Tom's newly invented card counting system

Tom's newly invented card counting system or can i invested a new card counting system?

i want to invent a new counting system.
it is to bet by hilo. but to play the and by hand EOR. which means, every hand,we will use a different system. all these different systems will be similar to hilow but with exceptions. then good but not too hard to use. if too hard at that moment, go back to hilo to play that hand.
i tried it in real casino, not that much not-practical.

i explain why and how llater step by step. updates by updates.

1) let's think about the IE. insurance strategy. A is counted by as -1. but it should be counted as 1. in this case, for a new shoe, we need tc4+ to make it +ev to bet insurance. as the cards travel, we need 3+, 2+, 1+. just because the A is +1, not -1. but we count it as -1(or 0). we can adjust it by not hard burden for memory if only we know why it is like this. if you agree with this, all hands will be like this, if only you understand why it is like this, you can do some good devi on strategy.

2) hands: A8V6, we double it at tc1+. but how about last hand has 6 *card 2. the 2 is working as -1. because A8 is crying for card 2. well. it is too hard to give -1 to card 2, 1 to card 3,4,5,6, but we don't really keep it in memory on purpose. because the chance of A8V6 to be present is low. we just need to understand this hand, we really meet this hand, we try to recall our shor memory. if there are many '2"s.

3) hands of 10,9, they are just using hi low. but hands of 11, cards A and 10 are working differently... just do it like above.

4) hands of 12, 13, 16...cards 5,6,7,8,9 are working so differents. we may just use basic strategy. or if that count is just around the point. for example. 12V3, the true count is 1.5 about, we are not really sure 1.4 or 1.6. if you can see a lot of ,7,8,9 on the table or in your memory, you split 77, 88,99 last hand, just stand 12V3. the card 9 reomoved is 19.5 times important that card 2.

there are many other examples. i have the full table of hands eor for each hand using my own CA. i may share it some time later.

so my counting systems. is the same as hilow. but with reference to hand eor.

we need to understand EOR to do good reference. one basic simple is: the left card(or using another logic, dealt cards) should make your hand 21. and that card is not making dealer 11 of 2 cards. and making dealer 16. these are the points make the card EOR high. which means. when playing, we need to focus both on our cards and dealer's card. this is really similar to basic strategy. what we go deeper is we need to know if dealt card is good for us or bad for u. and for the dealer, if dealt is bad for u and good.....i will make the logic clearer later. let's focus on some examples.
example 1:
one deck 84V3. we stand by CD(NOT TD). because we want the "8", but 8 is in this hand. dealer wants 8 to make 11. but dealer has less '8', because we have it in the hand. dealer is easier to get busted.
one deck 93V3. we hit. why? 9 is less, 9 is making us 21. but wait, we look at the dealer 3. 9 less is also good for the dealer, when dealer has less chance to make hand into 3+9=12. so card 9 is good for u, but less, we should stand. but 9 less is good for dealer, we then hit. in this hand. 9's eor is less than 8.
it seems now it explains cd basic strategy better than counting card? but actually cd is counting cards within this hand.

that is all for this post. if positive, i will finish all other hands'a analysis.

The first thing I would suggest is editing your post before hitting the POST button. I'm not sure about much of what you've written because of the simple syntax, spelling and punctuation errors.

Just one example:

"one deck 93V3. we hit. why? 9 is less, 9 is making us 21. but wait, we look at the dealer 3. 9 less is also good for the dealer, when dealer has less chance to make hand into 3+9=12. so card 9 is good for u, but less, we should stand. but 9 less is good for dealer, we then hit. in this hand. 9's eor is less than 8.

What's the purpose of your post if no one can understand what you are saying except you?

Quote: racquet

The first thing I would suggest is editing your post before hitting the POST button. I'm not sure about much of what you've written because of the simple syntax, spelling and punctuation errors.

Just one example:

"one deck 93V3. we hit. why? 9 is less, 9 is making us 21. but wait, we look at the dealer 3. 9 less is also good for the dealer, when dealer has less chance to make hand into 3+9=12. so card 9 is good for u, but less, we should stand. but 9 less is good for dealer, we then hit. in this hand. 9's eor is less than 8.

What's the purpose of your post if no one can understand what you are saying except you?

Its part of the camouflage to make the play unintelligible

Quote: racquet

simple syntax, spelling and punctuation errors.

All that stuff is highly overrated.

Quote: AxelWolf

All that stuff is highly overrated.

I done yes totally agree think.

Syntax is just a tax to be avoided.

AZDuffman and I should agree on the abolishment of this overburdening tax

I should be able to do syn without having tax as well

We all should strive to live syn free

Quote: racquet

The first thing I would suggest is editing your post before hitting the POST button. I'm not sure about much of what you've written because of the simple syntax, spelling and punctuation errors.

Just one example:

"one deck 93V3. we hit. why? 9 is less, 9 is making us 21. but wait, we look at the dealer 3. 9 less is also good for the dealer, when dealer has less chance to make hand into 3+9=12. so card 9 is good for u, but less, we should stand. but 9 less is good for dealer, we then hit. in this hand. 9's eor is less than 8.

What's the purpose of your post if no one can understand what you are saying except you?

that is language. i may feel ashamed to say i studied english as my major in college. but how about maths? i self learned to do a lot on blackjack, bac and poker(After read Great Eliot's articles)... is there no one who understands what i am trying to say?

maybe i just ask:
in single deck, 93V3, the right strategy is to hit, 84v3, it is to stand.
what is the reason behind it?
if there is a reason, then this reason works for the playing efficiency of all hands of blackjack.

if this hand is not important, how about 'A' as side count? do we really make good use of this side count? the A is the same 'direction' =-1 as for our hand total" 9, 10, A8', but total different direction=1 for hand total '11". mostly= '0' as counting system tells us for stiff hand. but when dealer's 6, A =1 again(rule of stand 'soft 17').

