Index Generation

QFIT

QFIT

Well-Known Member
Fast yes. Accurate, not close. I've known Sam Case for numerous years and respect his work. But this is just an old program based on a poor estimation technique. The indexes you can find in books are much better. All (and I mean all) of the software on that site is inaccurate and obsolete.
 
N&B

N&B

Well-Known Member
Review of BJSIM

Not a complete review. Generally the interface is very intuitive. Runs fast enough on DSL. I was using Hi/Lo 6D 70% S17 DAS LS SP4 and NoRSA.

One Question... if I un-check the Hit 16 vs. X box, and have checked (and allowed) Surrender 16 vs. X, does the Sim default the Hit Stand to a 3+ card 16 vs. X?

The only 2 other things missing I see for CC's is Surr. 88 vs. X (usually +1 or +2) and 3-card 12 vs. 3 (Again usually +1/+2).

Considering the free resource, IMHO its a good sim, Thanks muchly.
 
QFIT

QFIT

Well-Known Member
N&B said:
Not a complete review. Generally the interface is very intuitive. Runs fast enough on DSL. I was using Hi/Lo 6D 70% S17 DAS LS SP4 and NoRSA.

One Question... if I un-check the Hit 16 vs. X box, and have checked (and allowed) Surrender 16 vs. X, does the Sim default the Hit Stand to a 3+ card 16 vs. X?

The only 2 other things missing I see for CC's is Surr. 88 vs. X (usually +1 or +2) and 3-card 12 vs. 3 (Again usually +1/+2).

Considering the free resource, IMHO its a good sim, Thanks muchly.
Click to expand...
Except that the answers are incorrect.
 
B

BJmath

Active Member
QFIT said:
Fast yes. Accurate, not close. I've known Sam Case for numerous years and respect his work. But this is just an old program based on a poor estimation technique. The indexes you can find in books are much better. All (and I mean all) of the software on that site is inaccurate and obsolete.
Click to expand...
Hi QFIT, which software package is offered on your site, if I am mainly interested in generating index numbers for a new card counting system (and possibly including side counts)?

Also, do you happen to know any free index generation software online that is more reliable (apart from the couple mentioned in the previous posts under this thread)? I know that would counter-advertise your software package, though. :)

Thanks!
BJmath
 
QFIT

QFIT

Well-Known Member
On my site, CVData. For free, BJStrat is a very old program that is free and around somewhere I'm sure. But I've never tested its accuracy.
 
B

BJmath

Active Member
QFIT said:
On my site, CVData. For free, BJStrat is a very old program that is free and around somewhere I'm sure. But I've never tested its accuracy.
Click to expand...
Thanks! I did download BJStrat, as linked in zengrifter's original post, but the supposedly executable file somehow did not work for me. Maybe I have to work with the c code provided along with the package to test it.
 
B

BJmath

Active Member
zengrifter said:
FREE COUNTING RESOURCES ON WEB

JensenAlgebraic Index Calc (ZIP DL)
http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/tcindex/Generator.zip (Archive copy)
Click to expand...
This generator generates both primary strategy based on the main count and the so-called "multiplier" based one or two side counts (for example, Ace side count). Can anybody help point to me how this multiplier will be used in calculating the true count for playing purposes (assuming the main counting system is balanced)? BTW, I did find the following webpage that explains how the Ace side count should be used for the playing strategy:

http://www.qfit.com/blackjack-side-counts.htm

I'm copying it below:

"Ace Side Count for Playing Purposes

This method is only valid with Ace-reckoned strategies (e.g. High-Low, Halves, Red Seven, Zen Count, and Revere Point Count.) Note: using an Ace SC for one of these strategies requires a different set of strategy tables. Few people use this technique these days. If you are using any of these systems, the true count is quite accurate for betting purposes, but less accurate for playing purposes. To correct this, use the following procedure:

  • -- Calculate the number of excess Aces (may be negative) in the remaining cards
  • Multiply the number of excess Aces by the absolute value of the point count value assigned by the current strategy to Ten-value cards (normally one or two)
  • Temporarily subtract the result from the running count
  • Recalculate the true count for strategy decision purposes only
  • If this is an Insurance decision, temporarily subtract double the result from the running count
  • Recalculate the true count for Insurance purposes only
"

However, I am still confused (and possibly missed some basic points here): 1) why is it the point count value assigned to the Ten-value card be multiplied here (instead of that of the Ace-value card)? 2) If there's excess number of Aces in the remaining cards, given the same primary count, does it always favor the dealer? I could see effects in both directions: richness in Aces in the remaining cards favor the player, but on the other hand, less 10 cards would favor the dealer. Why should we substract instead of plus here? 3) I don't see where the multipliers generated in the table by the above program fit into the calculation described above.

Thanks in advance for any insight!
 
QFIT

QFIT

Well-Known Member
Well, yes in the case of Zen it would be Aces. I was trying to keep the descriptions close for the two ace side-count methods. But, this method of side-counting makes very little difference and is quite a pain. Generally people don't side count aces in ace-reckoned systems.

I have not seen the program. But it sounds like it is generating multi-parameter tables, which is altogether different.
 
Last edited:
B

BJmath

Active Member
QFIT said:
Well, yes in the case of Zen it would be Aces. I was trying to keep the descriptions close for the two ace side-count methods. But, this method of side-counting makes very little difference and is quite a pain. Generally people don't side count aces in ace-reckoned systems.

I have not seen the program. But it sounds like it is generating multi-parameter tables, which is altogether different.
Click to expand...
Thanks. And, yes, it is generating multi-parameter tables. Is your CVData generating multi-parameter tables? Or could you please describe briefly what the outcome will be like using your program, suppose I input an arbitrary counting (Ace-reckoned) system? Thanks!
 
QFIT

QFIT

Well-Known Member
BJmath said:
Thanks. And, yes, it is generating multi-parameter tables. Is your CVData generating multi-parameter tables? Or could you please describe briefly what the outcome will be like using your program, suppose I input an arbitrary counting (Ace-reckoned) system? Thanks!
Click to expand...
I don't directly support multi-param index generation. Although you could probably alter the deck and trick t into generating them. I do support simulation of MP counts.
 
jack.jackson

jack.jackson

Well-Known Member
QFIT said:
I don't directly support multi-param index generation. Although you could probably alter the deck and trick t into generating them. I do support simulation of MP counts.
Click to expand...
You can however, input your numbers, and you use the side count attachment, for playing purposes, correct?
 
QFIT

QFIT

Well-Known Member
BJmath said:
BTW, where can I input my counting strategy before running simulations to generate indexes using your CVData? Thanks!
Click to expand...
Create a user strategy (Define/Edit Strategy). It is best to base it on Composite Basic Strategy and add the tag values and TC calculation type.
 
B

BJmath

Active Member
QFIT said:
Create a user strategy (Define/Edit Strategy). It is best to base it on Composite Basic Strategy and add the tag values and TC calculation type.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your quick reply! I found it already after my post (long time no touch and forgot about it)... Thanks.
 
B

BJmath

Active Member
QFIT said:
Create a user strategy (Define/Edit Strategy). It is best to base it on Composite Basic Strategy and add the tag values and TC calculation type.
Click to expand...
For a user-defined counting strategy, your CVData calculate the true count by dividing the raw count by the # of decks left, correct? As a result, if this counting strategy is of high level, the magnitude of the true count indexes will be increased correspondingly, correct? Thanks!
 
QFIT

QFIT

Well-Known Member
BJmath said:
For a user-defined counting strategy, your CVData calculate the true count by dividing the raw count by the # of decks left, correct? As a result, if this counting strategy is of high level, the magnitude of the true count indexes will be increased correspondingly, correct? Thanks!
Click to expand...
On the counts tab, set the TC calculation to whatever you wish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top