differences in index numbers
January 12th, 2015 at 1:01:19 PM
permalink
I notice some differences in index numbers from source to source. I thought it was widely believed that you stand 16 v 9 at TC=5 in Hilo, but i am using cvdata index generator which gives me stand 16 v 9 at 4. What gives?
If I stand at 4 or 5, will there be much difference? What if I do what Arnold Snyder does and group things into +1, +5, -1, how much will that affect things?
If I stand at 4 or 5, will there be much difference? What if I do what Arnold Snyder does and group things into +1, +5, -1, how much will that affect things?
January 12th, 2015 at 1:52:24 PM
permalink
Don't do +1/+5/-1 etc. They're so simple to memorize, it makes no sense in any case.
Doing something at +4 or +5 doesn't really change much in your EV overall.
Doing something at +4 or +5 doesn't really change much in your EV overall.
January 12th, 2015 at 2:21:24 PM
permalink
There was a pretty knowledgeable poster back on Ken Smith's BJ site that went by AutomaticMonkey. He was/is a real sharp AP, with strong math skills. I wish I had a fraction of his ability.
Anyway, AutoMonk published what he called the Ben Franklin count, recommended for shoe BJ games (which is still available online in a PDF if you google ben franklin count). The Ben Franklin count was basically the level 2 Revere Point Count, as far as tags for counting. The difference is that he rounded off all the index play numbers to either +5 or +10. The name Ben Franklin had something to do with 5 and dime stores (which is what he rounded indices to). I never really got that connection....probably something before my time.
Anyway, the point is that the rounding off of index plays into only 2 numbers, +5 and +10, has almost zero effect on the win rates, when compared to actual precise index plays. It was a difference of a few cents literally. It goes to show that in today's mediocre at best games, especially multi-deck, shoe games, it's really all about the bet spread. Index plays just aren't nearly as important as years ago with better games.
Anyway, AutoMonk published what he called the Ben Franklin count, recommended for shoe BJ games (which is still available online in a PDF if you google ben franklin count). The Ben Franklin count was basically the level 2 Revere Point Count, as far as tags for counting. The difference is that he rounded off all the index play numbers to either +5 or +10. The name Ben Franklin had something to do with 5 and dime stores (which is what he rounded indices to). I never really got that connection....probably something before my time.
Anyway, the point is that the rounding off of index plays into only 2 numbers, +5 and +10, has almost zero effect on the win rates, when compared to actual precise index plays. It was a difference of a few cents literally. It goes to show that in today's mediocre at best games, especially multi-deck, shoe games, it's really all about the bet spread. Index plays just aren't nearly as important as years ago with better games.
January 12th, 2015 at 10:31:24 PM
permalink
Okay so I have been playing around with the index generation a little bit more. Running under the same parameters, sometimes I get stand at 4 for 16v9, sometimes I get 5 for 16v9. sometimes I get double at 0 for 9v3 sometimes i get double at 1 for 9v3. The difference between plays sometimes is very small. So I guess it could go either way.
Sometimes I get nervous that I am learning the wrong numbers. And it's hard to realize mistakes in the short run. you can only realize mistakes in the long run.
Sometimes I get nervous that I am learning the wrong numbers. And it's hard to realize mistakes in the short run. you can only realize mistakes in the long run.