Quote: tomchina123

that is language. i may feel ashamed to say i studied english as my major in college

What college? I have kids applying for college soon and want to make sure it's not on their list.

Quote: racquet

What college? I have kids applying for college soon and want to make sure it's not on their list.

SHK

School of Hard Knocks

Quote: racquet

What college? I have kids applying for college soon and want to make sure it's not on their list.

well, if your kids want to learn maths by Chinese language, or just learn Chinese as a major... i need to make sure of your understanding first.

如果你想用中文写文章，我想阅读下。

and i don't want the thread to go to politics. they are just 2 languges.
what i replied to this guy's comment was neutral. what i rereplied to him is soft defense to his offense.
if this guy goes further, i hope the administator of the forum makes good judgement.

Quote: racquet

What college? I have kids applying for college soon and want to make sure it's not on their list.

let's focus the blackjack first?

in single deck, 93V3, the right strategy is to hit, 84v3, it is to stand.
what is the reason behind it?

another one. which hand has more EV?
11V5
109V8
AAV4(one split, one card)
we use our own calculations. and we say how to calculate it.
or we say how many sites on the internet can calcuate it without downloaded software.

Quote: racquet

What college? I have kids applying for college soon and want to make sure it's not on their list.

I take it you speak fluent Chinese, that you can criticize his English twice now?

Yeah, didn't think so.

No doubt his posts are a tough slog. You've made your point. I suggest you block him, or at least back off insulting him. Thanks.

that is the understanding i want.
i may use it a term for the thread, the playing eor. all cards will be counted differently. in Peter Griffin, the theory of blackjack, fifth edition, chapter 4 ,5, this topic was covered).
another example. if 16V10, A12345 is small card, 6,7,8,9. 10 is big card....
i want to find sth in common for playing all hands: like if the card makes us bust. if the cards are making dealier, 11 or 16.( first card). bust( second card)... that the logic is so twisted when covering all different hands make my thinking lasting no more than one hour while the logic of others, more than weeks. which make my english poorer, i had my english criticized heavily and grouply some years ago..i knew i learned this language hard.i learned physics and industrial designing and boxing hard.

to add sth, even betting EOR, we use high-lo, when, in a roud, we see a lot 7s, we may temporarily add 0.5 if only we know we need to do sth when seeing 9s. also 2... then we are using Wong' halves. we can go even further:
2 0.7
3 0.9
4 1.2
5 1.5
6 0.9
7 0.5
8 -0.1
9 -0.5
10 -1.0
A -1.0
(dealer stands S17, DAS, MAcau style ENHC, data from 'bjstrat'. calculated by me. i will soon learn to calucate it myself).
the logic here: 4,5 will makes dealer 20,21 from 16, but 6 is not. so 4, 5 is more important to dealer). if too complex, there is explanation: we don't really use it when we are tired or we need to do sth on clumps, Aces. we don't even use any deviations because of importance order. but when we have nothing else to have our attention, we can do sth more from our understanding how betting and playing is working.

i will write more on this kind of things if only i feel writing is helping me to think. and by the way, i am writing them in Chinese in China, just for myself.

i want to add more on above info.
by true count, the small errors are never a big problem. if we have 2% edge, we take it as 3%, even at 4%(but not 5%, as i simulated, no doubles splits considered), we can even make better final result with some bigger bankroll fluctuations(the 3 %) . which means human adjustment is not necessairly doing worse then computer.
for fluctuation, some hands like A2V5, A4V4, 9V3, ,9V7(deviation) ,22v3, 22v7,we can make less doubles, splits, which make few EV difference. but work more on fluctuation.
the hand A4v4, after a lot of cards removed, we really don't know which card removed is good or bad for this hand. the EOR is so different from the counting systems. we just do it by our feeling, not by maths. or if we see a lot of Tens dealt, we double. or if we win, we double, we lose, we don't double.

maybe the topics are talked to death before by many authorities, i just share what i think. not to state or claim.( i don't know which english word works my intention out), i am still reading and learning from others. and i now feel strange by keeping writing more without any feedback. i will stop for some days.

Over a month ago I replied to the OP's original post suggesting that if he was looking for advice on this forum, he would stand a better chance of getting helpful responses if he posted in more easily understood English. He sounded serious to me, but honestly I really could make no sense of what he was talking about. It had something to do with counting, and possible improvements or questions about basic strategy.

My post was not politically correct. Honestly, I dashed it off quickly, although what I might have said that might have passed muster with the PC police was simply, "Say what?"

Regarding the tone of my comment, there were comments from two other forum members that also spoke to this issue. I won't say that they agreed with me, but the comments seemed in the same vein.

The OP responded, I think, by telling us that he had majored in English in college. Not sure. But that's what I got from his reply.

I answered that I wanted to make sure that my kids did not apply to that college. Again, off topic, politically incorrect, and insensitive. No question.

I was taken to task by a moderator for criticizing his lack of English, since I was not fluent in Chinese.

I was advised to "back off."

So I did. I sat back and waited. I wanted to see what the blackjack experts and the diligent moderator would contribute to the post - to see what advice and support they would offer that would address the actual topic presented in the original message.

I was sure that if I just "backed off" that the OP would be engaged by our other members in a thoughtful, respectful, diverse, culturally aware, sensitive, and erudite discussion about the intricate vagaries and "emanating penumbas" of basic strategy, as is always the case in this forum. I expected to see references and citations from the writings of Thorpe, Wong, Huston, Griffin, Confucius, Sun Yat Sen and Chairman Mao.

I was sure that my criticism - that the post was unintelligible - would be shown to be the horrible, insensitive thing that it was, because of all of the wonderful exchange of ideas that would ensue, demonstrating clearly that I was wrong, once I stood back and got out of the way.

But a month later, nobody has chosen to respond on-topic in this thread. Nobody, not even our vigilant moderator.

I'll accept that my two earlier posts were as horrible and unthinking as anyone wants them to be. I apologize sincerely to the OP if he took my responses to be insensitive. I 'll offer no excuses or comparisons with other posts on this forum.

But I would like, respectfully, to ask why, in over a month, no one has responded to the OP with any comments relevant to his post?

Quote: racquet

Over a month ago I replied to the OP's original post suggesting that if he was looking for advice on this forum, he would stand a better chance of getting helpful responses if he posted in more easily understood English. He sounded serious to me, but honestly I really could make no sense of what he was talking about. It had something to do with counting, and possible improvements or questions about basic strategy.

My post was not politically correct. Honestly, I dashed it off quickly, although what I might have said that might have passed muster with the PC police was simply, "Say what?"

Regarding the tone of my comment, there were comments from two other forum members that also spoke to this issue. I won't say that they agreed with me, but the comments seemed in the same vein.

The OP responded, I think, by telling us that he had majored in English in college. Not sure. But that's what I got from his reply.

I answered that I wanted to make sure that my kids did not apply to that college. Again, off topic, politically incorrect, and insensitive. No question.

I was taken to task by a moderator for criticizing his lack of English, since I was not fluent in Chinese.

I was advised to "back off."

So I did. I sat back and waited. I wanted to see what the blackjack experts and the diligent moderator would contribute to the post - to see what advice and support they would offer that would address the actual topic presented in the original message.

I was sure that if I just "backed off" that the OP would be engaged by our other members in a thoughtful, respectful, diverse, culturally aware, sensitive, and erudite discussion about the intricate vagaries and "emanating penumbas" of basic strategy, as is always the case in this forum. I expected to see references and citations from the writings of Thorpe, Wong, Huston, Griffin, Confucius, Sun Yat Sen and Chairman Mao.

I was sure that my criticism - that the post was unintelligible - would be shown to be the horrible, insensitive thing that it was, because of all of the wonderful exchange of ideas that would ensue, demonstrating clearly that I was wrong, once I stood back and got out of the way.

But a month later, nobody has chosen to respond on-topic in this thread. Nobody, not even our vigilant moderator.

I'll accept that my two earlier posts were as horrible and unthinking as anyone wants them to be. I apologize sincerely to the OP if he took my responses to be insensitive. I 'll offer no excuses or comparisons with other posts on this forum.

But I would like, respectfully, to ask why, in over a month, no one has responded to the OP with any comments relevant to his post?

Point well taken. I appreciate that you made an effort to understand. I think the rest of us are in a similar situation, not really comprehending any nuance or game flow from Tom's proposal.

I think perhaps there does need to be a truly bilingual person in the conversation, or else we won't be able to offer any insight or advice on the game. That's definitely not me.

I don't think most easily available translators are useful for a technical discussion of any depth. Maybe there's one that speaks math and someone knows of it?

Quote: tomchina123

<snip>maybe i just ask:
in single deck, 93V3, the right strategy is to hit, 84v3, it is to stand.
what is the reason behind it?
if there is a reason, then this reason works for the playing efficiency of all hands of blackjack.

tomchina123,

Assuming the game is S17, according to the Wizard of Odds (see https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/9/1ds17r4/ ), for 84 vs. 3 the Stand EV is -0.220209, while the Hit EV is -0.229755. Since the Stand EV is larger (in this case, less negative) than the Hit EV, BS is to Stand.

On the other hand, for 93 vs. 3 the Stand EV is -0.261815, while the Hit EV is -0.255712. Since the Hit EV is larger (in this case, less negative) than the Stand EV, BS is to Hit.

You are correct when you say "if there is a reason, then this reason works for the playing efficiency of all hands of blackjack": in every case, the optimal choice is the option with the highest EV.

Hope this helps!

Dog Hand

I think what he said “ major in English “ means he was in Chinese college chose English as his foreign language instead of Russian. ( I may be wrong).

Quote: tomchina123

.......1) let's think about the IE. nsurance strategy. A is counted by as -1. but it should be counted as 1. in this case, for a new shoe, we need tc4+ to make it +ev to bet insurance. as the cards travel, we need 3+, 2+, 1+. just because the A is +1, not -1. but we count it as -1(or 0). we can adjust it by not hard burden for memory if only we know why it is like this. if you agree with this, all hands will be like this, if only you understand why it is like this, you can do some good devi on strategy.......

I haven't been able to understand the whole post, but you are on the right track when you said for an insurance side count you need to treat "A as 1".
If you have found a way to make it "... not hard burden for memory if only we know why it is like this", then good for you.
It seems like you are good enough to be able to use your strategy^*^, either with a team or by yourself.
^*^: Edit, this originally said "system", but then I remembered that on this site "system" is generally considered a "bad word".
But for someone like me, I would only be able to play at a live internet casino using a more complex count than "hi lo".
For keeping a side count, I would use:
1. A "true %" by using a spreadsheet to keep track of all the cards left etc, and when the "non-ten" (A to 9) cards are less than 2/3 of the shoe that is left, then it would be +EV to make the insurance bet.
2. Or a count like the one shown in the link below (for when your are in a "brick and mortar" casino):
https://www.888casino.com/blog/side-bets/card-counting-blackjack-insurance

Quote: tomchina123

..... we need to focus both on our cards and dealer's card......

That is also true, if the player's first card is worth X, the dealer shows the same card it is worth Y, and if the player looked at their cards after looking at the dealer's up-card, it is worth Z (see examples):

Example 1: if the player's first card is a 5 it is worth -19.65% (to the player on average) and if the dealer is showing a 5 in the same hand, it is worth +2.995% (on average).
Also, if the player hadn't looked at their cards until they saw the dealer's up-card, then the average EV of that hand would be +19.52%.

Example 2: if the player's first card is a 10 it is worth +14.35% (to the player on average) and if the dealer is showing a 10 in the same hand, it is worth -0.9487% (on average).
Also, if the player hadn't looked at their cards until they saw the dealer's up-card, then the average EV of that hand would be -17.36%.

Rules used for above examples: infinite deck game where BJ pays 3/2, and dealer stands on 17, double any 2 card total, split once and double after split.

Used MGP's BJ CA and http://www.bjstrat.net/cgi-bin/cdca.cgi^^^, for working out the above values.

^^^: used 41000000 decks for this site, because it doesn't have an "infinite deck option".

Hope this was helpful.

-------------------------

Quote: beachbumbabs

...I think perhaps there does need to be a truly bilingual person in the conversation, or else we won't be able to offer any insight or advice on the game. ...

I agree with the above, and you (tomchina123) should ask if there are people on this site who are good at blackjack and can understand Chinese well, as I think a lot of people want to help you out, if they can (this seems unlikely, as I think they would have replied to you by now if they could).

Lastly, I congratulate you for using your non-native language to try to write a post that you think could benefit other readers and yourself.
English*** is one of the hardest languages to learn as a 2nd language.

***: English is my first language but I have a communication disorder, so I can find it hard to understand things or get my point across clearly.

Quote: Francisco

I think what he said “ major in English “ means he was in Chinese college chose English as his foreign language instead of Russian. ( I may be wrong).

that is right. i studied english as a majoy in China. i wrote and spoke Chinese english.
if there is an attitue to choose first before reading this read, i ask them to think i can do combinational anylysis on blackjack, poker and bac. in blackjack, it is like hand cacluator in wizard's site. i have full unerstanding of what i am doing. it is by excel. it works. i make comments on what i've found in the game.
i had wanted to use 'hand EOR'. this term will explain a lot things. and i have done eors for all hands by my own calcuation, except the splitting.
i give another full example:
by 12V6(s17). the index of Wong is 0. while the I18 is -1. what will reader believe?
EV D -1.7%
2 removed 0.2%
3 removed 0.2%
4 removed 0.2%
5 removed 0.2%
6 removed 0.1%
7 removed 0.2%
8 removed 0.2%
9 removed 0.2%
10 removed -0.4%
A removed 0.3%
the EV D= ev difference. it means, if we hit, we need =1.7. then we can see 1)1 is working oppositely. 2)789 is working.
so by true count, we need to assume how many 789 is removed. then TC 0 OR -1 is write or wrong. for this hand i prefer -1.
this is just an example. but every hand, the eor is different. we don't necessarily need to remember all. just to know in indices are not exact math. we try to use what we can do.

Quote: ksdjdj

I haven't been able to understand the whole post, but you are on the right track when you said for an insurance side count you need to treat "A as 1".
If you have found a way to make it "... not hard burden for memory if only we know why it is like this", then good for you.
It seems like you are good enough to be able to use your strategy^*^, either with a team or by yourself.
^*^: Edit, this originally said "system", but then I remembered that on this site "system" is generally considered a "bad word".
But for someone like me, I would only be able to play at a live internet casino using a more complex count than "hi lo".
For keeping a side count, I would use:
1. A "true %" by using a spreadsheet to keep track of all the cards left etc, and when the "non-ten" (A to 9) cards are less than 2/3 of the shoe that is left, then it would be +EV to make the insurance bet.
2. Or a count like the one shown in the link below (for when your are in a "brick and mortar" casino):
https://www.888casino.com/blog/side-bets/card-counting-blackjack-insurance



That is also true, if the player's first card is worth X, the dealer shows the same card it is worth Y, and if the player looked at their cards after looking at the dealer's up-card, it is worth Z (see examples):

Example 1: if the player's first card is a 5 it is worth -19.65% (to the player on average) and if the dealer is showing a 5 in the same hand, it is worth +2.995% (on average).
Also, if the player hadn't looked at their cards until they saw the dealer's up-card, then the average EV of that hand would be +19.52%.

Example 2: if the player's first card is a 10 it is worth +14.35% (to the player on average) and if the dealer is showing a 10 in the same hand, it is worth -0.9487% (on average).
Also, if the player hadn't looked at their cards until they saw the dealer's up-card, then the average EV of that hand would be -17.36%.

Rules used for above examples: infinite deck game where BJ pays 3/2, and dealer stands on 17, double any 2 card total, split once and double after split.

Used MGP's BJ CA and http://www.bjstrat.net/cgi-bin/cdca.cgi^^^, for working out the above values.

^^^: used 41000000 decks for this site, because it doesn't have an "infinite deck option".

Hope this was helpful.

-------------------------

I agree with the above, and you (tomchina123) should ask if there are people on this site who are good at blackjack and can understand Chinese well, as I think a lot of people want to help you out, if they can (this seems unlikely, as I think they would have replied to you by now if they could).

Lastly, I congratulate you for using your non-native language to try to write a post that you think could benefit other readers and yourself.
English*** is one of the hardest languages to learn as a 2nd language.

***: English is my first language but I have a communication disorder, so I can find it hard to understand things or get my point across clearly.

i can only answer to some points:
i don't really need help. except i want to learn how to do ca of splits to 4 hands. otherwise, i have done what MJP and bjstrat did.
i just shared what i knew and found.

Quote: DogHand

tomchina123,

Assuming the game is S17, according to the Wizard of Odds (see https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/9/1ds17r4/ ), for 84 vs. 3 the Stand EV is -0.220209, while the Hit EV is -0.229755. Since the Stand EV is larger (in this case, less negative) than the Hit EV, BS is to Stand.

On the other hand, for 93 vs. 3 the Stand EV is -0.261815, while the Hit EV is -0.255712. Since the Hit EV is larger (in this case, less negative) than the Stand EV, BS is to Hit.

You are correct when you say "if there is a reason, then this reason works for the playing efficiency of all hands of blackjack": in every case, the optimal choice is the option with the highest EV.

Hope this helps!

Dog Hand

thanks for help. but i calculated this and knew this and shared the reason.
i don't know why all think little of me, even in China, i have a wechat group. there are some big money winners in my group. some wants me to be his student, some said: you finally understand sth of blackjack. in fact, this guy is a beginner.
why took me as a beginner because i don't win big money? but i won small moneys for many years. and Wizard, Eliot is not either big money winner.
i can do so many difficult calcuations. and write so many things(chinese website).

