Side Counts in 6D and 8D

[ARK]

The general consensus seems to be that the edges are too small and the extra counts too complicated to maintain side counts in a shoe. Which makes sense - except I never see any mention as to HOW MUCH we are giving up by not side counting shoes.

I've seen various posts regarding the usefulness of Ace side counts and Seven side counts, but only for pitch games. I would think that there could be other counts that are useful as well. In a perfect world, I would think we would want to know the count for each card rank and apply strategy accordingly, right? In reality this is extremely difficult to do but I am curious as to the edge one could actually have.

Has anyone seen numbers for edges using side counts in shoe games?

 

[BJgenius007]

The general consensus seems to be that the edges are too small and the extra counts too complicated to maintain side counts in a shoe. Which makes sense - except I never see any mention as to HOW MUCH we are giving up by not side counting shoes.

I've seen various posts regarding the usefulness of Ace side counts and Seven side counts, but only for pitch games. I would think that there could be other counts that are useful as well. In a perfect world, I would think we would want to know the count for each card rank and apply strategy accordingly, right? In reality this is extremely difficult to do but I am curious as to the edge one could actually have.

Has anyone seen numbers for edges using side counts in shoe games?

I use advanced Omega II so I benefit tremendously from ace side count. Without ace side count, I earn 2 units per hour spreading 16 to 1 in the past. With ace side count, I earned 3.5 units per hour spreading 12 to 1 on shoe game. Actually I earned 4.25 units per hour in the recent 2 months since I began to adjust true count more accurately (+/- 0.5 for each pair of aces), not one full point for 4 aces.

 

[blackjack avenger]

anecdotal

I use advanced Omega II so I benefit tremendously from ace side count. Without ace side count, I earn 2 units per hour spreading 16 to 1 in the past. With ace side count, I earned 3.5 units per hour spreading 12 to 1 on shoe game. Actually I earned 4.25 units per hour in the recent 2 months since I began to adjust true count more accurately (+/- 0.5 for each pair of aces), not one full point for 4 aces.

Short term variance means little
What do sims say?

 

[tthree]

In another thread Psyduck posted an analysis of side counting sevens. It showed an increase in player edge of .1% in total considering the 19 most important hand matchups. I didn't want to get into what that was worth because I felt like everyone was ganging up on me. Anyway you are probably playing with a players edge of 1 to 1.5% with your basic counting system. That extra .1% is an increase in edge of 7 to 10% in your advantage. What is that really worth? As I pondered that question the most obvious thing was you are going to win more of your hands that are weakly correlated to your count and index.

The deeper issue is you base your bet ramp on your advantage. For HILO the player advantage at TC +1 is about .5% so you increase your advantage for your first ramp increase by 20%. Using the approximation of .5% advantage increase for 1 increase in TC increment you have increased your advantage at TC +2 by 10%, TC +3 by 7%, TC +4 by 5% and TC +5 by 4%. These are not increases in your advantage but percent increases in your advantage. This would allow a steeper optimal betting ramp along with winning more of your hands.

There are side counts that contain blocks of cards as a group that would double this increase or more. If we assume double that increase in player edge that would be .2% increase in player advantage. An increase in player advantage at TC +1 of 40% (.5% to .7%), at TC +2 of 20%, at TC +3 of 14%, at TC +4 of 10% and at TC +5 of 8%. The result is winning a higher percentage of bigger bets at each TC.

If you took the block side count to the best pitch games were the house edge is .19% you start off the shuffle with a slight advantage. No need to wong in.

The idea that a side count is too complicated for a shoe game is ridiculous. Everyone playing an ace neutral count should be side counting aces. If they don't they should switch to an ace reckoned count. Lots of people count shoes with ace neutral count. You should only use a side count if you can do it accurately. If you can't, don't use it in the casino and keep practicing. It becomes second nature after a while.

 

[blackjack avenger]

an alternative

Halves gives about a 5% to 10% increase over hi Lo without a side count.
This should be easier.

Side counting; keeping 2 counts, and having to adjust your RC & TC for playing decisions. Just these steps would slow down your play, which hurts EV. All this for 10%?

There is a reason every major author does not recommend side counts, plus those on this site who put in a lot of casino time (cept Tarzan). It's a lot of work for modest returns.

