11 vs 10 Index?
- Thread starter SammyBoy
- Start date
zengrifter
Banned
Re: 11 vs 10 Index? CLICK. ON 'INDICES' (left)
Abraham de Moivre
Well-Known Member
Try -4.
Anything less than -4 (and 0 is way less) and you are leaving money on the table. Basic strategy of always doubling will make you more than only doubling in positive counts on this play. So just hit it in the high negative counts only.
Anything less than -4 (and 0 is way less) and you are leaving money on the table. Basic strategy of always doubling will make you more than only doubling in positive counts on this play. So just hit it in the high negative counts only.
Abraham de Moivre
Well-Known Member
11 vs 9 is the same, so now you know 1 more.
Necessary adjustment
Go out and buy Wong's PBJ and learn a bunch of indices.
But, if you have to choose, also choose indices that have + values to learn, since they will be critical when you have big bets out. Who cares about a -4 index with a min bet out? It has almost no value.
Go out and buy Wong's PBJ and learn a bunch of indices.
But, if you have to choose, also choose indices that have + values to learn, since they will be critical when you have big bets out. Who cares about a -4 index with a min bet out? It has almost no value.
Abraham de Moivre
Well-Known Member
I learned it.
Simply because the double down on 11 when looking at a dealer's 10 up card was kind of a pet peeve. Much like the ploppie who doesn't like to split 8s because it involves putting up additional money, it just ticked me off to double a bet (even a small bet) in a highly negative count when I knew I wasn't going to get the cards.
You are right however. Positive indices are much more valuable than Negative ones. And indices for frequent hands (like 16 and 12) are much better than hands like A,A vs A.
Soft 18 vs A is another one of my pet peeves. Stand at +1.
Simply because the double down on 11 when looking at a dealer's 10 up card was kind of a pet peeve. Much like the ploppie who doesn't like to split 8s because it involves putting up additional money, it just ticked me off to double a bet (even a small bet) in a highly negative count when I knew I wasn't going to get the cards.
You are right however. Positive indices are much more valuable than Negative ones. And indices for frequent hands (like 16 and 12) are much better than hands like A,A vs A.
Soft 18 vs A is another one of my pet peeves. Stand at +1.
Re: Necessary adjustment
At one time I owned Wong's PBJ, before I knew how to count. At the time counting seemed so complicated that I thought I'd never learn to do it. I got so frustrated after several big losing sessions as a BS ploppy, that I swore off all gambling. I gave or threw away all of my gambling books. About six months later I went back to playing blackjack, and still could not win. This time it just made me more determined to learn how to play a winning game. So I began reading online and practicing everyday, until it became almost second nature. Now I'm practicing with the flash cards to learn the indices. I've also noticed that even though I'm playing often in casinos or playing with SAGE blackjack on the computer, I still need to do the counting drills with actual cards to keep me sharp. Wong's PBJ is the only book I really regret getting rid of. I will buy another copy this week.
I've become much more disciplined about my gambling since becoming a counter. I've gone into many casinos and then walked right back out because there were no decent games. Two years ago I couldn't do that because it was more about the action than it was about making money. I can honestly say that the day I can no longer find a good game of BJ is the day I no longer visit casinos. OK, maybe that's too strong of a statement. That's probably the day I start playing poker instead.
At one time I owned Wong's PBJ, before I knew how to count. At the time counting seemed so complicated that I thought I'd never learn to do it. I got so frustrated after several big losing sessions as a BS ploppy, that I swore off all gambling. I gave or threw away all of my gambling books. About six months later I went back to playing blackjack, and still could not win. This time it just made me more determined to learn how to play a winning game. So I began reading online and practicing everyday, until it became almost second nature. Now I'm practicing with the flash cards to learn the indices. I've also noticed that even though I'm playing often in casinos or playing with SAGE blackjack on the computer, I still need to do the counting drills with actual cards to keep me sharp. Wong's PBJ is the only book I really regret getting rid of. I will buy another copy this week.
I've become much more disciplined about my gambling since becoming a counter. I've gone into many casinos and then walked right back out because there were no decent games. Two years ago I couldn't do that because it was more about the action than it was about making money. I can honestly say that the day I can no longer find a good game of BJ is the day I no longer visit casinos. OK, maybe that's too strong of a statement. That's probably the day I start playing poker instead.
This one IS worth learning
First of all, the dealer will have a 10 up 4x as often as any other card. Second, you are lowering risk by not doubling, rather than increasing risk by finding another hand to double on. Finally, the value of this double plummets as the count drops further below -4.
Another important risk-reducing index to learn is when NOT to split 8,8 vs. 10 at high counts.
First of all, the dealer will have a 10 up 4x as often as any other card. Second, you are lowering risk by not doubling, rather than increasing risk by finding another hand to double on. Finally, the value of this double plummets as the count drops further below -4.
Another important risk-reducing index to learn is when NOT to split 8,8 vs. 10 at high counts.
Adam N. Subtractum
Well-Known Member
Excellent points...
The true effect of play deviations like 11 v T, 8/8 v T, and s18 v A often goes overlooked. Along with the ever so slight increases in ev, there is also the reduction of variance that needs to be factored in when determining the value of plays like these.
ANS
The true effect of play deviations like 11 v T, 8/8 v T, and s18 v A often goes overlooked. Along with the ever so slight increases in ev, there is also the reduction of variance that needs to be factored in when determining the value of plays like these.
ANS
Rob McGarvey
Well-Known Member
At Neggy 4
That's why it isn't in the Ill 18. You won't find any of my $$ on the table, unless we are playing single or double decky.
That's why it isn't in the Ill 18. You won't find any of my $$ on the table, unless we are playing single or double decky.
learning to count
Well-Known Member
Re: # for not splitting 8's?
"In a shoe game, is it about 7 or 8?"
I looked up in PBJ, Wong, page 48:h17;no das; 88 split 2-9, 10/6* (* reverse the meaning. Split only if the count per deck is less than the number in the table, split id ealer has ace. If DAS allowed then 10/8*. Same for s17 game.
"Do you (or anybody) here, know what the loss in ev is for not splitting tens against 5 and 6 when at a tc of 5 and 4? I would think this should be an important question for those who care about ev losses.
thanks."
Per Schlesinger page 191 in BJA I "refusing to split tens costs about 0.05-0.10 units per hour." Sorry this is best I can do without staying up all night. Hope this helps.
"In a shoe game, is it about 7 or 8?"
I looked up in PBJ, Wong, page 48:h17;no das; 88 split 2-9, 10/6* (* reverse the meaning. Split only if the count per deck is less than the number in the table, split id ealer has ace. If DAS allowed then 10/8*. Same for s17 game.
"Do you (or anybody) here, know what the loss in ev is for not splitting tens against 5 and 6 when at a tc of 5 and 4? I would think this should be an important question for those who care about ev losses.
thanks."
Per Schlesinger page 191 in BJA I "refusing to split tens costs about 0.05-0.10 units per hour." Sorry this is best I can do without staying up all night. Hope this helps.
Adam N. Subtractum
Well-Known Member
R-A 8/8 v T........ +4