Could you please show me your website ?

Quote: tomchina123

that is language. i may feel ashamed to say i studied english as my major in college. but how about maths? i self learned to do a lot on blackjack, bac and poker(After read Great Eliot's articles)... is there no one who understands what i am trying to say?

maybe i just ask:
in single deck, 93V3, the right strategy is to hit, 84v3, it is to stand.
what is the reason behind it?
if there is a reason, then this reason works for the playing efficiency of all hands of blackjack.

Tom, I think what you said is only for SINGLE deck game . . .

1st, website: i had made my own. but it was mainly the copy of wizard's site. daily visit: less than 3 persons. so i gave them up. this is a chinese blog website. or a high-end ask-and answer website, famous : https://www.zhihu.com/people/hu-xiao-jia-96/posts, chinese,no ads at all(i was wronged before) . baccarat info is not allowed. poker is ok, so i did a lot of maths on poker. and put them into articles. now blackjack. i still need to play to make money. i will fly to south korean tomorrow. i wrote for the reason only by this way,i can keep learning. now i may even cannot tell i learn to play or i play to learn. Life makes me a person like this, i cannot help. and i cannot help to say, i developed a world-class rental LED screen system,by many years, like this system, i know it is right by many ways. but it is not well accepted by the industry, if any would wonder what life i am living. i can tell: before this rental system, i made some good money by other LED screen designs with my Israel boss.

2nd. this hand is for single deck.

Quote: tomchina123

1st, website: i had made my own. but it was mainly the copy of wizard's site. daily visit: less than 3 persons. so i gave them up. this is a chinese blog website. or a high-end ask-and answer website, famous : https://www.zhihu.com/people/hu-xiao-jia-96/posts, chinese,no ads at all(i was wronged before) . baccarat info is not allowed. poker is ok, so i did a lot of maths on poker. and put them into articles. now blackjack. i still need to play to make money. i will fly to south korean tomorrow. i wrote for the reason only by this way,i can keep learning. now i may even cannot tell i learn to play or i play to learn. Life makes me a person like this, i cannot help. and i cannot help to say, i developed a world-class rental LED screen system,by many years, like this system, i know it is right by many ways. but it is not well accepted by the industry, if any would wonder what life i am living. i can tell: before this rental system, i made some good money by other LED screen designs with my Israel boss.

2nd. this hand is for single deck.

Can't access to your website ?

tomchina, I have done calculations similar to what you have done, although I have done them for 1, 2,6 and 8 decks. The effects of EOR of various ranks on "close-call" decisions is far more important for 1 deck than for 6 or 8 deck.

The Hi-Lo count is pretty good for some decisions such as 15v10, 15v9 and Insurance, but is bad for 16v10, 10v10, 13v2, 12v3,4, etc.

Regarding your questions on doing combinational analysis on split pairs (with resplitting): LOL, good question, I don't know how to do it any better than the approximations used by Wizard and bjstrat in their CA hand evaluators; although the rigorous combinatorial analysis of split/resplit pairs is not a question with much practical significance. That's why we all use approximations.

Quote: tomchina123

i can only answer to some points:
i don't really need help. except i want to learn how to do ca of splits to 4 hands. otherwise, i have done what MJP and bjstrat did.
i just shared what i knew and found.

Here is an interesting link, but I don't know if the link below is helpful*** to you (as I haven't learnt those formulas, and I don't know if you can use those formulas for anything other than working out basic strategy,)

http://www.professorbray.net/Teaching/89s-MOU/2017-SummerTerm2/Papers/CWR_Paper1_Blackjack.pdf

***: page 21 is where it explains how to work out the EV of splitting.

There is a problem with it though because it says "To make things easier, we assume that player won’t split again after splitting.", and you wanted to learn how to do a "ca of splits to 4 hands".

Even so, someone better at this than me may tell you if this is a good starting point or not for what you want to do.

Update (4 am Pac time):

Also, with the bjstrat website, would changing the "shoe composition" from 4 to 2 for the cards you want to split help in getting a better estimate for what the EV is, when splitting to 4 hands in a 1-deck game ?

Quote: ksdjdj

Here is an interesting link, but I don't know if the link below is helpful*** to you (as I haven't learnt those formulas, and I don't know if you can use those formulas for anything other than working out basic strategy,)

http://www.professorbray.net/Teaching/89s-MOU/2017-SummerTerm2/Papers/CWR_Paper1_Blackjack.pdf

***: page 21 is where it explains how to work out the EV of splitting.

There is a problem with it though because it says "To make things easier, we assume that player won’t split again after splitting.", and you wanted to learn how to do a "ca of splits to 4 hands".

Even so, someone better at this than me may tell you if this is a good starting point or not for what you want to do.

The link you provided assumes no resplit and also assumes that both split pair cards have the same EV -which they do before you hit them, but it gives the 2nd hand no equity for having knowledge of what the cards were when the first hand was hit. So it is a below-average way of calculating the split pair EV.

Quote: ksdjdj

Also, with the bjstrat website, would changing the "shoe composition" from 4 to 2 for the cards you want to split help in getting a better estimate for what the EV is, when splitting to 4 hands in a 1-deck game ?

Confusing way to word your question, but my answer is NO. Bjstrat website calculator does indeed provide you with calculated values of the incrementally higher EV of resplit pairs - when you check "optimum strategy" rather than "basic strategy" in the inputs above. I don't think you can get a better analysis of 4 way split/resplit of pairs than the bjstrat calculator provides without doing a simulation.

Quote: gordonm888

Regarding your questions on doing combinational analysis on split pairs (with resplitting): LOL, good question, I don't know how to do it any better than the approximations used by Wizard and bjstrat in their CA hand evaluators; although the rigorous combinatorial analysis of split/resplit pairs is not a question with much practical significance. That's why we all use approximations.

would a free and open source blackjack engine help to do statistical (i.e. Monte Carlo) analysis?

