. That would be 4 quarters and 4 Aces depleted would be normal, but I have only seen 2. So I am "rich" by 2 Aces. The R.C. and T.C. are the same as one deck has been viewed. NOW for betting purposes, (using Hi-Opt II), I add 2 x 2 = 4 to the count. As I am then at +8. I place a substantial bet.

Now I need to play my hands and SOME hands, (mostly doubles and splits), are effected by the Ace "richness" Most are not, and for them I MUST use indices keyed to +4, that is to say - the original unadjusted T.C..

So, for example, I play and I get Ace-8 The dealer shows a 4.
The Index of +4 is not enough to double this hand, [I need +7]
My adjusted Index of +8 is sufficient to double this hand. I do so.
The Pit Critter is grinning as he thinks that i am wildly overbetting AND misplaying my hands. He only knows Hi-Lo of course.

Another example: 7-7. The dealer flips over an 8. the extra Aces hurt as they are more beneficial to the dealer than they are to me. I am beyond the +3 that I would need to split here BUT here I must change direction and NOT add +4 for the Ace "richness" but SUBTRACT 4. Plus 4 and Minus 4 cancel each other out. I now play the hand as I would at a ZERO T.C.

If the dealer had a 6, I'd split my 7's with glee because the extra Aces make my potential 18's powerful against the dealer's likely 17.

A bit later things change. You are again at the one deck of two penetration point (keeping this simple) and your count is +8H The "H" tells me that there are no more Aces available until the shuffle (and sets up a nice shuffle-tracking scenario as well)

Ordinarily TC +8 would call for a Max bet (or nearly so), but with ALL 8 Aces played, the count is adjusted by [2] x [−2] = −8. Ergo +8 + [-8] = 0

In spite of the pit critter's counting along with you and imagining that you ought to be betting a few units, you bet the minimum, or Wong-Out.
Good and effortless camo'

You now have a neutral count and your doubles on eleven are enhanced because you cannot get an Ace for an ugly 22; your doubled 10's, 9's, and 8's are weakened for obvious reasons. Your (better) soft doubles are weaker than usual. The dealer's Faces and 9's, and 8's become less threatening. Your splits tend to be weaker for 6-6, 7-7, 8-8, and 9-9.

SO … where the Aces are helpful you will adjust your play to a True Count of +16 and where they are detrimental to you (because the lack of them assists the dealer) you would use an adjusted T.C. of 0

Is there a definitive list which tells you which hands you'd add the aces and which you'd subtract? Or is this a common sense sort of thing?

 

[Deathclutch]

Ordinarily TC +8 would call for a Max bet (or nearly so), but with ALL 8 Aces played, the count is adjusted by [2] x [−2] = −8. Ergo +8 + [-8] = 0

Would this here be [2] x [-4] since we're missing the 4 aces from the second deck?

 

[Renzey]

Any advice on methods or tricks for counting aces? I'm having a very hard time keeping two counts. MM

You're probably talking about side counting Aces in hand held games. It becomes a much greater chore with a shoe, and is worth far less to boot.

That said, in double deck play with a level one balanced count that ignores the Aces, begin your RC at "800". The "8" denotes 8 Aces remaining and the "00" denotes a neutral count. Now if the first round of cards happens to be:

..5----A----3----10----10----10----10----4----A---10
Your RC will go:
801--701--702--701--700--699--698--699--599--598

That's a -2 RC with six Aces left.

 

[Deathclutch]

You're probably talking about side counting Aces in hand held games. It becomes a much greater chore with a shoe, and is worth far less to boot.

That said, in double deck play with a level one balanced count that ignores the Aces, begin your RC at "800". The "8" denotes 8 Aces remaining and the "00" denotes a neutral count. Now if the first round of cards happens to be:

..5----A----3----10----10----10----10----4----A---10
Your RC will go:
801--701--702--701--700--699--698--699--599--598

That's a -2 RC with six Aces left.

This may be off topic, but in your book Blackjack Bluebook II where you talk about truing up to two decks is there a reason why you use increments of 1/3 and 1/2?

Such as 2 Decks

2 - multiply by 1
1 1/2 - multiply by 1 and 1/3
1 1/3 - multiply by 1 and 1/2
1 - multiply by 2

Seems strange to do instead of breaking the deck down into fourths. Why not do 1 and 3/4 by .6, 1 1/2 by 1 1/3, and then whatever 1 1/4 decks would be?

 

[Dopple]

Footloose

I use the method from MD Blackjack, Uston. You use your feet putting a little more pressure on your right toes after one ace, your right side of the right foot after two, the heel after three, and left side of right foot after 4.

For 5678 switch to left, 9101112 switch back to right.

It gets pretty natural after a while. I try to keep it as motionless and normal appearing as possible.