Prominent BJINFO Members in BJ INSIDER June

[mdlbj]

Was that his point? If it was it was entirely out of context considering that the 12v4 article referred to TOURNEY play where there is little to be gained from counting.

Now IF that assertion is correct, how would it stack against composition-based BS tethered to the 3/4D level?

Lastly, doesn't anyone wish to challenge my assertion that I'd arbitrarly change BS to any12v4 = HIT? zg

Because I am c.o.u.n.t.i.n.g. Mike Aponte won the first one. Talk to him about your theory. Maybe you can write to Wong about this as well. Or Hollywood Dave.

 

[zengrifter]

Johnny Chan can speak to this. And yes ZG, it was in the first sentence of the post you presented to the readers of the post at the start of this thread.

What, another JC mini interview? I said that we left MIT out of the History article.

Right now you feel about these guys the way I once felt about Lawrence Revere.

And I don't even read BJI, for obvious reasons. But I do post a lot of content here and the current issue intro seemed like one to post.

Look what you wrote :

Originally Posted by mdlbj
Why the lack of input Ken?
There have been many interesting discussions
guided buy the infamous ZenGrifter..
Not so much other than that.

"Not so much other than that?" Kinda insulting to some of the more experienced participants, other than moi.

Tell Mike Aponte that I didn't appreciate him removing my interview thread post from BJInst., BTW. Especially after our (his and my) cordial exchange in this here Announcements forum 2.5 years ago when Ken let him troll for customers. Hurt my feelings. zg

 

[KenSmith]

Was that his point? If it was it was entirely out of context considering that the 12v4 article referred to TOURNEY play where there is little to be gained from counting.

Actually, no, this article had nothing to do with tournament play. Like I mentioned before, I was squeezed for time on a topic, and thought this was an interesting observation. Apparently it wasn't worth the firestorm that ensued.

Lastly, doesn't anyone wish to challenge my assertion that I'd arbitrarly change BS to any12v4 = HIT? zg

OK, I'll challenge it. You'd be much better off deciding to stand on all 12v3 hands. At least that would work with a 'counter basic strategy'.

 

[zengrifter]

Actually, no, this article had nothing to do with tournament play. Like I mentioned before, I was squeezed for time on a topic, and thought this was an interesting observation.

It had nothing to do with TOURNEY PLAY??!!

CHIBI-SAN-ZEN NOT SO SMART!! zg

 

[mdlbj]

We are obviously getting our articles mixed up.. Yet at the same time, I was giving my point of view on hitting a 12v4 no matter what type of game one is playing.

If it is a tournament or a game offered at a local casino, I cant help but count. Its a subconscious thing for me.

I think the best action to take on a 12v4 is to stand unless the count is 0. So ZG what is the reason why you would hit it? We are curious..

Thats all.

 

[zengrifter]

I think the best action to take on a 12v4 is to stand unless the count is 0. So ZG what is the reason why you would hit it? We are curious..

We're talking basic strategy, no counting allowed. So always hitting 12v4, as opposed to EV-based BS always standing, is an RA-sort of consideration, like taking insurance for less, on certain good hands, when the count really doesn't warrant the ins bet. Bottomline: if you don't hit that 12v4, you can never push.

Now that I've offered up the above blasphemy, I leave it to other REAL experts to indicate my wisdom, or lack thereof. z(not so smart)g

 

[mdlbj]

I guess Im not a real expert because I dont know the answer. But I have done something close to this on a few occasions. I have seen the next card to be delt and have doubled a hard 13. Why.. Just because I had the info to make a playing decision.

This is starting to make me a little crazy.. Why would I hit a hard 12 on a 4 if I have not seen the hole card or have not tracked the shuffle and am not counting.. Come on man, cough it up.. Why???

 

[zengrifter]

I guess Im not a real expert because I dont know the answer. But I have done something close to this on a few occasions. I have seen the next card to be delt and have doubled a hard 13. Why.. Just because I had the info to make a playing decision.

Wow, you should have jumped up on the stool and shouted in a Cuban accident, "Say hallooo to my li'l friend!"

This is starting to make me a little crazy.. Why would I hit a hard 12 on a 4 if I have not seen the hole card or have not tracked the shuffle and am not counting.. Come on man, cough it up.. Why???