I cannot post the link because I am still new tp the forum...

Quote: kuroshivo

would a free and open source blackjack engine help to do statistical (i.e. Monte Carlo) analysis?

I cannot post the link because I am still new to the forum...

Yes. And I would certainly be interested in an open source blackjack engine to do statistical (i.e. Monte Carlo) analysis, as would many other people I think.

Quote: gordonm888

Yes. And I would certainly be interested in an open source blackjack engine to do statistical (i.e. Monte Carlo) analysis, as would many other people I think.

I still cannot post the link but there is another thread in the forum called "yet another derivation of the basic strategy" where one of the admins posted the URL.

You can browser Github slash seamplex slash libreblackajck to see the code. There is a link to the webpage with the docs.

Let me know if you can find it.

Quote: kuroshivo

I still cannot post the link but there is another thread in the forum called "yet another derivation of the basic strategy" where one of the admins posted the URL.

You can browser Github slash seamplex slash libreblackajck to see the code. There is a link to the webpage with the docs.

Let me know if you can find it.

Here's the link from my other post:

Quote: beachbumbabs

Ok, here is the link that your readme points to:

https://www.seamplex.com/blackjack/

It appears to have further links to the programming, and indicates which libraries it accesses in order to run (that you have to download or hook into, not sure how it manifests). I'm on my phone and not going further trying to run it, but if someone who is in a position to use and evaluate this program would look at it and report back, I'd appreciate it.

Quote: ksdjdj

Here is an interesting link, but I don't know if the link below is helpful*** to you (as I haven't learnt those formulas, and I don't know if you can use those formulas for anything other than working out basic strategy,)

http://www.professorbray.net/Teaching/89s-MOU/2017-SummerTerm2/Papers/CWR_Paper1_Blackjack.pdf

***: page 21 is where it explains how to work out the EV of splitting.

There is a problem with it though because it says "To make things easier, we assume that player won’t split again after splitting.", and you wanted to learn how to do a "ca of splits to 4 hands".

Even so, someone better at this than me may tell you if this is a good starting point or not for what you want to do.

Update (4 am Pac time):

Also, with the bjstrat website, would changing the "shoe composition" from 4 to 2 for the cards you want to split help in getting a better estimate for what the EV is, when splitting to 4 hands in a 1-deck game ?

thanks.

Quote: gordonm888

tomchina, I have done calculations similar to what you have done, although I have done them for 1, 2,6 and 8 decks. The effects of EOR of various ranks on "close-call" decisions is far more important for 1 deck than for 6 or 8 deck.

The Hi-Lo count is pretty good for some decisions such as 15v10, 15v9 and Insurance, but is bad for 16v10, 10v10, 13v2, 12v3,4, etc.

Regarding your questions on doing combinational analysis on split pairs (with resplitting): LOL, good question, I don't know how to do it any better than the approximations used by Wizard and bjstrat in their CA hand evaluators; although the rigorous combinatorial analysis of split/resplit pairs is not a question with much practical significance. That's why we all use approximations.

thanks. the 'split' will be my lifetime thing to do. i have read your other posts on this topic. you are a good prefessor.
to update what i said in one answer i would go to korean for some time to make money, now i am back after 18 days. more than 10 hours a day. quite fruitful. bankroll is doubled a little more. at br=USD30,000. i played small. USD30---500 per bet. walkerhill bared me playing shoegame of blackjack. my first time. they are famous for barring.
earning is too much more than EV. what can i say. i spent years on learning. luck pays to learning. and i have more money to meet next big losing streak.
on details, it is too detailed to be done... it is not good games compared to USA. but better for beginners as an asian.

the hand EOR is not practical, but realistic.
for example, 3 max bets at the table, hands: 20, 20, 16, dealer is 10 showing up.true count: 0 or i have tracked the clumps. i will do a lot of memory work as how to play the 16, if to hit or stand. i know by maths this 'hit' or 'stand' is of small difference. but by money, it is too big a difference.
i just want to play this 16 to my most understanding and memory. 6 is a high card for 16. A is now a small card.
if i have done my best for this 16, just let it to be what the result is. but if i haven't done by best. i would regret a lot.
hands like 12v2,3,4, 16V9,10, 15v10, 1010V6, A8v6... the count is just around the deviation. which makes me play like playing poker. thinking hard, playing chips...

Quote: tomchina123

thanks. the 'split' will be my lifetime thing to do. i have read your other posts on this topic. you are a good prefessor.
to update what i said in one answer i would go to korean for some time to make money, now i am back after 18 days. more than 10 hours a day. quite fruitful. bankroll is doubled a little more. at br=USD30,000. i played small. USD30---500 per bet. walkerhill bared me playing shoegame of blackjack. my first time. they are famous for barring.
earning is too much more than EV. what can i say. i spent years on learning. luck pays to learning. and i have more money to meet next big losing streak.
on details, it is too detailed to be done... it is not good games compared to USA. but better for beginners as an asian.

Well, either you're running very good, or your system is working well for you, doubling your br in 18 days like that. Congrats!

thanks.
it is hoped that the system is not understood as secret system as betting system or so.
it is maths. it can be talked and published.
it is all written in this thread. i am sure hand EOR is just right. every hand has a counting system. maybe too difficult for the public. but i have started it. i have made it fully at my own software. my software goes the same with the public ones as for making basic strategy and deviations.
and i cut some Aces. some shuffling is just right for me. too easy to track.
i will come to USA, when i am more ready.

Quote: tomchina123

thanks.
it is hoped that the system is not understood as secret system as betting system or so.
it is maths. it can be talked and published.
it is all written in this thread. i am sure hand EOR is just right. every hand has a counting system. maybe too difficult for the public. but i have started it. i have made it fully at my own software. my software goes the same with the public ones as for making basic strategy and deviations.
and i cut some Aces. some shuffling is just right for me. too easy to track.
i will come to USA, when i am more ready.

