True count

[Whatsmytotal]

Since the proper betting decisions and BS variations depend on the true count, how is it that a counter can constantly keep computing the true count every for every card that changes the running count? In general I am looking for a thorough explanation of the true count.

 

[Sonny]

In order to find the true count just divide the running count by the number of unplayed decks left. The true count is really just a “running count per deck” figure. For example, a running count of 9 with 3 decks left is a true count of 9 / 3 = +3. A running count of -7 with 5 decks left is -7 / 5 = -1.4, which you would probably floor to -1.

You will calculate the true count for every betting decision and perhaps again for a playing decision (although often not). You do not need to calculate it after seeing each card.

This is covered in section 7 of the Gamemaster’s articles. They are a great place to start:

http://bj21.com/gamemaster/gamemasterclassicsindex.shtml

-Sonny-

 

[dacium]

All you have to do is do it in jumps. Look at the deck and estimate the cards gone. Instead of doing a 'true count' you can just remember what count you need to go in at. For example at the start of the shoe, to get +2 you need +12! In other words its almost never werth playing at the start of a shoe. Then 1 deck in you only need +10, then +8 etc. Spreading is second nature, like +11 at 3 decks left is +3 and a bit, so werth a double bet.

 

[sagefr0g]

All you have to do is do it in jumps. Look at the deck and estimate the cards gone. Instead of doing a 'true count' you can just remember what count you need to go in at. For example at the start of the shoe, to get +2 you need +12! In other words its almost never werth playing at the start of a shoe. Then 1 deck in you only need +10, then +8 etc. Spreading is second nature, like +11 at 3 decks left is +3 and a bit, so werth a double bet.

yeah i tend to keep track of what the true count is in that manner also. but i do compute the true count before raising my bets. i just use the RC as a sort of radar as to when to bother computing the TC.
i think it's interesting that doing hi/lo that way is similar to how you do KO.

best regards,
mr fr0g

 

[twinturboguy]

But for hi/lo don't you need to divide the running count to the number of 1/2 decks? For example, I have a running count of +2 and 2 decks are dealt in a 6D game leaving me with 4 decks. So would I need to divide the count by 8(2x4) giving me true count of 1/4?

 

[zengrifter]

But for hi/lo don't you need to divide the running count to the number of 1/2 decks? For example, I have a running count of +2 and 2 decks are dealt in a 6D game leaving me with 4 decks. So would I need to divide the count by 8(2x4) giving me true count of 1/4?

Some HiLos are calibrated for 1/2D TC (HiLoLite for example) and some are calibrated for 1D TC, which adds to the confusion. But for the classic 1DTC HiLo it is not necessary to divide to the nearest 1/2D UNTILL there is 1.75Ds or less remaining. zg

 

[sagefr0g]

But for hi/lo don't you need to divide the running count to the number of 1/2 decks? For example, I have a running count of +2 and 2 decks are dealt in a 6D game leaving me with 4 decks. So would I need to divide the count by 8(2x4) giving me true count of 1/4?

twinturboguy i wouldn't bother dividing by fractions of a deck. just divide by full decks ie. in the case of your six deck game if 1 deck has been dealt out divide the running count by 5, if 2 decks have been dealt out divide the running count by 4, if 3 decks have dealt out divide the running count by 3, if 4 decks have been dealt out divide the running count by 2. i'd also suggest truncating your true count by flooring it or rounding down to be conservative. for example say you have a running count of +8 with one deck dealt out. so your tc =8/5 = 1 (if you round down).
later on after you gain more experience you might want to figure your true count by fractions of a deck but you should do quite well just using full deck computations.
question are you trying to learn hi/lo lite or just the plain generic hi/lo ? i'd suggest going with the good ole plain geneic hi/lo .

best regards,
mr fr0g

 

[twinturboguy]

I'm going with the hi/lo lite for now and considering other forms of counting such as KO or Red Seven later. Until I master hi/lo counts, I might move onto unbalanced counts. At the moment I can't keep negative counts in my head for too long until my brain explodes.

As for true counts, I use the hi/lo lite because I find it easier that its calibrated to counting by 1/2Ds. This helps get rid of any fractions that might take up my time at the tables (not very fast with math). But then again, playing 6-8 deck shoes, I think estimating by 1/2 or 1/4 isn't necessary unless I'm playing a 1-2D game which I might not due to poor penetration.

P.S.

When I find the true count, do I factor in the built-in house advantage or advantage off the top? Which is usually around -1/2%. For example, If I get a true count of 1% do I subtract 1/2%? I'm just making sure if thats correct according to my readings of a few BJ books.

 

[sagefr0g]

I'm going with the hi/lo lite for now and considering other forms of counting such as KO or Red Seven later. Until I master hi/lo counts, I might move onto unbalanced counts. At the moment I can't keep negative counts in my head for too long until my brain explodes.

you really need to understand the red seven count in order to understand the hi/lo lite as described by Snyder in Blackbelt in Blackjack.
i'm not fully conversant in hi/lo lite. if you was using hi/lo you really would not have to deal much with negative numbers at all. once you get into a significant range of negative numbers is when you would be sitting out rounds, taking a potty break or getting up to stretch you know just generally wonging out.

As for true counts, I use the hi/lo lite because I find it easier that its calibrated to counting by 1/2Ds. This helps get rid of any fractions that might take up my time at the tables (not very fast with math). But then again, playing 6-8 deck shoes, I think estimating by 1/2 or 1/4 isn't necessary unless I'm playing a 1-2D game which I might not due to poor penetration.

it's surprising too me that you find calibrating the count by 1/2D's easier than dividing by a whole number and then rounding down but i guess it's different for us all as to what we are comfortable with.

When I find the true count, do I factor in the built-in house advantage or advantage off the top? Which is usually around -1/2%. For example, If I get a true count of 1% do I subtract 1/2%? I'm just making sure if thats correct according to my readings of a few BJ books.

when you find the true count using hi/lo lite if you are following the procedure as described by Snyder you will have what Snyder refers to as a 'true edge count' that has figured in it the house advantage. you also have to use the special hi/lo lite index numbers for your play decisions as i understand it.
like i say i'm not very conversant with this version of hi/lo. personally i find it a bit convoluted compared to hi/lo .

best regards,
mr fr0g