Illustrious 18

I just want to confirm something that might be a stupid question.

15: 12 vs 4 Tc 0
16: 12 vs 5 Tc -2
17: 12 vs 6. Tc -1
18: 13 vs 3 Tc -2

Is the correct play in these situation to stand or double. I assume it’s standing but I just want to be sure.

You stand if the true count is equal or above the value stated.

Thanks I figured

Bosox.

Why didnt 14v10 make the. ill 18? Was it close in Don S study?
Or just too close of a call? So it's better to always hit.

A question for my study. Thanks.

Quote: moses

Bosox.

Why didnt 14v10 make the. ill 18? Was it close in Don S study?
Or just too close of a call? So it's better to always hit.

A question for my study. Thanks.

Moses, it is on the same page as the ill18 that Don refers to as the Fab 4 which is surrender plays that are very important plays for shoe games with big spreads.
Remember based on all of chapter 10 Don used the Hi LO count. That creates a problem why there is no index plays for hit/stand on hard 14 because the Hi Lo count does not count the sevens, the most important card when you are holding a hard 14.

Got it. Thanks Mr. B

What does Don S say in his books'about splitting in a No DAS game in his book? Are the number of splits reduced?

Shoild be my last question?

Quote: moses

What does Don S say in his books'about splitting in a No DAS game in his book? Are the number of splits reduced?

Shoild be my last question?

Don has the best basic strategy charts available today only I realize that is not what you are looking for. However, what he does have that should be of big interest to you playing the single deck games is starting on page 495 in Appendix D, which are for effects of removal in the 1,2,6, and 8 deck games. Moses, with that column count that you use your playing efficiency numbers, should be off the charts. To answer your second question the number of splits is reduced in a NDS game, and you do need some higher true counts to make some of those splits. I like to also refer to my old reliable standby books from Wong. I hope it helps.

Yes. That helps a great deal. Thank you very much.

Moses, just curious do you receive a large amount of preferential re-shuffling? How do you react when that does happen?

I know and avoid those dealers. I wouldnt say large amount. But enough to get ones attention.

The problem is dealers are like basketball officials. Inconsistent as a group. So Im working on a count that balances.

Quote: BoSox

Don has the best basic strategy charts available today only I realize that is not what you are looking for. However, what he does have that should be of big interest to you playing the single deck games is starting on page 495 in Appendix D, which are for effects of removal in the 1,2,6, and 8 deck games. Moses, with that column count that you use your playing efficiency numbers, should be off the charts. To answer your second question the number of splits is reduced in a NDS game, and you do need some higher true counts to make some of those splits. I like to also refer to my old reliable standby books from Wong. I hope it helps.

Id really liike to reach that page.

Quote: moses

Id really liike to reach that page.

moses, there are 28 pages in that Appendix D.

Quote: BoSox

moses, there are 28 pages in that Appendix D.

28 pages. 😨 Thanks for the summary. Today is my split day. Studying nothing but spkits. It's the final segment.

Illustrious 18 is nice and dandy. It lessens the needed study for card counters. But the trouble is that it also gives casinos’ “eye-in-the-sky” 18 unmistakable “illustrious telltale plays” for identifying a cookie cutter card counter. For career protection, you should expand your deviation repertoire beyond Illustrious 18.

Lesser known deviation plays sometime have good camouflage effect. If you hit 14 vs. 2 or A-A vs. A at -4 Hi-Lo True Count, the casino floor personnel and the eye in the sky may all conclude that you are a confused player, let alone a card counter, while you are doing the exact things to win more (or lose less) while sitting at the table.

If you truly like to reduce the number of indices to the real important ones only, you don't need the full Illustrious 18 at all. You can stop at Evil TWINS - insurance and 16 vs.10. With Evil Twins alone, you have already reaped close to one-half of all potential benefits from play deviations already.

PS - Many popular card counting systems may not have indices beyond Illustrious 18 at all. A card counting system may still be a very good system in spite of its lack of deviation indices.

Interesting. I replaced 12vs5,6 with 14vs2,3 for that very reason. Too many comments when hitting 12vs5,6.

16vs10. Sometimes, in that really close call area, I might ask the dealer and then go with whatever they say. Hitting in deep negative territory may not win this hand. But it usually takes a small card out and gets closer to a shuffle. Of course that doesnt matter in a shoe.

ill 18 is based on HiLo. I wonder if it would be different with Felt. It would seem to me if one were to change the tags on the 2 and 7 they could capitalize on 14 vs 10 with large bets out.