Do you guys round, truncate, or floor the TC?
March 24th, 2013 at 1:33:48 AM
permalink
http://www.blackjackincolor.com/truecount4.htm
I just read this article, and I start to wonder if I've been counting correctly.
I learned card counting from the book Professional Blackjack 1994 edition by Stanford Wong. On page 37, it says "You should truncate, and not round." But what I've been doing is flooring because it seems more reasonable for me.
For example, deviation number for 16 vs 10 is 0, which means if I got 16, I should stands @ 0 or more against dealer's 10.
In this case, if I play six deck game, the shoe just started, and the Running Count is -5, the True Count is approximately -0.9, should I truncate the -0.9 to 0 and therefore stand against 10 because the truncated TC is zero?
That seems weird because -0.9 is definitely below zero.
Whenever I got a Running Count below 0, I don't convert it to True Count. I would just hit 16 against 10 because the TC doesn't exceed 0.
So confusing with the truncating stuff..
I just read this article, and I start to wonder if I've been counting correctly.
I learned card counting from the book Professional Blackjack 1994 edition by Stanford Wong. On page 37, it says "You should truncate, and not round." But what I've been doing is flooring because it seems more reasonable for me.
For example, deviation number for 16 vs 10 is 0, which means if I got 16, I should stands @ 0 or more against dealer's 10.
In this case, if I play six deck game, the shoe just started, and the Running Count is -5, the True Count is approximately -0.9, should I truncate the -0.9 to 0 and therefore stand against 10 because the truncated TC is zero?
That seems weird because -0.9 is definitely below zero.
Whenever I got a Running Count below 0, I don't convert it to True Count. I would just hit 16 against 10 because the TC doesn't exceed 0.
So confusing with the truncating stuff..
Great
March 24th, 2013 at 2:27:37 AM
permalink
It doesn't really matter if you floor or truncate -0.9, as you won't play negative TC with much money on the table.
The key is never round "up", where you overestimate your advantage, and start the bet spread to early. Personally I would round for index play, but floor for betsize.
The key is never round "up", where you overestimate your advantage, and start the bet spread to early. Personally I would round for index play, but floor for betsize.
March 24th, 2013 at 3:59:09 AM
permalink
I also mentioned this in the book:
On page 254 of Professional Blackjack, it says "These tables differ from earlier editions of this book. The change was increasing all the negative numbers by 1 because in the 1981 and earlier editions of Professional Blackjack, strategy numbers were presented using a different assumption as to how to round count per deck."
Therefore, I think if I use the indexes from this book, I should truncate every number because Stanford Wong increased all the negative numbers by 1 from previous edition of the book.
I know lots of things in blackjack don't matter a lot, but correct answer(which generates the highest EV) has to be one. So why not memorize the best choices even though they only have some minor effects.
Do you round the index from Stanford Wong's book?
On page 254 of Professional Blackjack, it says "These tables differ from earlier editions of this book. The change was increasing all the negative numbers by 1 because in the 1981 and earlier editions of Professional Blackjack, strategy numbers were presented using a different assumption as to how to round count per deck."
Therefore, I think if I use the indexes from this book, I should truncate every number because Stanford Wong increased all the negative numbers by 1 from previous edition of the book.
I know lots of things in blackjack don't matter a lot, but correct answer(which generates the highest EV) has to be one. So why not memorize the best choices even though they only have some minor effects.
Do you round the index from Stanford Wong's book?
Great
