Indices vs. Basic Strategy

[Deathclutch]

First of all I'd like to thank everyone for your their help because your advice has me winning so far, but I've run across this situation here.

Now I know that my casino will have a slightly different basic strategy due to surrender being allowed and also the H17, so my basic strategy looks like this.

Now my assumption is that basic strategy is the best way to play certain rules at a count of 0.

Now this is where my problem comes in. I'm playing using the KISS III count and am starting to use the different indices as are explained in Fred's book. Some of his indices go against basic strategy even at my beginning count, which is making me wonder if the indices were made to play against a game with a S17 rule set. Let me provide a couple examples.

As you can see on the chart BS says I should surrender a 15 vs. a 10. Well in the book it says I surrender a 15 vs. a 10 at 12+ for a shoe game. (For those that don't know the count starts at 9). So if I'm playing heads up and this is my first hand would I go ahead and hit against it as if surrender wasn't an option, or would I follow BS?

Another example would be the book states I should Double a 11 vs. an Ace at 20+. According to BS I always should. Which one do I follow?

Last example. The book says I should Double down on A/7 vs. a 2 at 19+. BS says I always should. Thank you guys again for all the help, you've all already helped me win more than I thought I would be so soon.

 

[k_c]

First of all I'd like to thank everyone for your their help because your advice has me winning so far, but I've run across this situation here.

Now I know that my casino will have a slightly different basic strategy due to surrender being allowed and also the H17, so my basic strategy looks like this.

Now my assumption is that basic strategy is the best way to play certain rules at a count of 0.

Now this is where my problem comes in. I'm playing using the KISS III count and am starting to use the different indices as are explained in Fred's book. Some of his indices go against basic strategy even at my beginning count, which is making me wonder if the indices were made to play against a game with a S17 rule set. Let me provide a couple examples.

As you can see on the chart BS says I should surrender a 15 vs. a 10. Well in the book it says I surrender a 15 vs. a 10 at 12+ for a shoe game. (For those that don't know the count starts at 9). So if I'm playing heads up and this is my first hand would I go ahead and hit against it as if surrender wasn't an option, or would I follow BS?

Another example would be the book states I should Double a 11 vs. an Ace at 20+. According to BS I always should. Which one do I follow?

Last example. The book says I should Double down on A/7 vs. a 2 at 19+. BS says I always should. Thank you guys again for all the help, you've all already helped me win more than I thought I would be so soon.

Basic strategy is the best way to play off the top of a full shoe. Therefore if it's a freshly shuffled shoe, use basic strategy.

Indices are what is best on average over the range of all possible shoe penetrations determined by simulation. If you're deeper into the shoe it's best on average to use the index play.

In most cases basic strategy and indices are in agreement, but not always.

 

[Deathclutch]

Thanks for the answer. So is there not a definitive concrete answer on this? It would seem that in a game of math there should he a right way and a wrong way with little guesswork.

 

[ycming]

How i see it, if you don't count then just play BS perfectly.

If you count meaning you have extra information then you must adjust the BS (indices)

Ming

 

[Deathclutch]

Thanks Ming. If I'm understanding you correctly you are saying I would hit on the 15 V 10 scenerio I put above, even at a TC of 0 and even though BS says I should surrender because my indices will be more accurate?

 

[iCountNTrack]

Thanks Ming. If I'm understanding you correctly you are saying I would hit on the 15 V 10 scenerio I put above, even at a TC of 0 and even though BS says I should surrender because my indices will be more accurate?

A very common misconception is that BS playing decisions should be identical to index play at when true count is zero (balanced count), while this might be the case for many hands, there are few cases when this is not true.
You have to keep in mind that Basic strategy is the optimal playing decision that maximizes your ev for a FULL DECK. When you are counting cards you have extra information that you use in order to maximize your ev (for non-risk averse indices) with the help of indices.
so bottom line you either have to stick with BS for playing decisions or indices, obviously the latter is more powerful especially for the most frequent hands.

 

[Deathclutch]

A very common misconception is that BS playing decisions should be identical to index play at when true count is zero (balanced count), while this might be the case for many hands, there are few cases when this is not true.
You have to keep in mind that Basic strategy is the optimal playing decision that maximizes your ev for a FULL DECK. When you are counting cards you have extra information that you use in order to maximize your ev (for non-risk averse indices) with the help of indices.
so bottom line you either have to stick with BS for playing decisions or indices, obviously the latter is more powerful especially for the most frequent hands.

Great! That's just the information I was looking for. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[jack.jackson]

A very common misconception is that BS playing decisions should be identical to index play at when true count is zero (balanced count), while this might be the case for many hands, there are few cases when this is not true.
You have to keep in mind that Basic strategy is the optimal playing decision that maximizes your ev for a FULL DECK. When you are counting cards you have extra information that you use in order to maximize your ev (for non-risk averse indices) with the help of indices.
so bottom line you either have to stick with BS for playing decisions or indices, obviously the latter is more powerful especially for the most frequent hands.

