Side Count of A For Playing Near Worthless?

blackjack avenger · Mar 10, 2011

If you use an A reckoned count the A is -X. One can use an A side count to adjust playing indicies. The indicies would be different then what one would use without an A side count. However, this extra work is almost worthless because we know Lite indices and RA indicies show indicies have a broad barrier of indice precision. One can be off by 1 or 2 TC's and still be accurate. The A side count would rarely effect a strategy play enough to make it worthwhile.

Wong in the earlier edition of Professional Blackjack had A side count info for hi lo and halves for strategy variations. He stated then it was not worth much and later editions of the book dropped the info entirely.

Nothing new here as it's rarely mentioned to keep an A side count for playing decisions in an A reckoned system.

:joker::whip:
good cards

moo321 · Mar 11, 2011

It's not near nearly worthless. It MAY be worth 10% in a good pitch game with a lot of indices. It's certainly good for insurance. I'ts just a pain in the ass. I've certainly never bothered with it, and would only do so if I was already using a lot more indices than I use.

blackjack avenger · Mar 11, 2011

Not So Sure

An A side count for playing only effects a few indicies. So whether one uses a lot of indices or not does not matter.

Regarding these 3 important hands; I think they have A side count adjustments, that are in the ILL 18:
10 v 10
10 v A
insurance

One has a range of potentially correct plays from EV to RA. So anything within the range is in essence correct. So the times when an A side count would matter is not often.

If indicies had to be precise or you paid a huge penality then an A side count would matter more, but because precision of indices is not that important the precision of an A side count just isn't much of a factor.

good cards
:joker::whip:

zengrifter · Mar 11, 2011

Yes, Ace is nearly worthless...
... whereas 7s properly side-counted are very strong. zg

moo321 · Mar 11, 2011

blackjack avenger said:
An A side count for playing only effects a few indicies. So whether one uses a lot of indices or not does not matter.

Regarding these 3 important hands; I think they have A side count adjustments, that are in the ILL 18:
10 v 10
10 v A
insurance

One has a range of potentially correct plays from EV to RA. So anything within the range is in essence correct. So the times when an A side count would matter is not often.

If indicies had to be precise or you paid a huge penality then an A side count would matter more, but because precision of indices is not that important the precision of an A side count just isn't much of a factor.

good cards
:joker::whip:

I should clarify. I would spend time memorizing more indices before I would spend time learning to side count aces.

Southpaw · Mar 11, 2011

zengrifter said:
Yes, Ace is nearly worthless...
... whereas 7s properly side-counted are very strong. zg

Are there any articles published about this? I have heard of this, although infrequently?

Is it just so that you know that they make you want to hit 12-14, but stand on 15-16? I suppose it would also have an effect for surrendering as well.

Spaw

FLASH1296 · Mar 11, 2011

The Ace Side-Count has considerable value for Bet Sizing.
It also strengthens your Insurance Coefficient.
It is significant in many plays - especially pair splits and doubles.

The problem is that the value of the Ace Side count is radically diminished in a shoe game.

For Basic Strategy Departures, the SEVEN, is far and away the strongest card to Side-Count;
especially useful when you have a stiff or the dealer shows an 8 or 9.
The improvement to Playing Efficiency is dramatic.

moo321 · Mar 11, 2011

Southpaw said:
Are there any articles published about this? I have heard of this, although infrequently?

Is it just so that you know that they make you want to hit 12-14, but stand on 15-16? I suppose it would also have an effect for surrendering as well.

Spaw

Yeah, your stiffs vs. low, especially 2,3,4. Also 14 vs. 9-A.

zengrifter · Mar 11, 2011

Southpaw said:
Are there any articles published about this? I have heard of this, although infrequently?

For starters -
See - Theory of Blackjack Chapter 5 — "Multiparameter Card Counting Systems"
Also see - HOW TO BEAT SINGLE DECK BLACKJACK by Michael Hall
Simply counting the 7s and utilizing an effective bivaluate adjustment skyrockets your PE for playing stiffs. zg

Southpaw · Mar 11, 2011

zengrifter said:
For starters -
See - Theory of Blackjack Chapter 5 — "Multiparameter Card Counting Systems"
Also see - HOW TO BEAT SINGLE DECK BLACKJACK by Michael Hall
Simply counting the 7s and utilizing an effective bivaluate adjustment skyrockets your PE for playing stiffs. zg

Ahh the good Michael Hall. Was just reading an St'ing article by him earlier.

Thanks,

Spaw

jack.jackson · Mar 11, 2011

hers another

http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/counting/gordon.htm (Archive copy)

Example: Say you have 88 and dealer shows a Ten. Theres been 3 Aces in a half deck of play. You add +1 to your RC, making you less likely to split. Or say you have 10v10 and theres been 1 x-tra Ace played(on avg). You now would subtract -2 from your RC for every XTRA ace(please note, this is a L1 count).

Code:

[B]DEALER 10[/B]

HITTING 17-12
    A     2     3     4     5     6     7     8     9    10
    1     1     2     3    -2    -2    -1     1     0    -1 
    0     0     1     2     2    -1     1     0     0    -1 
    0     0     0     1     2     3     1     0    -1    -1 
    0    -1     0     0     1     2     7     0    -1    -2 
    0    -1    -1     0     0     1     6     6    -2    -3 
    0    -1    -1    -1    -1     0     4     5     6    -3 

DOUBLING 11-10
    A     2     3     4     5     6     7     8     9    10
    1     1     1     1     1     1     1     1     0    -1 
  [U][B] -2  [/B][/U]   1     1     1     1     1     2     1     0    -1 

HITTING SOFT 18
    A     2     3     4     5     6     7     8     9    10
    1     4     7    -2    -1    -1    -5    -2     1     0 

SPLITTING (88)(33)(22)(AA)
    A     2     3     4     5     6     7     8     9    10
   [U][B] 1 [/B]  [/U]  1     2     0     0     0     2     0    -1    -1 
    1     0    -3    -1     0     4     7     7    -2    -3 
    1    -1     0     0    -1     0     0     5     5    -3 
    1     1     1     1     1     1     1     1     0    -1

jjj

zengrifter · Mar 11, 2011

jack said:

http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/counting/gordon.htm (Archive copy)

Example: Say you have 88 and dealer shows a Ten. Theres been 3 Aces in a half deck of play. You add +1 to your RC, making you less likely to split. Or say you have 10v10 and theres been 1 x-tra Ace played(on avg). You now would subtract -2 from your RC for every XTRA ace(please note, this is a L1 count).

Code:

[B]DEALER 10[/B]

HITTING 17-12
    A     2     3     4     5     6     7     8     9    10
    1     1     2     3    -2    -2    -1     1     0    -1 
    0     0     1     2     2    -1     1     0     0    -1 
    0     0     0     1     2     3     1     0    -1    -1 
    0    -1     0     0     1     2     7     0    -1    -2 
    0    -1    -1     0     0     1     6     6    -2    -3 
    0    -1    -1    -1    -1     0     4     5     6    -3 

DOUBLING 11-10
    A     2     3     4     5     6     7     8     9    10
    1     1     1     1     1     1     1     1     0    -1 
  [U][B] -2  [/B][/U]   1     1     1     1     1     2     1     0    -1 

HITTING SOFT 18
    A     2     3     4     5     6     7     8     9    10
    1     4     7    -2    -1    -1    -5    -2     1     0 

SPLITTING (88)(33)(22)(AA)
    A     2     3     4     5     6     7     8     9    10
   [U][B] 1 [/B]  [/U]  1     2     0     0     0     2     0    -1    -1 
    1     0    -3    -1     0     4     7     7    -2    -3 
    1    -1     0     0    -1     0     0     5     5    -3 
    1     1     1     1     1     1     1     1     0    -1

jjj

Excatly why its not worth the effort.
7s ARE worth the effort in 1-2D. zg

FLASH1296 · Mar 11, 2011

J.J.,

I may be stoned, but I think that you are mistaken when you say … "Theres been 3 Aces in a half deck of play. You add +1 to your RC"

IF 3 Aces have been depleted in half a deck, that is one WORSE than the expected two. Ergo, you deduct from the R.C.

jack.jackson · Mar 11, 2011

FLASH1296 said:
J.J.,

I may be stoned, but I think that you are mistaken when you say … "Theres been 3 Aces in a half deck of play. You add +1 to your RC"

IF 3 Aces have been depleted in half a deck, that is one WORSE than the expected two. Ergo, you deduct from the R.C.

In my TWO examples above(wasnt very thorough) i demonstrated, how in one scenario you would ADD while in scenario 2 you would SUBTRACT(depends on the hand). In other words, if the remaining deck, is 1 Ace poor(1 xtra Ace seen), you ADD for 88vX while SUBTRACT for 10vX according to the chart.

jack.jackson · Mar 11, 2011

zengrifter said:
Excatly why its not worth the effort.
7s ARE worth the effort in 1-2D. zg

I wish you would of told me that, before i spent two years studying those chart lol.

zengrifter · Mar 11, 2011

jack said:
I wish you would of told me that, before i spent two years studying those chart lol.

I'm sorry, that was when I was distracted and stalking the wild tree octopus. zg

zengrifter · Mar 11, 2011

zengrifter said:
Excatly why its not worth the effort.
7s ARE worth the effort in 1-2D. zg

I am reconsidering the emphasis on 1-2D.
I know of at least one pro's recent (5 yrs) extensive simming and he found that even in 6D the multiparameter count, either 7s or 7&8 as a block, held a good extra margin, surprisingly. How much?? Anyone? zg

FLASH1296 · Mar 11, 2011

jack said:
In my TWO examples above(wasnt very thorough) i demonstrated, how in one scenario you would ADD while in scenario 2 you would SUBTRACT(depends on the hand). In other words, if the remaining deck, is 1 Ace poor(1 xtra Ace seen), you ADD for 88vX while SUBTRACT for 10vX according to the chart.

In both instances that you cite, a SURPLUS Ace benefits you, Ergo … the RC is inflated.

With both 8-8 v X ~ and ~ 10 v X you WANT extra Aces available.

It is 100% clear that with Aces (and especially with Sevens), Surplus/Deficit Aces need to be
employed to ADD to ~ or ~ SUBTRACT from the R.C. depending on the particular hand match_up.

jack.jackson · Mar 11, 2011

With both 8-8 v X ~ and ~ 10 v X you WANT extra Aces available.

I agree, since an Ace would give you A,8 for 19 or 21 if you happen to catch a 2 on your split 8 as well. And of course an Ace would give you 21 on your doubled Ten. So we both agree, that aces help these hands right, right. So for every xtra ace left in the deck the more likely we are to double or split. That would mean ADDING to our RC for XvX while SUBTRACTING for 88vX, since 88vX is a REVERSE split. In other splits, you would be adding as well, EXCEPT for 88vX since its a reverse split.

And of course, if the remaining deck was lean one Ace,(instead of rich one Ace) our calculations would be opposite from above.

FLASH1296 · Mar 11, 2011

You are saying that 8-8 v X is a "Reverse Index".
At least according to the reference you are citing.

Please explain how you define "Reverse Index"
So that everyone shall "be on the same page."

Side Count of A For Playing Near Worthless?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Banned

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Banned

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Banned

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Banned

Banned

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member