UncrownedKing
Well-Known Member
Can anyone help me find a single parameter count with a very high PE?
In search of highest PE count
- Thread starter UncrownedKing
- Start date
Sonny
Well-Known Member
The maximum PE for a single parameter count is around 0.7. Uston APC has a PE of 0.69, but it uses an ace side count so it's not actually single parameter. You can look at some common systems here:
http://www.qfit.com/card-counting.htm
If you're only concerned with the PE then you should consider using a custom system. Most popular systems focus on BC.
-Sonny-
http://www.qfit.com/card-counting.htm
If you're only concerned with the PE then you should consider using a custom system. Most popular systems focus on BC.
-Sonny-
UncrownedKing
Well-Known Member
None of those really jumped out at me. I'll do more research to try and come up with a custom count. Looks like it will have to be a two parameter count though 
. Any more helpful comments would be greatly appreciated.
. Any more helpful comments would be greatly appreciated.
iCountNTrack
Well-Known Member
I am not sure why you need very high such a high PE, my guess that you are playing pitch games, best system would be hi-opt II with an ace side count for betting. Very powerful combination. But as Sonny said in order to exceed the 0.70 threshold, you will need to side-count and use multi-parameter table,which if the game is not deeply dealt not very important.UncrownedKing said:None of those really jumped out at me. I'll do more research to try and come up with a custom count. Looks like it will have to be a two parameter count though
FLASH1296
Well-Known Member
This question is well-covered in Theory of Blackjack by Peter Griffin, 6th ed.
On pages 45-47 we learn that ...
Of the (practical) systems Hi-Opt II with P.E of .671 is clearly the best.
Note: The P.E. is even [higher with ACE Side Count adjustments
How do popular Level One counts fare ? Pathetically ! Hi-Lo ranks as the worst with a P.E. of just .510
An unusable systems with 12 different tags running from +169 to -180 yields a P.E. of .703
To get a rough idea what the p.e. means, it is a correlation coefficient; so if you square the metric you will generate a figure suggesting the power.
With a correlation of .70 - squaring produces .49% which you view as 50% accuracy.
With a correlation of .50 - squaring produces .25% which you view as 25% accuracy.
NOTE: IF you wish to play a "pitch" game you need a Level Two Count, preferably with Side Counted Aces,
i.e. Hi-Opt II or AO II, although the far-easier ZEN and UBZ2 can both perform reasonably well.
On pages 45-47 we learn that ...
Of the (practical) systems Hi-Opt II with P.E of .671 is clearly the best.
Note: The P.E. is even [higher with ACE Side Count adjustments
How do popular Level One counts fare ? Pathetically ! Hi-Lo ranks as the worst with a P.E. of just .510
An unusable systems with 12 different tags running from +169 to -180 yields a P.E. of .703
To get a rough idea what the p.e. means, it is a correlation coefficient; so if you square the metric you will generate a figure suggesting the power.
With a correlation of .70 - squaring produces .49% which you view as 50% accuracy.
With a correlation of .50 - squaring produces .25% which you view as 25% accuracy.
NOTE: IF you wish to play a "pitch" game you need a Level Two Count, preferably with Side Counted Aces,
i.e. Hi-Opt II or AO II, although the far-easier ZEN and UBZ2 can both perform reasonably well.
UncrownedKing
Well-Known Member
I'll just go with zen and add an ace count. I'm fairly familiar with zen already.
jack.jackson
Well-Known Member
Whats the difference between Level 1 and Single parameter?
Arnold Snyder, had this in his Forums, but i cant find the article on it.
Arnold Snyder, had this in his Forums, but i cant find the article on it.
iCountNTrack
Well-Known Member
A level one count indicates that the highest tag value is + or - 1 for instance Hi-Lo.jack said:
A single parameter count is where each card rank is given one unique tag, so Zen would be for instance a single parameter Level II count
FLASH1296
Well-Known Member
UncrownedKing,
A single parameter Level One count cannot have a good P.E. because the E.O.R.
[the effects of removal] of some of the low cards is about 1/2 of what it is for some others.
The FIVES and the FOURS are always the most important to monitor.
Then comes the SIXES and the THREES.
The DEUCES and the SEVENS have very little impact.
A Level One Count treats each of these low cards AS IF they
were of the same value to the player. They are not.
Note that you cannot simply ADD an Ace Side Count to a balanced count
which already includes Aces, and expect to experience major improvements.
A single parameter Level One count cannot have a good P.E. because the E.O.R.
[the effects of removal] of some of the low cards is about 1/2 of what it is for some others.
The FIVES and the FOURS are always the most important to monitor.
Then comes the SIXES and the THREES.
The DEUCES and the SEVENS have very little impact.
A Level One Count treats each of these low cards AS IF they
were of the same value to the player. They are not.
Note that you cannot simply ADD an Ace Side Count to a balanced count
which already includes Aces, and expect to experience major improvements.