You should let us know when you come over. If nothing else, some of us could meet up with you, share a meal, discuss counting systems and such.

it will be very nice. i worry i am too lonely in USA. i would also be intereted in team work by many ways.
i just use hilo.
i would do sth on strategy devitations according to remembered cards. for betting, any system is good enough. it is humanly possible to reach to nearly 100%.
for tracking, it is also a new challenge as for how to do with 14, 15,16 V 10. actually, even 16V7, if counted right. tc is more than 3, we should stand.
thanks for your comment, i feel it is a big encouragement.

Quote: beachbumbabs

You should let us know when you come over. If nothing else, some of us could meet up with you, share a meal, discuss counting systems and such.

Might I suggesting timing a trip with a WoV meetup, where you could meet a fairly good group of people and professionals from these forums =).

Quote: Romes

Might I suggesting timing a trip with a WoV meetup, where you could meet a fairly good group of people and professionals from these forums =).

I suggest so, also.
Romes is the guest of ' GAMBLING WITH AN EDGE". counting is now like the view from DON JOHNSON.
I will meet Romes personally and grouply. if there is a meetup.

if you are using chinese wechat, you are welcome to add my wechat, tom0056, i will add u to my wechat group. in there, a few Chinese AP.
i am very generous there. i share many counting systems for free. like bac fortune 6.
baccarat fortune 6 ，1 paid 12 or 20
standard HE: -0.16683572


http://miplet.net/table/

baccarat fortune 6 ，1 paid 12 or 20
Removed	HE=-0.166835720405581	EOR	*777	counting	true count
1	-0.167159715	-0.000323994	-0.251743643		14* 789 removed
2	-0.167119596	-0.000283876	-0.220571264
3	-0.167772142	-0.000936421	-0.72759934	-1
4	-0.167085144	-0.000249423	-0.193801906
5	-0.166982297	-0.000146577	-0.113890257
6	-0.171987132	-0.005151412	-4.002646941	-4
7	-0.163138636	0.003697085	2.872634849	3
8	-0.163597636	0.003238085	2.515991876	2
9	-0.164252134	0.002583586	2.007446615	2
10	-0.167442484	-0.000606763	-0.471454997	-0.5

I make it all by myself. so there is no copyright or so.
i can do all kinds of all counting systems. i share it all by free.

Quote: tomchina123

I suggest so, also.
Romes is the guest of ' GAMBLING WITH AN EDGE". counting is now like the view from DON JOHNSON.
I will meet Romes personally and grouply. if there is a meetup.

I'm nooooooo Don Johnson... give me 10 years ;-).

i'll give you Don Knotts as Barney .

-deleted-

Quote: tomchina123

if you are using chinese wechat, you are welcome to add my wechat, tom0056, i will add u to my wechat group. in there, a few Chinese AP.
i am very generous there. i share many counting systems for free. like bac fortune 6.
baccarat fortune 6 ，1 paid 12 or 20
standard HE: -0.16683572


http://miplet.net/table/

baccarat fortune 6 ，1 paid 12 or 20
Removed	HE=-0.166835720405581	EOR	*777	counting	true count
1	-0.167159715	-0.000323994	-0.251743643		14* 789 removed
2	-0.167119596	-0.000283876	-0.220571264
3	-0.167772142	-0.000936421	-0.72759934	-1
4	-0.167085144	-0.000249423	-0.193801906
5	-0.166982297	-0.000146577	-0.113890257
6	-0.171987132	-0.005151412	-4.002646941	-4
7	-0.163138636	0.003697085	2.872634849	3
8	-0.163597636	0.003238085	2.515991876	2
9	-0.164252134	0.002583586	2.007446615	2
10	-0.167442484	-0.000606763	-0.471454997	-0.5

I make it all by myself. so there is no copyright or so.
i can do all kinds of all counting systems. i share it all by free.

We have done that long time ago, see image file below. We prefer unbalance counting system, which is 14% lower than complex true count system in term of ev/shoe. The ev/shoe = 0.087unit compare to complex true count system(ev/shoe =0.101 unit/shoe).

Image link : https://imge.to/i/4guVZ


The trigger RC is between RC=91 and RC = 104.

Quote: ssho88

Quote: tomchina123

if you are using chinese wechat, you are welcome to add my wechat, tom0056, i will add u to my wechat group. in there, a few Chinese AP.
i am very generous there. i share many counting systems for free. like bac fortune 6.
baccarat fortune 6 ，1 paid 12 or 20
standard HE: -0.16683572


http://miplet.net/table/

baccarat fortune 6 ，1 paid 12 or 20
Removed	HE=-0.166835720405581	EOR	*777	counting	true count
1	-0.167159715	-0.000323994	-0.251743643		14* 789 removed
2	-0.167119596	-0.000283876	-0.220571264
3	-0.167772142	-0.000936421	-0.72759934	-1
4	-0.167085144	-0.000249423	-0.193801906
5	-0.166982297	-0.000146577	-0.113890257
6	-0.171987132	-0.005151412	-4.002646941	-4
7	-0.163138636	0.003697085	2.872634849	3
8	-0.163597636	0.003238085	2.515991876	2
9	-0.164252134	0.002583586	2.007446615	2
10	-0.167442484	-0.000606763	-0.471454997	-0.5

I make it all by myself. so there is no copyright or so.
i can do all kinds of all counting systems. i share it all by free.

We have done that long time ago, see image file below. We prefer unbalance counting system, which is 14% lower than complex true count system in term of ev/shoe. The ev/shoe = 0.087unit compare to complex true count system(ev/shoe =0.101 unit/shoe).

