I'm asking because I recently ran into the following situation: I use Omega II count system with Ace side count, and I mainly play 2 deck games. In one game there were about 75% of a deck left, and the running count was a whooping +20. However, all 8 aces had been played, but even after adjusting for the Ace side count, the true count still calls for a max bet. So I'm wondering, if the absence of Aces, which eliminates the possibility of a blackjack, increases the house edge by 2.72% like a 1:1 blackjack game would, I would be actually playing a disadvantage game for the rest of the deck regardless of the high count.

So for those of you who keeps ace side count, would you still push out a max bet when there are no aces left but the true count still calls for it?

Thanks!

The player loses the ability to double on soft hands and split aces. But the dealer loses a valuable small card.

All in all, I'd rather play a game with no aces than one with BJ paying 1:1

2-7-8-9: not counted, with 3/4 deck remaining presume 3 of each (std. distribution)

No Aces

10-Jack-Queen-King: 20 more than 3-4-5-6

Approx. Std. Composition: 12 uncounted leaves 28 counted. x+(x+20)=28. Four cards are 3-4-5-6

24 cards are 10-J-Q-K.

Advantage 10's/non-tens = 24/16 or a ratio of 1.5 to 1

Note that for 39 cards the std. ratio is 12/27 or 0.44 to 1 (3-4x bet here... maybe)

So....BJ pays 1:1 (with all cards) is better than a game with no aces remaining, when you're comparing the return/value of a BJ. Don't know about the other values of an ace (doubling down and catching an ace, soft hands, or dealer's small card).

Quote:RSNo aces remaining means the TC (in HiLo) is -4/(48/52) or -4.33.

No it doesn't. You know nothing about the tens.

I've simmed that situation, and for the most part, the TC is still the TC with respect to your edge, with very little effect from the Aces remaining.

For example like the OP's situation

+20 RC 1.5 decks -8 Aces.

There should be 6 Aces in the 1.5 deck, but since it's missing, you -12 RC which would make the RC +8.

RC +8 / 1.5 deck = +6 TC ?

I'm probably so wrong.

Quote:NumpkinHello everyone. Not sure if this has been discussed before, but when there are no aces left in the deck, would the house edge change be the same as Blackjack pays 1:1?

I'm asking because I recently ran into the following situation: I use Omega II count system with Ace side count, and I mainly play 2 deck games. In one game there were about 75% of a deck left, and the running count was a whooping +20. However, all 8 aces had been played, but even after adjusting for the Ace side count, the true count still calls for a max bet. So I'm wondering, if the absence of Aces, which eliminates the possibility of a blackjack, increases the house edge by 2.72% like a 1:1 blackjack game would, I would be actually playing a disadvantage game for the rest of the deck regardless of the high count.

So for those of you who keeps ace side count, would you still push out a max bet when there are no aces left but the true count still calls for it?

Thanks!

Do not really know the answer but I would guess yes (still bet the max or almost max).

The effect of Card Removal an Ace is more than a Ten but not by much.

Checking WoO the Effects of Card Removal are:

Ten = 0.4932%

Ace = 0.5816%.

So like 1 Ace removed is equivalent to around 1.18 Tens removed.

Counting is a linear aproximation of actual EV and it could be that when all Aces are removed, the EV does not behave linearly and drops a lot even with a big positive TC. But I do not think so. I am pretty sure that this has been investigated and is not the case and the TC still works more or less ok.