5 ace counting system

[pogostick]

Have any of you guys heard of the 5 ace counting system? May be too good to be true . It is used when dealing from multiple decks.

 

[moo321]

I've heard of it, it just doesn't work well.

 

[Sonny]

Uston mentions it in MDBJ and The Wiard has a version online:

http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/wizardcount.html

It’s a very simple system, but also pretty much worthless. It suffers from “OPP Syndrome” - the advantage is tiny and the variance is huge. I don’t think that system would give you an advantage in most games.

-Sonny-

 

[cardcounter0]

Have any of you guys heard of the 5 ace counting system? May be too good to be true . It is used when dealing from multiple decks.

Try the 5-5-5 system for double deck. Find a good rule double deck game.
Use the ace/five system and flat bet until the count is +5, then bet 5x your min bet. If the count is ever -5, sit out until the shuffle.

Do not play the last hand before the shuffle if the count is negative. Play at full tables, take frequent bathroom breaks, and occasionally sit out the first hand after the shuffle.

This system is basically break even, your gain is what the casino will comp your action. So if you are playing green at a low roller joint, a couple of hours of this system will get you a free room or dinner, and in the long run it is actually free.

 

[callipygian]

Have any of you guys heard of the 5 ace counting system? May be too good to be true.

Nobody's posted this so far, but there are two criteria that are used when evaluating systems.

One is playing effiency (PE), which is basically how good of a correlation the count is to the "perfect" count. 0 is the worst (no correlation, and 1 is the best (perfect correlation). Memorizing every single card and every advantage from every possible combination is the only system with a 1.00 PE, and most systems are between 0.50 and 0.70.

The other is betting correlation (BC), which is basically how good of a correlation the count is to your advantage. Again, 0 is the worst and 1 is the best. Most systems have high BC's, 0.85+.

Ace-five (BC = 0.51, PE = 0.05) is inferior to most systems in BOTH categories. Hi-Lo (BC = 0.97, PE = 0.51) is no more complex than ace-five, and Red 7 (BC = 0.98, PE = 0.6) is arguably easier. The bottom line is that there's really no reason to play ace-five.

 

[Sonny]

One is playing effiency (PE), which is basically how good of a correlation the count is to the "perfect" count. 0 is the worst (no correlation, and 1 is the best (perfect correlation).

Technically a correlation of -1 would be "worst." A perfect inverse relationship would have you constantly making the wrong decisions. But that's really just nitpicking.

-Sonny-