Southpaw
Well-Known Member
When opening the strategy tables for the "Complete Zen Count," (in CVData) I notice that Arnold Snyder did not provide the user with indices for surrendering. He only advises one to surrender 16 v. 9, 10 and A, regardless of the count. This is probably because he knew the system was meant for shoe games where indices are less important.
Using the index generator that comes with CVData, I have generated surrender indices for the Zen Count.
The game I am generating them for has the following rules:
6D, .75 Pen, S17, SP to 4, RSA to 4, DAS, LS
I didn't choose to generate indices for all hard hands, but only ones that my intuition tells me may be important.
16 v. 8: 13
16 v. 9: 0
16 v. 10: -5
16 v. A: -3
15 v. 9: 4
15 v. 10: 0
15 v. A: 3
14 v. 10: 5
14 v. A: 10
Obviously, if you have 8,8 or 7,7 then you should not be using the 16 and 14 indices here because a separate index would be needed. I can generate this, but I'm not really interested in doing so. As usual, surrender when TC => index. If you suspect the validity of these indices, I, of course, solicit your opinion.
A few side notes for that you may want to consider. I was using a rounded TC, so you may want to consider this. Also, for the TC calc. I was using 1D resolution. Lastly, I use TC conversion factors because they allow me to calculate the TC much quicker. I programmed this sim accordingly as well.
These are the TC conversion factors (multiplication) I was using:
8D: .1
7D: .1
6D: .2
5D: .2
4D: .25
3D: .33
2D: .5
1D: 1
I did a sim a while back to evaluate the penalty for using these conversion factors instead of using exact division and the penalty, in my opinion, was absolutely negligible.
Edit: Although I'm not going to go in to specifics at the moment, adding these surrender indices has added a nice 0.10% advantage to the Zen Count in 6D games when playing pretty typical AP strategy (i.e., wonging and a nice spread).
SP
Using the index generator that comes with CVData, I have generated surrender indices for the Zen Count.
The game I am generating them for has the following rules:
6D, .75 Pen, S17, SP to 4, RSA to 4, DAS, LS
I didn't choose to generate indices for all hard hands, but only ones that my intuition tells me may be important.
16 v. 8: 13
16 v. 9: 0
16 v. 10: -5
16 v. A: -3
15 v. 9: 4
15 v. 10: 0
15 v. A: 3
14 v. 10: 5
14 v. A: 10
Obviously, if you have 8,8 or 7,7 then you should not be using the 16 and 14 indices here because a separate index would be needed. I can generate this, but I'm not really interested in doing so. As usual, surrender when TC => index. If you suspect the validity of these indices, I, of course, solicit your opinion.
A few side notes for that you may want to consider. I was using a rounded TC, so you may want to consider this. Also, for the TC calc. I was using 1D resolution. Lastly, I use TC conversion factors because they allow me to calculate the TC much quicker. I programmed this sim accordingly as well.
These are the TC conversion factors (multiplication) I was using:
8D: .1
7D: .1
6D: .2
5D: .2
4D: .25
3D: .33
2D: .5
1D: 1
I did a sim a while back to evaluate the penalty for using these conversion factors instead of using exact division and the penalty, in my opinion, was absolutely negligible.
Edit: Although I'm not going to go in to specifics at the moment, adding these surrender indices has added a nice 0.10% advantage to the Zen Count in 6D games when playing pretty typical AP strategy (i.e., wonging and a nice spread).
SP
Last edited: