Index for 8,8 v 9 anyone?

[UK-21]

Finally got around to looking this up.

According to Mr S's frequency table, 8,8 v 9 shows only 43 times in every 100,000 hands. At TC+3+ (8% of the time) this averages out to 3.44 - lets call it 4 instances in every 100,000 hands played at the felt.

So the cost (loss in EV) of standing on this hand at TC+3+, rather than splitting and doubling the amount at risk, is never going to be more than peanuts if incorporated into a general playing strategy. It depends on how you want to measure it of course, but the reduction in variance may be worth more than the loss in EV - particularly if you're spreading big.

 

[FLASH1296]

Index to NOT split with Aces vs. Ace.

With Aces vs a dealer's Ace Hi-Opt II dictates hitting at −7 in a S17 game and −9 in a H17 game.

I do not use Level One counts but I guess that these indices would be the equivalent of −5 and −6. with Hi-Lo - for those using a "play-all" approach.

Interestingly, in Spanish 21 you can Resplit Aces to 4 hands, and you can hit or stand or double with each resulting hand. If you double and the result is a stiff, you can even surrender the doubled hand.

Note: that is called a "Double Down Rescue" in Span21.

 

[blackjackstudent]

Flash,

Can you really draw on split aces in Spanish 21? That is so good because an ace is so powerful that Australian casinos ONLY allow one card per ace split. This could lower the indices especially since you cant resplit aces - however this is still an offensive move marginally when you confronted with splitting aces versus a dealer's ace.

 

[FLASH1296]

In Spanish 21 you can draw, stand or double with your Paired Aces.
Four hands is the maximum.

The only North American casino that forbids this is Mohegan Sun in Connecticut.

The negative e.v. "penalty" for these restriction are VERY significant.

Once, last winter, when I first strating specializing in Spanish 21, I had turned a Pair of Aces into FOUR (4) hands.
while the (particularly slow and annoying) dealer had displayed a FOUR (4).

One was a BJ for the instant payoff for a 21.
One more was a built-up 5 card 21 (for a premium 3 to 2 payoff).
One became a hard 18. "A No-Brainer".
One became a soft 18 which I doubled.

The dealer politely turned his 4 into a twenty four.
HAPPY. HAPPY. JOY. JOY. HAPPY. HAPPY. JOY JOY

I turned my original $90 wager into a $495 windfall; which turned out to be almost precisely the $500 that I won for the day.

That phenomena is actually quite commonplace in all forms of BJ.
if one is a dedicated and skilled practitioner of the esoteric art of Card Counting that is.

It is not at all unusual that one or two or more "big hands" would determine the overall results for the day.

The wider and more aggressive the bet ramping is, the more true this phenomena is.
That should be obvious. Just extrapolate to the logical extremes. If flat betting or using a tight spread of perhaps 4-1 this sort of thing does not happen.
BUT imagine a 100-1 spread, where your one unit wagers (statistically) disappear in the shadows of the big bets
Ultimately you could win the vast majority of your small bets and still lose heavily [or vice versa], as the little bets are so small (relatively speaking) that they have virtually no bearing on the overall session result.

This is worth mentioning (for the benefit of novice Card Counters) - because I can recall, long ago (1985) and far away, (Reno, NV), when i was yet a newbie. I was seriously over-betting my bankroll. Thus I had experienced some major wins and losses. Mostly losses. and reviewing my session notes made it all quite clear to me.

 

[bjcount]

With Aces vs a dealer's Ace Hi-Opt II dictates hitting at −7 in a S17 game and −9 in a H17 game.

I do not use Level One counts but I guess that these indices would be the equivalent of −5 and −6. with Hi-Lo - for those using a "play-all" approach.

I'm not sure how we got to A,A vs A in this thread but by the way Flash, what are you using in Zen
DD H<-7
6d H<-6 ?

In RPC, I'm using:
DD H<-6
6d H<-3

Thanks

BJC

 

[FLASH1296]

For ZEN, Arnold Snyder gives us −7.

QFIT's software supports this, as it generates either −6 or−7 in all cases.

Oddly, S.B.A. gave some bizarre values as divergent as −1, and −14.

Long ago, I decided to mistrust "Statistical Blackjack Analyzer", specially for generating Risk Averse Indices.
For A6 vs. Deuce I expected +4 or +3. S.B.A. 5.0 generated a bizarre +14
in a 6 or 8 deck S17 shoe game; but I digress.

In a H17 game the dealer's increased chances of busting are ordinarily a factor in a hand where
the dealer shows an Ace or a Six, but in the case of this play it does not seem to be relevant;
but that is because ordinary card Counting is not effective in determining an index for this play.

The Indices that we use often have VERY little value when it comes to situations where the crucial cards are not counted.

In the case of A-A vs. A, what are the crucial cards other than the (obvious) TEN valued cards ?

7's, 8's, and 9's are all very important or are they?
Not really. They make good hands for player and dealer alike.

In any case these card ranks are either ignored or they are assigned
tags of ZERO or have a reduced value in Level Two counts.

"Ace-Reckoned" counts are not well structured for determining this index,
because the Aces and the Tens work in opposite directions for "playing" purposes,
while complementing each other for purposes of "bet-sizing".

The ratio of Ten Valued cards to Aces is 4 to 1, so the effect is to dilute the power of the "HIGH" cards.
What all of this means is that none of the standard Counts that we utilize is worth much when it comes to this play.
If the density of 10's is all that we have working for us then we do not have much at all.

For Hi-Opt II Aces are not included in the "main" count.
For the ZEN Count, the Aces are weighted at ½ the value of the TEN.
For R.P.C. Aces have the same weight as do Tens, [as is the case in ALL Level One counts].

Only a "multi-parameter" count can really handle A-A vs. A.
A surplus of available 7's, 8's, and 9's would have the effect
of increasing the likelihood of winning via a HIT.
Obviously a deficit of this grouping would encourage one to SPLIT as opposed to standing.

In the case of this playing decision, the same cards that are "good" for you are also "good" for the dealer.
This is a factor that pretty much nullifies the value of any index we compute.
As split Aces will receive one and only one card, the dealer, is "one up" on you, as s/he is not obliged to stand after drawing ONE card.

Lets look at a more common situation, e.g. you have a 16 and are facing a TEN Card. Sound familiar ?

A standard "PLUS" count, indicating a surplus of High Cards and/or deficit of Low Cards.
The scarcity of Small Cards and the abundance of High Cards prompt you to STAND,
increasing your winning chances while simultaneously decreasing the dealer's winning chances.
In cases like this, our Indices are powerful because of this "dual action".
This phenomena was dubbed the "Key Card" concept by poker expert David Sklansky.

The best examples of the "Key Card" concept are as follows:

Basic Strategy for Single Deck directs us to STAND with a 14 vs. TEN if the 14 is composed of a pair of Sevens.
Not only is a 7 the best card that you can draw, it is a card that weakens the dealer's hand,
as the dealer never wants to have a (sub-par) soft/hard 17.

Imagine you are still playing Single Deck and you have a completely accurate side count of 5's.
You have a 16 and the dealer shows a Face card. In this situation the 5's are "Key Cards".
If there is a surplus of 5's they will help you mightily if you catch one; but they are weak cards for the dealer to have with his Face card.

Knowing the relative density of the 5's is better than knowing a precisely perfect True Count.
If you have reached the 50% point in penetration and you have seen NO 5's then you HIT - irrespective of the True Count.
Of course, the opposite situation - where, (at any depth of penetration), ALL of the 5's have been depleted, you STAND, ignoring the True Count.

Overall, (after the Aces), the best cards to "Side Count" in a "pitch game" are the 7's because it is a valuable "KEY" card in so many situations.

12's, 13's and 14's all have an affinity for 7's - while the dealer
showing a Ten or a 9 or an 8 does not want to have a 7 to go along with it.

I apologize for this absurd digression. These pain-killing drugs may help block my chronic pain
(while I am not in a casino or driving a car) but they wreak havoc on my ability to stay focused.
Thus, this tangential disquisition.