One of the basic Illustrious 18 rules is staying on 16, against a face card, when the TC is 0, or higher. I understand this, especially in case of higher counts, it just makes perfect sense. However, I'm not really sure what to do against dealer's 7, 8, or 9, when the count is +. Again, especially with higher counts (TC of +4, 5, or maybe even higher), wouldn't it make sense to stay, the same way as against a dealer's face card?
Illustrious 18 question (staying on 16)
- Thread starter DonR
- Start date
Sonny
Well-Known Member
Here are the HiLo numbers for standing:DonR said:
16 vs. 9 = +5.5
16 vs. 8 = +8
16 vs. 7 = +10
As you can see, the numbers are very different for different upcards. That is because the probabilities of the dealer making different hands changes with different upcards.
-Sonny-
cardcounter0
Well-Known Member
You have discovered the reason why 16 vs 9 is a part of the I18, but 16 vs 8 and 16 vs 7 is not.
:grin:
:grin:
That is not what I meant. My only point was that I'll definitely try first to remember the rule vs 9, and I won't care that much if I make an occasional mistake vs 8 or 7. This all based on my experience so far in 8D games with 75% penetration (the only ones available to me), where I don't really remember seeing that many TC's as high as 8 or 10 (maybe I need to play more). Just starting to learn about this stuff, I am only trying to prioritize things. So far, I am pretty religiously sticking to these two only: 1-insure on TC of +3 or higher, and 2-stay on 16 vs a face card, with TC=0, or higher. I'm not saying that the rest of I18 is not important, it is just that I feel that "all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others".cardcounter0 said:
Last edited:
EasyRhino
Well-Known Member
If you get to the point where you're playing indices for 16 v7 and 8, then you're probably using the Illustrious 300. Not only are the counts where the deviations are justified hardly ever present, but the hands themselves are much less likely than other hands at those counts.
Actually I think 16 vs 7, 16 vs 8 & 16 vs 9 pretty much occur at the same frequency. Without regard to a count that is.EasyRhino said:
The value of an index number departure depends not only on the frequency of the hand occurring but also, if card-counting, how much money you will be betting on avg when the hand does occur.
Like the value of insurance when +3 or more is more when betting x units at +3 or more than if always flat-betting.
Like 16 vs 10 may occur 5 times as often as insurance but it's worth less to a CC than ins because your avg bet will be a lot less when it does occur.
Which I think is what you were saying lol.
you forgot the most important part of the equation!
dont have the numbers in front of me but im going to go out on a limb and say your %advantage when taking insurance is also significantly higher than the advantage you get from standing on a 16v8 instead of hitting it, especially at the high counts that make standing on 16v8 marginally the right move and insurance very much so the right move.
besides frequency and $ bet, you need your % advantage/disadvantage when making each of the deviations. that final piece will give you your actual $EV for a given deviation from BS like say taking insurance or standing on a 16v8. $EV = %advantage from deviation*probability of that situation*$ bet.Kasi said:
dont have the numbers in front of me but im going to go out on a limb and say your %advantage when taking insurance is also significantly higher than the advantage you get from standing on a 16v8 instead of hitting it, especially at the high counts that make standing on 16v8 marginally the right move and insurance very much so the right move.
Last edited:
Well, I also think I didn't mention the playing efficiency and betting efficiency of your chosen counting system comes into play to. And how much of the total playing efficiency for any given hand, say 16 vs 10 whatever, your counting system captures. At least I think stuff like that was used in developing the "I18" for a card-counter using indexes.rukus said:
Are you maybe just referring to the total cost for a non-counting BS player deviating from BS?