21st. Century Sidecounting Question

[Rob V.]

In best posts, Adam N. Subtractum provides a much simpler method of sidecounting. Being somewhat 20th century, I can't wrap my brain around it entirely. Subtractum writes:

"-21st Century Sidecounting Steps-

1. Count down Aces played
2. Add Aces remaining to Running Count and convert to True Count "

...and then use this new TC for playing strategy. This seems too good to be true. On every hand off the top of a single deck that does not contain an Ace, you are supposed to adjust your RC and therefore TC by +4 {Hi-Lo)? This automatically makes such plays as

STAND 16 v. 10
STAND 12 v. 2
STAND 12 v. 3
DOUBLE 5,5 v. 10

correct off the top. Am I missing something?

Thanks for any enlightenment on this topic. This really caught my interest.

- Rob V

 

[T-Hopper]

You should start your TC at -4, and that will represent what you used to think of as a count of 0.

 

[Rob V.]

"You should start your TC at -4, and that will represent what you used to think of as a count of 0. "

Of course, thanks! Of course, if you really meant "TC" instead of "RC", that confuses me.

This adds a surmountable readjustment to betting. I don't know yet if I can just shift my TC betting levels down, or add and subtract 4 back and forth from the RC when playing/betting. I guess a need a day or so to think about it, and how it all comes together.

I can see a glimmer now of what you guys must be doing with "Ace variable pivots" and such. Since I use Zen, this side count could be used very nicely for betting. I'll try to work that out someday, but I'm more interested in strategy at the moment. I'm happy right now with the conventional betting algorithm.

You guys have really opened up multiparameter counting possibilities. Very nice job.

- Rob V.

 

[CC-Management]

You know MR V. It would be nice if you would file a profile and become a full member of CC.COM! I know the other members would be happy to know that you are on our side of the table! CC.COM WANT'S YOU!

 

[Rob V.]

Nope, you did mean TC, didn't you? My apologies. An excerpt from Brett Harris's explanation of Unbalanced True Counting at bjmath.com:

-----------------------------------------------
Tc(n) = Tb(n) - U.

Or to put it another way, if you start your running count at -pivot instead of zero, then it is possible to compute a true count for the unbalanced system, and this true count is always different from the equivalent balanced count by U, and so this may be used in conjuction with published indices for Hi-Lo to use the unbalanced system in the same way as for a balanced system. Note though that the neutral deck no longer has a true count of zero, it has a true count of -U.
--------------------------------------------------

Thanks again,
Rob V.

 

[Magician]

Where's AnS lately?