The Einstein? count I think considers every card or just use an EOR count for each game you play? Again adding a lot of complexity for small additional gains.

I think the army has studies showing that multi tasking is not effective.

In shoes side counts may be worth 1% to 3%.

I think according to Griffin BC is more important then PE. Hence the power of halves .99 BC

If someone can & wants to side count that is great.

 

[psyduck]

I didn't want to get into what that was worth because I felt like everyone was ganging up on me.

I never had such intention. Sorry if you got that impression. I just like to analyze the idea myself to determine the gain.

 

[tthree]

I never had such intention. Sorry if you got that impression. I just like to analyze the idea myself to determine the gain.

I never thought you were piling on. You kept the discussion intellectual and civilized.

 

[blackjack avenger]

doctrine

If someone challenges beliefs they will be challenged on their thoughts, nothing personal. It takes thick skin to take on casinos for big money.

 

[tthree]

If someone challenges beliefs they will be challenged on their thoughts, nothing personal. It takes thick skin to take on casinos for big money.

I have a thick skin but I know when to keep quiet because a debate has degenerated into a personal assault. I think many of you rely so much on sims you forgot the math of the game. I read an old thread in here that debated the usefulness of sims. I think the conclusion was sims can be tweeked to show whatever you want. I saw Psyduck very innocently show sims that had no gain in PE from HILO to higher counts. He knew something was wrong with his approach but didn't want to switch to a "better" count without his sims showing it was worth it. Finally he figured out his flat bets were to small to show a difference. He put in a bigger bet size and bingo there was the difference. Properly used sims are a great tool but learn the math and consider it so you can see when they aren't giving you an accurate picture of the real world.

 

[ARK]

In another thread Psyduck posted an analysis of side counting sevens. It showed an increase in player edge of .1% in total considering the 19 most important hand matchups. I didn't want to get into what that was worth because I felt like everyone was ganging up on me. Anyway you are probably playing with a players edge of 1 to 1.5% with your basic counting system. That extra .1% is an increase in edge of 7 to 10% in your advantage. What is that really worth? As I pondered that question the most obvious thing was you are going to win more of your hands that are weakly correlated to your count and index.

The deeper issue is you base your bet ramp on your advantage. For HILO the player advantage at TC +1 is about .5% so you increase your advantage for your first ramp increase by 20%. Using the approximation of .5% advantage increase for 1 increase in TC increment you have increased your advantage at TC +2 by 10%, TC +3 by 7%, TC +4 by 5% and TC +5 by 4%. These are not increases in your advantage but percent increases in your advantage. This would allow a steeper optimal betting ramp along with winning more of your hands.

There are side counts that contain blocks of cards as a group that would double this increase or more. If we assume double that increase in player edge that would be .2% increase in player advantage. An increase in player advantage at TC +1 of 40% (.5% to .7%), at TC +2 of 20%, at TC +3 of 14%, at TC +4 of 10% and at TC +5 of 8%. The result is winning a higher percentage of bigger bets at each TC.

If you took the block side count to the best pitch games were the house edge is .19% you start off the shuffle with a slight advantage. No need to wong in.

The idea that a side count is too complicated for a shoe game is ridiculous. Everyone playing an ace neutral count should be side counting aces. If they don't they should switch to an ace reckoned count. Lots of people count shoes with ace neutral count. You should only use a side count if you can do it accurately. If you can't, don't use it in the casino and keep practicing. It becomes second nature after a while.

Thanks Tthree. Currently I just use Zen but I think I will look into what other side counts are available for other counts. Are there any resources you found especially useful?

I think a lot of people see the relatively small but don't understand the effect they can have on winrate. I believe adding 0.25% to a 1% player edge increases his bank roll growth by 50% for a full Kelly bettor. Obviously we would hope to be playing games with a better than 1% win rate but the point
is that these small numbers aren't so small after all.

How has the adjustment been adding in another side count?