My count,(ao2) says to double 9v2 @+2, but yet; this is a BS play for single deck!

Assuming the above is true, does this mean, I can/could double @0, with 1deck remaning, in, lets say, a 6deck game?

 

[iCountNTrack]

My count,(ao2) says to double 9v2 @+2, but yet; this is a BS play for single deck!

Assuming the above is true, does this mean, I can/could double @0, with 1deck remaning, in, lets say, a 6deck game?

It is actually tempting to do that but you should stick with your index play, True count of zero does not necessarily mean a normal composition of the remaining single deck (although on average it should be similar) but yeah for compositions of the remaining that is close to normal composition doubling the nine vs a 2 would be better than hitting. I wouldnt worry about the hand too much, the gain is about 1% and the hand is not a very frequent one.

 

[k_c]

My count,(ao2) says to double 9v2 @+2, but yet; this is a BS play for single deck!

Assuming the above is true, does this mean, I can/could double @0, with 1deck remaning, in, lets say, a 6deck game?

There's a difference between a full single deck and a 52 card slug of what remains from a six deck shoe that is neutral in count according to a given counting system.

For the full single deck it is guaranteed that you know the composition. For the 52 card slug you don't have any other guarantee relative to it other than its count is neutral.

For the full single deck there is one and only one subset of cards possible and expected values can be calculated. For the 52 card slug there are countless subsets of cards possible if you want to be exact. That is why simulation is used. Simulation endeavors to find the best play on average for all penetrations including full shoe. It may not be the best play for any particular case, but should be best on average.

 

[bj bob]

Basic strategy is the best way to play off the top of a full shoe. Therefore if it's a freshly shuffled shoe, use basic strategy.

Indices are what is best on average over the range of all possible shoe penetrations determined by simulation. If you're deeper into the shoe it's best on average to use the index play.

In most cases basic strategy and indices are in agreement, but not always.

Good case in point, k_c. I came across this very same situation last week. Playing DD, H-17, DOA heads up with the dealer, I was dealt a 6,3 v.2 off the top. Now BS says to dd, but the count was not yet high enough, hence the dilemma. I did dd anyway and then began to wonder if level II counts would have picked up on this, especially if my 9 was composed of 4,5 rather than 6,3 or even 7,2.

 

[FLASH1296]

IF you are playing heads up and using Hi-Opt II or AO II - you get to see just 3 cards.

If all three are 4's and 5's your running count is +6

The True Count would be +6 divided by 1.9 decks, so the True Count is +3 if rounded and +2 if floored.

If instead, you held 6-3 or 7-2 and the dealer held a 6 your running count would be +3.

The True Count would be +3 divided by 1.9 decks, so the True Count is +2 if rounded and +1 if floored.

In either case you'd be doubling that hand.

It is important to note that 9 vs. 2 is not a big moneymaker, so don't sweat the small stuff.

 

[bj bob]

When you are playing heads up and using Hi-Opt II or AO II you get to see just 3 cards.

If only those three 4's and 5's are seen your running count is +6

The True Count would be +6 divided by 1.9 decks, so the True Count is +3 if rounded and +2 if floored.

In either case you'd be doubling that hand.

It is important to note that 9 vs. 2 is not a big moneymaker, so don't sweat the small stuff.

Yeah, I already know it's pretty much trivial: it's more a theoretical curiosity. In one example that I cited though, I used the 7,2 v. 2 scenario which, depending on one's tag system would not exceed the dd threshold and therefore would simply be hit if one forget to revert back to BS off the top of a DD, while a 4,5 v. 2 would constitute a higher TC and therefore be doubled.

 

[jack.jackson]

There's a difference between a full single deck and a 52 card slug of what remains from a six deck shoe that is neutral in count according to a given counting system.

For the full single deck it is guaranteed that you know the composition. For the 52 card slug you don't have any other guarantee relative to it other than its count is neutral.

For the full single deck there is one and only one subset of cards possible and expected values can be calculated. For the 52 card slug there are countless subsets of cards possible if you want to be exact. That is why simulation is used. Simulation endeavors to find the best play on average for all penetrations including full shoe. It may not be the best play for any particular case, but should be best on average.

Thanks, Flash IC&T and KC.

Of course, the 9v2 was just an example.

Honestly Speaking, (may be wrong) I will always double 9v2 @0 if theres 1deck or less, to be played, in any given number of decks(primarily DD).

Interestingly enough, it seemingly always seems to work out, to my favor. The deeper into the deck, I get, the better hard doubling seems to "work"(at same TC). Is there a 'floating advantage' for Hard Doubles as well? Or do you think, it just seems that way to me? Or maybe ive just been lucky