Online blackjack to practice card counting

Using the Online blackjack practice with "warn on strategy errors enabled". Wanted to ask the wizard on this because I'm still new to card counting. Assuming it might be an issue with the rules of the game.

Anyways, according to the "illustrious 18" on your site, if you have a hard 16 against a 10 and the count is +0 or higher it says you should stand.

I currently have a 10,6 vs a dealer 10. True count is +1 (+4 with 4.33 decks left).

Hand analyzer shows Stand being at -0.549, and hit being at -0.533

Now obviously the choices are very close in their odds, being a difference of .016% which is almost insignificant because you would never be able to calculate that at the table. However, I just want to make sure I'm using the counting system correctly.

Rules are as follows:

8 decks, 75% penetration.
Peeks for BJ
pays 3:2 on BJ
can split up to 3 times, aces only once with one card.
Double on any 2 cards, including after splits
No surrender allowed

Using the standard Hi-lo count

Edit: Same rules as above, ran into this scenario:

6,10 vs a 10. Running count is -10, 3.29 decks left for a true count of ~-3.

-0.5496 for Stand
-.05828 for hit, so software recommends standing....

A,2,9 against dealer 2. Running count is -6, 4 decks left for a true count of -1
rule states hard 12 against a 2, hit as long as true count is less than 3
Hand analyzer shows:
-0.262 for standing
-0.264 for hitting
so recommends standing....


I could understand the first example above as it's a very borderline case, but this one doesn't seem to make sense at all as it should heavily favor hitting.


My only guess is it's taking into account every card that's actually left and not going by the hi-lo count recommendations. ie even though the count is negative, the deck is still rich in 6-9 cards, making it unfavorable to hit.

Welcome to the forum. I am pretty sure the practice BJ game here uses Basic Strategy and does not factor in the count. My response will bump up this thread so maybe someone who knows for sure will respond.

What is the URL of the trainer you are using? You seem to indicate one from the Wizard of Odds site, but please specify.

This trainer at this Wizard of Odds address should give you what you want: Online Blackjack - Play for Free or Real Money (Learn to Count Cards)

The page is listed as last updated today, so if that is what you are using it might have changed what is recommended.

I belive I'm using the one you're referring to as i just started using it today.

/play/blackjack-v2/

edit: can't post full url, so just add wizardofofdds to beginnging

There ya go. Click here.
Hmmmm. I could not edit in the link in situ. You learn something new every day :o)

Thank you

And just to clarify for previous discussion this is the URL I am using for original discussion and issues I found

So we are all talking about the same tool. I infer that data you present is taken from the display, in which case the contradictions you cite rightfully raise questions. I think your intuition that the hand analysis percentages are derived from the remaining cards in the shoe is probably correct. All card counting systems are imperfect. If you take the time to search for it, you can find studies that compare how well each system measures up to perfection. In general, the closer to perfection a system rates, the more difficult it is to use. I think you are seeing cases where the Hi-Lo method falls short of perfection, but you know this based on information you won’t have at a table.

[added] For each of the hands, total counts and penetrations presented, there could be an extremely wide variety of cards left in the shoe. You are probably seeing a hand analysis based on one possibility. The Hi-Lo system aim is to make a decision that is right for the majority of those possibilities.

Quote: BleedingChipsSlowly

So we are all talking about the same tool. I infer that data you present is taken from the display, in which case the contradictions you cite rightfully raise questions. I think your intuition that the hand analysis percentages are derived from the remaining cards in the shoe is probably correct. All card counting systems are imperfect. If you take the time to search for it, you can find studies that compare how well each system measures up to perfection. In general, the closer to perfection a system rates, the more difficult it is to use. I think you are seeing cases where the Hi-Lo method falls short of perfection, but you know this based on information you won’t have at a table.

Completely agree with you there, however when trying to practice based solely off the hi-lo system (and not the computer generated correct play), it's a bit frustrating lol.

I'm enjoying using the tool with a hidden count, occasionally revealing it to make sure I'm at the correct count and also using the warnings to tell me I wasn't using the correct index number. It's frustrating when I get a warning even though I am actually following the correct table.

Is there a tool that warns of incorrect play based soley off the tables?

Quote: SeaBacon

... Is there a tool that warns of incorrect play based soley off the tables?

I don’t know of one. I don’t see how such a tool would help you learn to play. Counting systems are imperfect, but they offer a way to approach perfect play given our human limitations. If your aim is perfect play, I suggest you bone up on programming and start pricing out single board systems you can conceal and interact with at the table. Online sites will probably spot your perfect play in short order.

[edit] I am, of course, joking about computer aided play. It is illegal. These days, it is advisable to label your humor as such. Also, the penalty for being caught using machine aided play is quite a bit stiffer than being caught card counting.

Quote: BleedingChipsSlowly

I don’t know of one. I don’t see how such a tool would help you learn to play. Counting systems are imperfect, but they offer a way to approach perfect play given our human limitations. If your aim is perfect play, I suggest you bone up on programming and start pricing out single board systems you can conceal and interact with at the table. Online sites will probably spot your perfect play in short order.

[edit] I am, of course, joking about computer aided play. It is illegal. These days, it is advisable to label your humor as such. Also, the penalty for being caught using machine aided play is quite a bit stiffer than being caught card counting.

He meant he wants the warnings to go off when they are wrong based on the Hi-Lo tables instead of perfect play.