 

[psyduck]

I think many of you rely so much on sims you forgot the math of the game. I read an old thread in here that debated the usefulness of sims. I think the conclusion was sims can be tweeked to show whatever you want. I saw Psyduck very innocently show sims that had no gain in PE from HILO to higher counts. He knew something was wrong with his approach but didn't want to switch to a "better" count without his sims showing it was worth it. Finally he figured out his flat bets were to small to show a difference. He put in a bigger bet size and bingo there was the difference.

Not only bet size, the biggest problem I found out later was the inaccurate indices in the canned systems. I ended up generating my own indices for each system and then compare them.

I like to use a simulator to look at the game I play from different angles. The only concern I have is the potential presence of bugs in the program.

I think if someone is capable of using a complex system without making mistakes to gain some extra advantage, go ahead and do it. If one cannot use it to an error-free level, then it is not worth the effort. It is all up to the individual to judge if he wants to invest in the effort and if he is capable of doing it right.

 

[tthree]

Thanks Tthree. Currently I just use Zen but I think I will look into what other side counts are available for other counts. Are there any resources you found especially useful?

I think a lot of people see the relatively small but don't understand the effect they can have on winrate. I believe adding 0.25% to a 1% player edge increases his bank roll growth by 50% for a full Kelly bettor. Obviously we would hope to be playing games with a better than 1% win rate but the point
is that these small numbers aren't so small after all.

How has the adjustment been adding in another side count?

I am not as proficient at one side count as I would like to be before a trying 2 at once. Remember I am stuck where the only good games are shoe games. One side count is relatively easy with practice. Finding good information on side counts has been a little challenging. I decided it would be easier to generate the adjustment indices by hand for block side counts. I am going to hand generate ones I already have for sevens and aces to make sure I am doing it accurately. These are the things that help you understand the game better. I have tried doing a second side count a little with qfits trainer and it seems about like when I started adding the first side count. It takes practice. After enough practice it seems easier and easier. My time with one side count for counting down an 8 deck shoe averages around 29 seconds. If I obsess about time I loose accuracy. Just stick with accuracy and let the time improve naturally.

Sims can be very helpful for the fine tuned analysis of the math. The math I listed above is general. If your main count index for a hand match up is low you will use it more accurately and often with the adjustments but the bets affected will tend to be smaller. If it is a high index the more accurate play will tend to be larger bets. The exact affect of these on profit etc can only be determined by sims. An example is side counting eights raises your PE more than side counting sixes. But the six side count adds more profit because of the way it interacts with a bet ramp.

 

[tthree]

Not only bet size, the biggest problem I found out later was the inaccurate indices in the canned systems. I ended up generating my own indices for each system and then compare them.

I like to use a simulator to look at the game I play from different angles. The only concern I have is the potential presence of bugs in the program.

I think if someone is capable of using a complex system without making mistakes to gain some extra advantage, go ahead and do it. If one cannot use it to an error-free level, then it is not worth the effort. It is all up to the individual to judge if he wants to invest in the effort and if he is capable of doing it right.

I am leery about trusting other peoples software as well. I prefer to write my own if I can. The only thing I have written compares systems with identical card sequences. Once you play a hand differently it is not an apples to apples comparison. I have some ideas about how to remedy that.

 

[tthree]

I think if someone is capable of using a complex system without making mistakes to gain some extra advantage, go ahead and do it. If one cannot use it to an error-free level, then it is not worth the effort. It is all up to the individual to judge if he wants to invest in the effort and if he is capable of doing it right.

I totally agree 100%.

 

[BJgenius007]

Halves gives about a 5% to 10% increase over hi Lo without a side count.
This should be easier.

Side counting; keeping 2 counts, and having to adjust your RC & TC for playing decisions. Just these steps would slow down your play, which hurts EV. All this for 10%?

There is a reason every major author does not recommend side counts, plus those on this site who put in a lot of casino time (cept Tarzan). It's a lot of work for modest returns.

The Einstein? count I think considers every card or just use an EOR count for each game you play? Again adding a lot of complexity for small additional gains.

I think the army has studies showing that multi tasking is not effective.

In shoes side counts may be worth 1% to 3%.

I think according to Griffin BC is more important then PE. Hence the power of halves .99 BC

If someone can & wants to side count that is great.

I really don't want to join the conversation on this topic because in the end, other APs are my competitors. I have something that makes me quite different from other APs and also make pit boss difficult to figure out my plays, or even better, makes me look like a ploppy playing on hunch. Why give it away?

There are a few things I can say about Advanced Omega II though:

1. I have also tried Wong Half and Zen before I settled with Omega II. The main reason is that Omega II only count ten and nine as high cards. I like the CLEANNESS of risk/reward evaluation on each play. If you include ace, the whole counting system became a mush because ace is really irrelevant on evaluating if the next card will break your hand or not.

2. For betting purpose, Omega II treats ace and ten as equal weight while nine is half weight of ten or ace. With Zen, ace is only half weight of ten. In real world, ace is more important a card than ten.

3. For doubling down ten, you benefit more from ace side count because you add 150% of ace side count to your adjusted true count. <This is how you accurately use basic ace side count.>

4. <About advanced ace side count.> Someday I may write a book to reveal my trade secrets on how to use the secondary index matrix for ace side count. Basically you calculate dynamic index:

dynamic index = main index + ace side count * secondary index

On point 4, I can only say there will be a major boost on your return because you will play some particular IMPORTANT hands much more accurately, specifically the high bets on soft hands on ace rich AND ace poor conditions.

But the major problem for APs is that there are few books giving you the secondary index matrix, much less the table is not very accurate. And I doubt that even some genius can't calculate the dynamic index on the fly for each hand.

 

[ARK]

I really don't want to join the conversation on this topic because in the end, other APs are my competitors. I have something that makes me quite different from other APs and also make pit boss difficult to figure out my plays, or even better, makes me look like a ploppy playing on hunch. Why give it away?

There are a few things I can say about Advanced Omega II though:

1. I have also tried Wong Half and Zen before I settled with Omega II. The main reason is that Omega II only count ten and nine as high cards. I like the CLEANNESS of risk/reward evaluation on each play. If you include ace, the whole counting system became a mush because ace is really irrelevant on evaluating if the next card will break your hand or not.

2. For betting purpose, Omega II treats ace and ten as equal weight while nine is half weight of ten or ace. With Zen or Wong Half, ace is only half weight of ten. In real world, ace is more important a card than ten.

3. For doubling down ten, you benefit more from ace side count because you add 150% of ace side count to your adjusted true count. <This is how you accurately use basic ace side count.>

4. <About advanced ace side count.> Someday I may write a book to reveal my trade secrets on how to use the secondary index matrix for ace side count. Basically you calculate dynamic index:

dynamic index = main index + ace side count * secondary index

On point 4, I can only say there will be a major boost on your return because you will play some particular IMPORTANT hands much more accurately, specifically the high bets on soft hands on ace rich AND ace poor conditions.

But the major problem for APs is that there are few books giving you the secondary index matrix, much less the table is not very accurate. And I doubt that even some genius can't calculate the dynamic index on the fly for each hand.

Really interesting stuff. The secrecy APs often take about their methods is often frustrating to me yet at the same time completely understandable.

Are you these against shoes? My understanding of Advanced Omega II was that its one of the best for pitch games but I haven't seen anyone using it for shoes.

 

[BJgenius007]

Really interesting stuff. The secrecy APs often take about their methods is often frustrating to me yet at the same time completely understandable.

Are you these against shoes? My understanding of Advanced Omega II was that its one of the best for pitch games but I haven't seen anyone using it for shoes.

It is fantastic on shoe game. Actually it smooths out the variance using Omega II with ace side count.

 

[blackjack avenger]

halve right

2. For betting purpose, Omega II treats ace and ten as equal weight while nine is half weight of ten or ace. With Zen or Wong Half, ace is only half weight of ten. In real world, ace is more important a card than ten.

the above regarding halves is not correct.
Halves treats the 10 & A as -1. Halves has a BC of . 99.
In the real world 10 & A are very close. I think even flip importance depending on rules.

 

[zengrifter]

My understanding of Advanced Omega II was that its one of the best for pitch games but I haven't seen anyone using it for shoes.

Its not ideal for either game. zg

 

[BJgenius007]

Its not ideal for either game. zg

Without ASC, Omega II is only marginally better than Zen. With basic ASC, you will get 25% or 30% more return than using Zen. With advanced ASC, Omega II will double your return than using Zen.