50+ INDICES, lazy goldbricks!

zengrifter

zengrifter

Banned
Lazy goldbricks (YOU know who you are)!

IMHO its time for YOU to advance to 50+ indices (75 IS BETTER) - how would you justify only knowing 1/3 of the multiplication tables?

LEARN -4 to +10 (approxHiLo), BS for 22-99 and A2-A7.

Look at it this way: if you can increase your gain by 20% just by adding extra ROUNDED indices -and- if you also play 20% faster -and- if you then also play a 20% longer session, on average - the compounded result implies an overall relative sessionEv increase of 100% - yes/no?

Am I being too unscientific here? Did we need HO2 with betting side counts and/or multiparam-adjusting to double our Ev? Why NOT double our Ev if its that easy?

Get the lead out! sgt.zg
 
zengrifter

zengrifter

Banned
DD' on Indices

DD' on Indices (bj21)

Insurance, 16v10, and 15v10. After that the value gained from
strategy departures drops considerably. A good argument for risk
averse strategy. Only use the variations that make a measurable
difference in ev.

One thing is, however, that after you become experienced you will not
be memorizing indeces. You will be so used to the numbers from the
constant discussions of how to play every hand that you will know
them pretty well. As long as you have the big 3 correct, you could
change all the others randomly up or down one and you'd see almost no
change. Exact numbers are very unimportant. But if you understand the
play you will always be in the ball park.

When publishing they should give all the exact correct numbers. They
should not make a judgement call for you as to what is important,
what you should learn, and what you should not bother with. We can
all look at the numbers and decide for ourselves whether we want to
learn 20 numbers, 30, etc. I only use about 30 numbers.

Insurance
hard 12 v 2,3,4,5,6.
hard 13 v 2,3,4
hard 14 v 2,10
hard 15 v 10
hard 16 v 9,10
11 v 9,10,Ace
10 v 9, Ace
9 v 2,3,7
8 v 4,5,6
A2&A3 v 4
A7 v 2,Ace
A8 v 4,5,6
A9 v 4,5,6
TT v 4,5,6 (about 2 or 3 times per year)
99 v 7
44 v 4,5,6

Okay, I guess that's 42 numbers. But some of these are approximations
and I didn't set out to have this many. Most expererienced players
have many more than this, like doubling 8 v 3, or A5 v 2, splitting
33 v 8, etc, most of them worthless. But if you know them, especially
the hit/stand on stiffs, you might as well use them. Why not? The
rare worthless doubles and splits you can do without to decrease
variance.
 
zengrifter

zengrifter

Banned
Re: DD' on Indices YES

YES, in between serious play - like the decade from '88-'98 - when I
am playing recreationally twice per year - NO indices per'se yet I
know where the departure points are regardless. Notwithstanding,
right now I know 100#s and wizz through the flash-cards shuffled
randomly - what does my extra discipline get me if playing quarters?
probably an extra $7 and hour statistically. On the other hand I
believe that excerizing intuition on the many borderline plays that
occur can garner more than an extra $7/hr - so YES precise indices
are NOT necessarily the optimum approach. zg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top