Blackjack Side Bet needing it's own count.

Ok so there is a 6 deck hand dealt shoe game (not gona say exactly what one sorry), that has a +EV when a single card type (suit doesn't matter) has a deck saturation of 12.5% (instead of the normal ~7.7%). From here on out I'll call this card "Card X."

What I want to do is create a count that makes tracking the % of Card X easy.

What I came up with was +1 for all cards except Card X, and -7 for Card X. And play the side bet when TC=20.

After running a days worth of hand dealt sims on my living room floor I feel like I've made a mistake? This much I know, the Edge for the player starts at 12.5% saturation of Card X in the shoe. My count system I honestly am not sure on though.

Any help? Also hi ;)

If you wanted to count by 6's and 1/2's, or by 12's and 1's, either would be easier than what you're doing. Six non-cards = 1/2. 1 star card = -1/2. Play at or above + 1. Reset your non-card count each 6, because the previous 6 has been added to your +/- 1/2 count. That would be easiest to keep track of if it's baccarat, because it's about average for 1 dealt hand of P/B cards to use up 6.

If it's a multi-player game, it would be easier to do the above head-to-head, with 3 or more players/hands, it would be easier to do with 12 non-cards = 1, 1 star card = -1, play at or above + 2. You wouldn't have to carry over many cards in your head to do multiples in either one. You can count on your fingers and 2 feet as they come out in either case without being obvious.

Quote: beachbumbabs

If you wanted to count by 6's and 1/2's, or by 12's and 1's, either would be easier than what you're doing. Six non-cards = 1/2. 1 star card = -1/2. Play at or above + 1. Reset your non-card count each 6, because the previous 6 has been added to your +/- 1/2 count. That would be easiest to keep track of if it's baccarat, because it's about average for 1 dealt hand of P/B cards to use up 6.

If it's a multi-player game, it would be easier to do the above head-to-head, with 3 or more players/hands, it would be easier to do with 12 non-cards = 1, 1 star card = -1, play at or above + 2. You wouldn't have to carry over many cards in your head to do multiples in either one. You can count on your fingers and 2 feet as they come out in either case without being obvious.

Excuse me if I am wrong, but this method would lead me to think that if 12 non "star" cards came out of the shoe right away that I would have the advantage. Although it seems to me 12.5% saturation of the star card only occurs when 20 non star cards are removed from a single deck, (40 from a double deck, 120 from a six deck ect.).

I could be terribly wrong though. This is a Blackjack side bet I'm trying to develop a count for... 6 decks to be exact.

I see a problem with any "X" type side counts for a winning side-bet. Usually such a side-bet has a rather large -EV. What becomes evident during play is that there are n X's remaining in the shoe divided by remaining decks (or half-decks, ehatever). The problem exists that near the stop card, the count, and the remaining X's in FRONT of the stop card can provide a serious error. I encountered this in the trials of Ace-5 using a 6 deck game with stop card at 4.25 decks penetration.
You have been warned.

I have seen quite a few side bets based on Aces, Sevens etc., as you say it seems quite countable.

Using Super Sevens ( https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/8/#supersevens ) as an example the base payback is 88.600% (based on 6 decks, third card on Blackjack) and that 1/13 of cards in the six decks are 7s. If the 6 decks were manipulated to have 8.1568% of 7s, the HE is 100%. With 4 decks it has to be 8.3606% (i.e. nearly 1 in 12) because there are less decks so the effect of removing one seven is more significant, but that means 6 or less 7s having appeared in the first two decks - doesn't sound too hard to notice.

Of course most casinos offering that kind of bet use a continuous shuffler, so I imagine if you're lucky enough to see one deck in the discard tray with say less than 2 sevens then the bet seems worth doing.

Quote: charliepatrick

Using Super Sevens ( https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/8/#supersevens ) as an example the base payback is 88.600% (based on 6 decks, third card on Blackjack) and that 1/13 of cards in the six decks are 7s.

I just wrote about Super Sevens two weeks ago:

http://apheat.net/2013/09/14/card-counting-the-super-sevens-blackjack-side-bet/

rorry,

I should have identified myself as a non-mathematician, sorry; I was just looking for a way for you to be non-obvious about the counting at the table. I still think it would work mechanically and be easy to not lose your place. The bet-point is much better illustrated by teliot and what he linked for you, however you go about tracking it physically, and he is one of the best (maybe the best; I'm just learning) in the business. I highly recommend you use his numbers and count system valuation over mine.

So here's what sims have found. For an unbalanced count system (+1 all, -7 Card X) you need to wait to hit trigger count 120 then the rest of the deck is well saturated. Sadly this doesn't happen too often.

A much better method is +1 all, -12 Card X. And when TC=20 you have the real edge.

I came up with this late last night and testing is proving VERY profitable.

---

I see Teliot's method is quite similar, I'm unsure what TC system he is using to get to TC trigger of +4 but I believe both counts are just as effective.

PS: Telliot, I've been reading through APHeat... Are you anti-AP?

7.7% is 4 from 52, i.e. your star card is a card of specific rank. Counting a single card is terribly easy, count +1 for every non-star card, and -12 for every star card you see. Note that this is a balanced count.

If your threshold is 12.5%, then 6.5 cards out of 52 cards must be your star card. Such a deck would have a RC of 6.5*12 - 45.5 = 32.5 for a single deck left.
Thus your TC threshold is 32.5.

Quote: Rorry

PS: Telliot, I've been reading through APHeat... Are you anti-AP?

I am pro knowledge.

If my work happens to anger someone who wants to keep it secret so that they can profit from other people's ignorance, then yes, in that sense I am anti-AP. On the other hand, if an AP finds a way to beat a casino and then puts that edge into action, good for them. I have no problem with that.

Quote: MangoJ

If your threshold is 12.5%, then 6.5 cards out of 52 cards must be your star card. Such a deck would have a RC of 6.5*12 - 45.5 = 32.5 for a single deck left.
Thus your TC threshold is 32.5.

Interesting, I had it at 20... Because 4 Star Cards within 32 makes the 12.5%.

Quote: Rorry

Interesting, I had it at 20... Because 4 Star Cards within 32 makes the 12.5%.

Sure, 4 star cards out of 32 cards marks the threshold. The "running" count for that is indeed 20, but for the "true count" you need to divide by the number of decks.
32 cards won't make a full deck, it is a 32/52 deck. You are looking at a true count of 20 / (32/52) = 32.5.