Last edited:
iCountNTrack
Well-Known Member
Interesting, so Revere was totally wrong when he included an Ace side count to RPC to improve playing efficiency.FLASH1296 said:
jack.jackson
Well-Known Member
iCountNTrack said:
Qfit has an article on this(playing purposes), but I couldnt understand it.
http://www.qfit.com/blackjack-side-counts.htm
zengrifter
Banned
Pretty much. There can be an improvement, but it is negligible and so mostly subjective and limited to a narrow range of plays. Its a relatively ineffective example of multi-parameter. As for true multi-parameter adjustments, like for 7s, Revere could never get his mind around it, or otherwise chose not to in his preeminence. zgiCountNTrack said:
iCountNTrack
Well-Known Member
I am afraid you might have understood me ZG, i am sorry there was some educational sarcasm in my post. Flash was saying that you cannot add an ace side count with ace-reckoned count, this is totally erroneous, an ace side count could be added for increased playing efficiency regardless of whether it is really worth it or not. Revere did it with RPC, and Wong published some work for Hi-Lo in older editions of Professional BJ.zengrifter said:
It is worth the effort for shoe games, most likely not, but it is certainly doable for pitch games and do show some sizable increase in profitability.
But obviously the simpler approach would be to use a Level II ace-neutral count (Hi-Opt II for instance) and side-count the Aces for BETTING since it does not require memorizing any Multi-Parameter tables for the same result.
bj bob
Well-Known Member
Ace side count
As Zg mentioned, the Ace side count doesn't do much for PE except for certain occasions such as ins. decisions, dd's near the index departure viz. 10 and 11 v. 10, A.Other than that it's pretty much meaningless, even in pitch games. The real value, however is its enhancement of the BC. A single or double deck dealt a third or more way through with no aces yet seen can get pretty interesting and causes me to increase my next bet accordingly in relation to the rest of the TC. In this respect, it can be a powerful weapon when used properly.
As Zg mentioned, the Ace side count doesn't do much for PE except for certain occasions such as ins. decisions, dd's near the index departure viz. 10 and 11 v. 10, A.Other than that it's pretty much meaningless, even in pitch games. The real value, however is its enhancement of the BC. A single or double deck dealt a third or more way through with no aces yet seen can get pretty interesting and causes me to increase my next bet accordingly in relation to the rest of the TC. In this respect, it can be a powerful weapon when used properly.
iCountNTrack
Well-Known Member
i suggest reading my post again, the argument was about the correctness/doability of side-counting aces to improve playing decisions not the value of this method.bj bob said:
I dont agree with your statement concerning side-counting aces for playing in pitch games, there is a tremendous increase in PE and IC when you add an ace-side count. For instance, for RPC
PE= 0.55, and PE=0.66 (with Ace side count)
IC=0.78, and IC=0.90 (with Ace side count)
Keep in mind that insurance is the most important decision for pitch games.
UncrownedKing
Well-Known Member
Please keep in mind that I plan on playing shoe games.
I'm not quite understanding the concept flash presented. If I'm using an ace reckoned count such as the Zen, is using a side ace count hurting my profitablity if I'm using the ace count for betting purposing?
I'm not quite understanding the concept flash presented. If I'm using an ace reckoned count such as the Zen, is using a side ace count hurting my profitablity if I'm using the ace count for betting purposing?
Ace side count on shoes
For ace reckoned counting systems:
A side count of aces can be used to improve playing efficiency.
One of the difficulties using an ace side count is that for different plays the rc will be adjusted differently. As flash pointed out you cannot simply ADD an ace side count, there are other adjustments.
Is it worth it?
For pitch games, undeniably!
Keeping in mind you are playing shoes:
No, it's not worth it. I have it from the highest authority that in shoe games the chance to use it is so rare, it's just not worth it.
Consider this, after making adjustments 4 out of 6 decks seen, your side count is likely to be between -2 and +2. Most times up to that point it will stay within those bounds or even a little bit out, but then make it a TC and the difference in the TC you make a decision from is barely affected.
It's a lot of work for next to nothing the majority of the time. Your time is better spent working on your act, instead of making numerous calculations for a TC difference of 1.
When to use the ace side count for betting:
The ace side count can be a significant improvement to the BC (betting) for counting systems which do not count the ace.
Hope this cleared some things up!
Not sure which FLASH concept your referring to.UncrownedKing said:
Yes, the betting has already considered the ace in an ace reckoned counting system.
For ace reckoned counting systems:
A side count of aces can be used to improve playing efficiency.
One of the difficulties using an ace side count is that for different plays the rc will be adjusted differently. As flash pointed out you cannot simply ADD an ace side count, there are other adjustments.
Is it worth it?
For pitch games, undeniably!
Keeping in mind you are playing shoes:
No, it's not worth it. I have it from the highest authority that in shoe games the chance to use it is so rare, it's just not worth it.
Consider this, after making adjustments 4 out of 6 decks seen, your side count is likely to be between -2 and +2. Most times up to that point it will stay within those bounds or even a little bit out, but then make it a TC and the difference in the TC you make a decision from is barely affected.
It's a lot of work for next to nothing the majority of the time. Your time is better spent working on your act, instead of making numerous calculations for a TC difference of 1.
When to use the ace side count for betting:
The ace side count can be a significant improvement to the BC (betting) for counting systems which do not count the ace.
Hope this cleared some things up!
UncrownedKing
Well-Known Member
Yes! You certainly helped me understand what's happening. Maybe rereading flash's post again helped too.