Because without any extra info, straight BS, the EV-based BS degrades a bit , not entirely optimal, on that hand. My lay sense it being similar to RA or CE type consideration, without any 1st-year statistical logic to back my thinking up.

Also, something that Karl Janecek mentioned to me in passing may have rang true. And similar to Grosjean's case for why you might want to insure a good hand for less, sometimes, when the count doesn't warrant it.

Or maybe, also, its like that scene in 21 where the kid chooses 'curtain 1-2-3'?

Apart from the above, remember I teach that there is a LOT of room for fudge on indices anyway - so if counting, the line isn't a strict immuteable index for any hand, but 12v4 is a case in point - you can hit or stand at whim between -2 and +2 and it will have no effect on your game whatsoever. So why not hit!? zg

Ps - Anyone, please feel free to jump in and show the chibi-san-zen the error of my thinking on 12v4... and this whole theory can summarily be moved to VOODOO.

 

[mdlbj]

Right yet, to squeak out that little bit of EV, I would use every tool I had available. But yes, you are right as far as the straight BS play..

Amen pass the tequila.. Or cillaciben in this case

 

[zengrifter]

Right yet, to squeak out that little bit of EV, I would use every tool I had available. But yes, you are right as far as the play..

Amen pass the tequila..

In other words, "yes and no, zipideedudah"? zg

 

[mdlbj]

Wow, you should have jumped up on the stool and shouted in a Cuban accident, "Say hallooo to my li'l friend!"

I was two steps away from it when I made the others stand up at the 6/5 table..

To funny.

Im done playing anyway, but not really.

 

[mdlbj]

In other words, "yes and no, zipideedudah"? zg

I will play for you if you bankroll me..

 

[zengrifter]

I will play for you if you bankroll me..

Haven't you heard? I'm just an over-the-hill redchipper. zg

 

[mdlbj]

Haven't you heard? I'm just an over-the-hill redchipper. zg

Well red chips will work. Im not greedy.

 

[Kasi]

We're talking basic strategy, no counting allowed. So always hitting 12v4, as opposed to EV-based BS always standing,

I'm sure I'm missing something but, nonetheless, from a BS point of view, hit 10,2 vs 4 but stand on 84, 75, and 93 vs 4 up to 4 decks anyway in an S17 game. Kind of like hit 10,2 vs 6 and 10,3 vs 2 or stand on 84 vs 3 and 75 vs 3in a 1D S17 game.

But it's true the hand is misplayed more often than not since 10,2 vs 4 occurs more frequently than 75, 84, and 9,3 vs 4 put together. I think lol.

When you think about it, it's pretty consistent with counting in that 10,2 is -TC and the others are +tc if off the top of a shoe.

Were you guys really arguing about 13.4 cards vs 14 cards after 2 rounds?
If so, seems as if The Wise One was closest lol. Assuming QFIT is TRUTH which of course there can be no arguing about lol.

 

[mdlbj]

Were you guys really arguing about 13.4 cards vs 14 cards after 2 rounds?
If so, seems as if The Wise One was closest lol. Assuming QFIT is TRUTH which of course there can be no arguing about lol.

Yes and no...

 

[Kasi]

Yes and no...

That's what I thought too lol.

let's call it a "definite maybe".

 

[mdlbj]

We were talking about two different articles and that is were the confusion was.

 

[zengrifter]

NZBS* = ALWAYS HIT any 12v4, any rules, any #decks!** zg

*New Zen BS - No counting allowed (count-related betting requires CABS)
**If you don't hit it you can never PUSH it.

Ps - Any takers? No one wants to challenge moi on a simple question of etched in stone BS?

 

[mdlbj]

NZBS* = ALWAYS HIT any 12v4, any rules, any #decks!** zg

*New Zen BS - No counting allowed (count-related betting requires CABS)
**If you don't hit it you can never PUSH it.

Ps - Any takers? No one wants to challenge moi on a simple question of etched in stone BS?

Then why not stand on anything below 17? I would pull out the copy of Professional Blackjack or BJ attack that is propping up my KRK Rokit RP10s to see if there is any validity in what you are saying but, I would rather hear the bass.