Image link : https://imge.to/i/4guVZ


The trigger RC is between RC=91 and RC = 104.

it is interesting. and professional.
1) i hate to see tables without EOR showing. that is the reason i like great Eliot. who is showing Eor all the time. of course, his counting system is always textbook style. much more complete.
2) if to use running count, it must go with hands.
like hands=40, rc=???
hands=45, rc=???
hand cards=4.93.
i am not doing it for now. it is some time. and i never count bac side bet.
3) another thing my counting tag is closer to EOR. then more powerful, for bac side bet, using decimal will not make it as hard as Standford Wong's halves. BAC is not blackjack. decimal is not a big burden for paper and pens. so this industry is not making a change for decimal for a bac sidebet counting system.

anyway, yours is a prefessional one.

Quote: tomchina123

Quote: ssho88

Quote: tomchina123

if you are using chinese wechat, you are welcome to add my wechat, tom0056, i will add u to my wechat group. in there, a few Chinese AP.
i am very generous there. i share many counting systems for free. like bac fortune 6.
baccarat fortune 6 ，1 paid 12 or 20
standard HE: -0.16683572


http://miplet.net/table/

baccarat fortune 6 ，1 paid 12 or 20
Removed	HE=-0.166835720405581	EOR	*777	counting	true count
1	-0.167159715	-0.000323994	-0.251743643		14* 789 removed
2	-0.167119596	-0.000283876	-0.220571264
3	-0.167772142	-0.000936421	-0.72759934	-1
4	-0.167085144	-0.000249423	-0.193801906
5	-0.166982297	-0.000146577	-0.113890257
6	-0.171987132	-0.005151412	-4.002646941	-4
7	-0.163138636	0.003697085	2.872634849	3
8	-0.163597636	0.003238085	2.515991876	2
9	-0.164252134	0.002583586	2.007446615	2
10	-0.167442484	-0.000606763	-0.471454997	-0.5

I make it all by myself. so there is no copyright or so.
i can do all kinds of all counting systems. i share it all by free.

We have done that long time ago, see image file below. We prefer unbalance counting system, which is 14% lower than complex true count system in term of ev/shoe. The ev/shoe = 0.087unit compare to complex true count system(ev/shoe =0.101 unit/shoe).

Image link : https://imge.to/i/4guVZ


The trigger RC is between RC=91 and RC = 104.

it is interesting. and professional.
1) i hate to see tables without EOR showing. that is the reason i like great Eliot. who is showing Eor all the time. of course, his counting system is always textbook style. much more complete.
2) if to use running count, it must go with hands.
like hands=40, rc=???
hands=45, rc=???
hand cards=4.93.
i am not doing it for now. it is some time. and i never count bac side bet.
3) another thing my counting tag is closer to EOR. then more powerful, for bac side bet, using decimal will not make it as hard as Standford Wong's halves. BAC is not blackjack. decimal is not a big burden for paper and pens. so this industry is not making a change for decimal for a bac sidebet counting system.

anyway, yours is a prefessional one.

1)RC method NO NEED go with hands ! Just count RC and bet when reach trigger point. That is the beauty of RC method.
2) As I said, I have more complex and powerful true count system, but only 14% higher in term of ev/shoe, IF I use RC, I may count 2 or more tables at the same time, meaning my ev/hour = 2 x 0.087 = 0.174 units > 0.101units ! LOL !

Quote: ssho88

Quote: tomchina123

Quote: ssho88

Quote: tomchina123

if you are using chinese wechat, you are welcome to add my wechat, tom0056, i will add u to my wechat group. in there, a few Chinese AP.
i am very generous there. i share many counting systems for free. like bac fortune 6.
baccarat fortune 6 ，1 paid 12 or 20
standard HE: -0.16683572


http://miplet.net/table/

baccarat fortune 6 ，1 paid 12 or 20
Removed	HE=-0.166835720405581	EOR	*777	counting	true count
1	-0.167159715	-0.000323994	-0.251743643		14* 789 removed
2	-0.167119596	-0.000283876	-0.220571264
3	-0.167772142	-0.000936421	-0.72759934	-1
4	-0.167085144	-0.000249423	-0.193801906
5	-0.166982297	-0.000146577	-0.113890257
6	-0.171987132	-0.005151412	-4.002646941	-4
7	-0.163138636	0.003697085	2.872634849	3
8	-0.163597636	0.003238085	2.515991876	2
9	-0.164252134	0.002583586	2.007446615	2
10	-0.167442484	-0.000606763	-0.471454997	-0.5

I make it all by myself. so there is no copyright or so.
i can do all kinds of all counting systems. i share it all by free.

We have done that long time ago, see image file below. We prefer unbalance counting system, which is 14% lower than complex true count system in term of ev/shoe. The ev/shoe = 0.087unit compare to complex true count system(ev/shoe =0.101 unit/shoe).

Image link : https://imge.to/i/4guVZ


The trigger RC is between RC=91 and RC = 104.

it is interesting. and professional.
1) i hate to see tables without EOR showing. that is the reason i like great Eliot. who is showing Eor all the time. of course, his counting system is always textbook style. much more complete.
2) if to use running count, it must go with hands.
like hands=40, rc=???
hands=45, rc=???
hand cards=4.93.
i am not doing it for now. it is some time. and i never count bac side bet.
3) another thing my counting tag is closer to EOR. then more powerful, for bac side bet, using decimal will not make it as hard as Standford Wong's halves. BAC is not blackjack. decimal is not a big burden for paper and pens. so this industry is not making a change for decimal for a bac sidebet counting system.

anyway, yours is a prefessional one.

1)RC method NO NEED go with hands ! Just count RC and bet when reach trigger point. That is the beauty of RC method.
2) As I said, I have more complex and powerful true count system, but only 14% higher in term of ev/shoe, IF I use RC, I may count 2 or more tables at the same time, meaning my ev/hour = 2 x 0.087 = 0.174 units > 0.101units ! LOL !

1) if mid-shoe, what RC is needed, if dealt 75 hands, what RC is needed? if RC is the same, how can it be? if not, then it is hands+RC combined.
2)14%? maybe i don't use EV/shoe much. so i don't know.