Systems Archive 1

[ Read Responses | Return to the Index ]
[ Previous | Previous in Thread | Next in Thread | Next ]


Re: Simpler way to do T-Hop 1

Posted by Pete Moss on Thursday, 20 November 1997, at 9:53 p.m., in response to Simpler way to do T-Hop 1, posted by Steve Heston on Wednesday, 19 November 1997, at 8:23 p.m.

T-Hop 1 (running count) is identical to using Uston Advanced Plus-Minus as the betting count and adding the number of aces-seen for playing.

I thought UAP/M didn't count deuces.

Isn't easier to just count aces and add them to a balanced count for occasional playing decisions?

Simpler, yes. Correct, no, not if you use true-count conversion, which is quite significant for playing decisions. What you would need to do is subtract the number of aces remaining, then divide by the (fractional) number of decks left. If you use the original indices, you now must add four to your true count -- either that or re-memorize the indices with four subtracted. It would be better to generate new indices.

If you get tired or play shoes then you can just drop the ace count. It would be a lot easier for people to switch this way too.

If you use the K-O count as your main count, and keep the ace/deuce count as the side count, you can drop the A/2 count if you want to. (I would never want to. It has become second nature.) I think the A/2 count is easier than tracking aces anyway.

Pete


Responses


Password:


The Systems Archive 1 is maintained with WebBBS 2.24.060398.