Simple bet question
- Thread starter Dopple
- Start date
kewljason
Well-Known Member
Rules (dd and more) most certainly do matter! We need to determine if a TC of +1 means we are playing with an advantage or not and can't do that without first determining starting house advantage. So you really haven't given enough info.Dopple said:
6 deck h17, game with 1/2 deck dealt and a count TC of +1 probably is still negative EV.
1 deck game with decent rules with a TC of +1 and 1/2 deck gone would be positive EV.
Jack_Black
Well-Known Member
Depends on how nerdy and technical you want to get? what count system are you using?
I would say yes on that you are now 2 aces rich. the stuff I've read about ASC for betting is that you always add or subtract from the TC by however much you are ace rich or ace poor
I would say yes on that you are now 2 aces rich. the stuff I've read about ASC for betting is that you always add or subtract from the TC by however much you are ace rich or ace poor
Last edited:
kewljason
Well-Known Member
I agree with 21forme. The extra aces have already been incorporated into your TC. So if you now figure you have an advantage because extra aces remain to be played you are in a sence double counting or putting too much value on the aces. Now if you were using a non-ace reckoned count such as Hi-opt 1 or 2, and had a Tc of 0 (which of course didn't include aces) but knew that there were extra aces remaining you would have an advantage at that time.21forme said:
Jack_Black
Well-Known Member
What the? I assumed he was playing an ace neutral strategy since he was talking about DD and that he was talking about a 2 ace rich situation. And since he was also asking about how much to bet, and since ASC for betting purposes are used for ace neutral strategies, you only conclude he was talking about that.kewljason said:
kewljason
Well-Known Member
I guess it is my bad then Jack. I generally try not to assume, as we all know the trouble associated with that, however in the absence of mention of another count, I did make the mistake of assuming the poster was using hi-lo, by far the most widely used count. So I will defer back to my original response in this thread that not enough info was provided.Jack_Black said:
Wow thanks for all the great responses. I should have mentioned I use UAPC and we dont count aces for strategy so they dont effect tc except for betting.
In the above situation in UAPC you have a 6 count for betting divided by 3 half decks remaining giving you a betting tc of 2, clearly an advantage.
In constructing the post I wanted it to be only one ace rich being a betting tc of 1 and seeking to find if others thought an ace betting tc of 1 would be just as strong as a normal tc of 1 using hi low or an other system than counts aces as -1, and without an ace side count.
I appreciate your comments. In uapc aces count 3 for betting purpose ( the excess or depletion thereof in relation to unplayed cards)
In the above situation in UAPC you have a 6 count for betting divided by 3 half decks remaining giving you a betting tc of 2, clearly an advantage.
In constructing the post I wanted it to be only one ace rich being a betting tc of 1 and seeking to find if others thought an ace betting tc of 1 would be just as strong as a normal tc of 1 using hi low or an other system than counts aces as -1, and without an ace side count.
I appreciate your comments. In uapc aces count 3 for betting purpose ( the excess or depletion thereof in relation to unplayed cards)
Jack_Black
Well-Known Member
close. but that's how I act normally to throw the PCs off my trail.psyduck said: