I haven't read Katrina Walker's book yet on applying the Hi-Lo count to Spanish 21/Pontoon, but I was wondering if there was a way to apply the Easy OPP count system to Spanish 21. I'm no mathematician, but I'm sure there is a way to apply a level 1, non-conversion counting system to this game to make it easier to beat. Can anyone add some serious input here?
HI-LO sucks for S17 Spanish 21.
Maybe something useful has been posted on GreenChip about it.
I've been trying to find a way to employ the Easy OPP count to Spanish 21. I have to agree with Gorgon as well. I don't like any count where you have to convert anything. Even in blackjack I use the KO count.
If you play a standard 8 deck 80% penetration S17 game of SP 21 use the JP count below.
Cards 2, 3, 4 & 6 +1
Card 5 +1.5
Cards 9, J, Q, K & A -1
This means the true count is -2 per deck and the running count starts at -16 for 8 decks. Use Katrina Walker's playing indexes but add 2 to them of course because she starts at a true count of -4 per deck.
Provides about same advantage as hi lo against a 6 deck 80% penetration S17, DOA, DOS game.
If you really want to extend it then side count aces. Do not use the side count to alter play, just betting. Aces are HUGE in this game. Any extra or reduction of aces in the deck can be tacked on the running count for betting purposes.
This increases your advantage to be similar to the BJ game listed above but with late surrender as well. I never bother to side count the aces because it's just too much extra work.
The best Spanish count is based upon the e.o.rs as in blackjack itself.
EORs are not the whole story. EORs are only a guide to show what happens if one card is removed from a deck. They give us a good starting point but not a final answer. However, as the composition of the deck changes so does the EOR of any given card. Simulations give a better solution.
I assume you do not like me valuing the 9 at -1 while leaving the ace at -1.
I tried increasing the value of the ace in my simulations and this did increase my win rate but also increased my risk of ruin. Therefore in order to reduce risk of ruin, I would need to decrease my bets. this counteracted the increased win rate. The problem with overvaluing the ace is that is does show advantage and works well for betting correlation but it does not work well for playing correlation. That's why a side count of aces can be used for betting but not playing. Side counting aces did increase win rate without altering risk of ruin.
Walker shows the EOR of removing a 9 as -0.17%. I got -0.20% (the same). However, when I ran my simulations and counted the 9 as -1, I got good results for win rate and risk of ruin. Perhaps this is helped because I hit 12 at all counts in my simulation. This probably helped its EOR at higher counts.
But would your same argument apply to the H17/redouble+2 game?
I don't side count either and refuse to value A as -1.
I am unconcerned about R.O.R.
