Questions on Uston APC

[queued]

Hello,
I am trying to interpret the Uston APC Numbers Matrix and
have some questions on how to interpret them.
Hopefully someone here plays this system and would be kind enough
to help straighten out my confusion.

1)The zero numbers ("0") are perplexing to me in that Ken's
original instructions are to

"Deviate from Basic Strategy if the half-deck true count
equals or exceeds the numbers in the matrix"

yet doing this seems to result in basic strategy deviations
even at a zero count. For example, he gives a "0" for the
following hitting/standing plays: player 12 vs dealer's 4,
player 16 vs dealer's 10. Normally basic strategy would
say to stand on a 12 vs 4 but a "0" here would imply that the
player hit for this hand. Why? (I am under the impression
basic strategy itself implies that the count is zero since by
definition we are not counting) Also, the BS says to hit
a 16 vs 10 (unless surrender available) and Ken is seeming
to say to stand here on a count of zero?

For the single deck games I am also wondering what other
"0" numbers mean. For example, in the Hard Doubling
matrix a "0" in the player 9 vs dealer 2 comes up. Is Ken
asking to deviate here? Normally we are supposed to
double but the "0" would imply just hitting. Player A,4 vs
dealer 4 also gives us a "0" for Ken's matrix implying not
to double. I do not get it.

The pair splitting matrix is confusing on the zero spots
as well; 6,6 vs dealer's 2, 9,9 vs dealer's 2, and 3,3 vs
dealer's 4. The zero "0" in all these spots imply that one
again would deviate from BS on a count of zero. Why?

How do I interpret these "0" markings and in which direction
from the zero(postive or negative) should I deviate from BS for?

2) Do you sometimes need to reference more than one Number's
Matrix for a single card decision? For example, if the
true count is +4 Ken's "Splitting Pairs" chart says to deviate
from BS at player 6,6 vs dealer 0. Do I just hit here or do I
now go to the "Hitting or Standing" chart and see that the
count is at least a +3 (in which case I should stand)?

Thanks in advance for any help!
queued

 

[KenSmith]

Excellent question

Equating basic strategy with an index number of 0 is a common misconception.

Let's take the best example of 16vT. This is a very close decision, and the index is 0, indicating that you should stand at or above a true count of 0. Yet, basic strategy says to hit this hand.

Off the top of a fresh shuffle, let's say you get (T,6) vs dealer T. The true count is slightly negative, since we've seen two face cards and one 6. Thus, basic strategy (hit) and the counting index actually do agree.

In other words, basic strategy takes into account the cards used up in the hand. That's why basic strategy is not the same as a counting strategy at TC=0.

As for your second question... Just like using a basic strategy chart, start by deciding whether splitting the sixes is appropriate or not, by using the pair splitting index. If you do not split the pair of sixes, then treat it as a hard 12 and use the hit/stand index to decide whether to hit or stand on the 12.

 

[queued]

Grateful response!

Ken,

Thanks very much for such a clear and consise resolution
to my questions....I have been wondering and searching for
the answers for some time now.
From your response I think the directions(positive true
counts or negative true counts) have become clear for
those "0" spots as to which direction from the
zero TC to deviate from Basic Strategy. If the existing hand
is negative deviate in the positive TC direction from "0" and if the
existing hand has a positive TC then deviate in the negative
direction from "0". I hope this checks out with the
zero spot TC examples below(are the belows and aboves correct???)?

1) player A, 4 vs dealer 4 = +4 TC so deviate from BS at 0 TC or below
2) player 9, 9 vs dealer 2 = -1 TC so deviate from BS at 0 TC or above
3) player 6, 6 vs dealer 2 = +5 TC so deviate from BS at 0 TC or below
4) player 3, 3 vs dealer 4 = +6 TC so deviate from BS at 0 TC or below
5) player 9 vs dealer 2 = +4,+5,or +6 TC so deviate from BS at 0 TC or below
6) player 12 vs dealer 4 = 0>+6 TC so deviate from BS at 0 TC or below

Thanks again ahead of time for your verification!
queued

 

[queued]

follow on inquiries for soft doubling and pair splits

In trying to reconcile the mdbj matrix counts with the
correct basic strategy move for zero TC I have stumbled
on two non zero TC counts, as well, that do not seem
to make sense:

1)The mdbj matrix for soft doubling a player A, 3 vs
a dealer 4 shows a +1. In deciphering the chart one
is supposed to "deviate from BS" at a positive 1
or above true count. The running count here, as far as
basic strategy is concerned on a new deck, would be +4
and the true count would be at least +2(+4 x .6). The problem
I am having is that this implies I should deviate and
not double on a single deck game whereas BS says
that I should double. Where am I going wrong here?

2)The mdbj matrix for splitting a player 6, 6 vs
a dealer 3 shows a +1 or above TC. My TC comes
out to at least +3(+6 x .6) which again does not
correlate with the correct basic strategy move at
the same count. BS says split while mdbj says
not to split. Any ideas?

queued