Thread Rating:

odiousgambit
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 312
  • Posts: 8653
Thanks for this post from:
Mission146
July 16th, 2021 at 5:31:10 AM permalink
Quote: Mission146

I’ll take a close look in a bit, but I figure you should be just about there by now. I hope I have helped a little bit, and I apologize for not perhaps being even more active on this, but counting the 21 has never really bothered me.

This will be excellent for many players, though. For me, I can do the 21 count in probably less time than it would take them to look up the play. It’s just almost automatic.

Getting to automatic is the whole idea!

The surprise for me is how fast I now analyze the 'can't outkick' situations, as long as I recognize I can't outkick!
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 312
  • Posts: 8653
Thanks for this post from:
Mission146
July 17th, 2021 at 2:05:06 PM permalink
Getting close to posting in the blog , finding some better language, etc


There are some exceptions to 18/21 outs simple strategies, most notable perhaps is when a King isn't a bettable kicker even though Total Dealer Outs are less than 21. 


In the next images, even though the board shows a rainbow picket fence, the calculator deems it best to fold. 








In the first situation, I experiment and change the 8s to 10s, and the calculator now says to bet. 





I think there are 2 conclusions. One is that these cases are marginal, the error is not costing much, as you can see [though I cut off one analysis by mistake]. You can make a case that these exceptions aren't worth learning, and that's pretty much where I'm at, for myself at this point anyway. Perhaps when you have K,2 you could be more on guard. 3 to a straight flush on the board, even with gaps, seems to factor. 


The other conclusion is that it's good if the board eliminates next lower kickers. Using the 18/21 outs strategy has you thinking the single card Kicker trumps all others. But it is possible for the dealer to have a K same as you, in which case the second kicker comes into play.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 132
  • Posts: 15024
Thanks for this post from:
odiousgambit
July 17th, 2021 at 2:23:43 PM permalink
Changing the eight to a ten got rid of 5-6-7-8-9 two card straights the dealer could have. When you changed the eight to a nine, the dealer just needed 6-8 for that same straight instead.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 312
  • Posts: 8653
Thanks for this post from:
Mission146
July 17th, 2021 at 2:30:25 PM permalink
do you think second kicker elimination is a factor?

it's not too many variations you can mess around with, if you assume you have already bet with any K,5 and thus don't have a 1x decision
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 132
  • Posts: 15024
Thanks for this post from:
odiousgambit
July 17th, 2021 at 2:35:37 PM permalink
Quote: odiousgambit

do you think second kicker elimination is a factor?

it's not too many variations you can mess around with, if you assume you have already bet with any K,5 and thus don't have a 1x decision



I might not be understanding the question, but all pictured hands have 2-3, so your four doesn’t out kick anything.

It also doesn’t help that 4-6 is winning for the dealer, whereas the dealer would lose with some other fours in his hand.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 312
  • Posts: 8653
Thanks for this post from:
Mission146
July 17th, 2021 at 5:23:34 PM permalink
Quote: Mission146

I might not be understanding the question, but all pictured hands have 2-3, so your four doesn’t out kick anything.

I might not understand your point, either, but what we are looking for as second kicker is something on the board, as the King does not have any possible hefty companion in 1X decisions unless the player has goofed and not bet 'any' K,5+ at the 4x decision point.

To be sure, nothing changes that *all shown* are < 21+ out qualified and to keep it simple, you bet. I don't plan to add exceptions, just mention that there are some.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 312
  • Posts: 8653
Thanks for this post from:
Mission146
July 19th, 2021 at 8:20:08 AM permalink
Mission, or anyone, if you've captured my error prior to this edited version, please delete your reply

So I've added "reverse succession" as something to use when sorting out whether to bet 1x or not. This mostly revolves around the board having a one gap inside straight possibility, which is a one dealer card scenario, not a dismissable 2 dealer card scenario, which in fact I do dismiss in the text.


Mission likes to call such, when there is otherwise an unpaired rainbow board, a 19-out initial board, I think. That's not unreasonable. Alternatively, you could add such a board to the list of boards that automatically have you not bet a kicker, which are 4-flush and 4-cards to outside straight* on the board. So why not do these things instead?


I'll take them one at a time. First, if you want to have 19-out boards etc, then you would want to make more tables for that and other scenarios where straight possibilities add to the initial board dealer outs. I definitely want to have a simpler strategy than that, with fewer tables.


If the idea is to add inside straight possibilities to instant dismissal, then this dismisses also those cases where an Ace on the board has the Q viable by succession, then reverse succession would return the K only to bettable.

I'm having trouble with good examples, hopefully this one is OK. I had to edit out a flawed one. In this case, there are 15 board outs making a K bettable, and the presence of the Ace offsets the inside straight. The Q on the board influences things. Note that it is a close call.



So I am admitting two things. One, I might eliminate "reverse succession" and stick to the LVA wording, see footnote, for a simpler strategy, your input appreciated. I also admit I am keeping this thread alive in case anyone wants to bet me, now I will say up to $80 if the Wizard will determine the winner if needed.

* the actual language on the LVA strategy card is just "any 4-straight", so I am not following that perfectly and perhaps LVA/Grosjean intend that to include even straight possibilities with 2 gaps.
Last edited by: odiousgambit on Jul 19, 2021
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 312
  • Posts: 8653
Thanks for this post from:
Mission146
July 20th, 2021 at 5:17:31 AM permalink
I'm finally satisfied that in order to have charts or tables, a simple strategy is going to be it.

'reverse succession' certainly goes into 'not simple' so i am going to drop that, even though I use it myself.

I think that might leave me vulnerable, so in the next version i put out I'm not accepting any bets.

the LVA strategy card keeps to a simple strategy by saying to fold kicker against 4-flushes and 'any' 4 card straight, then count outs for the remaining. You can see with the next examples it's not perfect either

fold:

but change to K, bet, but you don't get here if you fold against any 4-straight
Last edited by: odiousgambit on Jul 20, 2021
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
unJon
unJon
Joined: Jul 1, 2018
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 3001
Thanks for this post from:
Mission146
July 20th, 2021 at 6:43:38 AM permalink
Quote: odiousgambit

I'm finally satisfied that in order to have charts or tables, a simple strategy is going to be it.

'reverse succession' certainly goes into 'not simple' so i am going to drop that, even though I use it myself.

I think that might leave me vulnerable, so in the next version i put out I'm not accepting any bets.

the LVA strategy card keeps to a simple strategy by saying to fold kicker against 4-flushes and 'any' 4 card straight, then count outs for the remaining. You can see with the next examples it's not perfect either

fold:

but change to K, bet, but you don't get here if you fold against any 4-straight



I guess I would have called both at table. Top one is 19 outs and bottom one is 15 right?
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 132
  • Posts: 15024
July 20th, 2021 at 6:54:55 AM permalink
Quote: odiousgambit

I'm finally satisfied that in order to have charts or tables, a simple strategy is going to be it.

'reverse succession' certainly goes into 'not simple' so i am going to drop that, even though I use it myself.

I think that might leave me vulnerable, so in the next version i put out I'm not accepting any bets.

the LVA strategy card keeps to a simple strategy by saying to fold kicker against 4-flushes and 'any' 4 card straight, then count outs for the remaining. You can see with the next examples it's not perfect either

fold:

but change to K, bet, but you don't get here if you fold against any 4-straight



The top one has 23 outs, you’re missing the eights it fill the straight.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219

  • Jump to: