Does anyone know anything about "True Count Tables With Index Numbers for Single Dealer Card Exposure Blackjack" written by Willaim T. Bastable??
are these the most current and accurate index numbers or just some B.S.
thanks
Bill Bastable is a good friend of mine, so I won't tell you that these tables are the greatest thing since sliced bread. All I will do is tell you what these charts are and who Bill is, and let you make your own decisions.
These tables are only 3 pages, there isn't a whole lot about the "how-to" of card counting; Wong's books are excellent for that. All these are is index numbers, but you can spend a lot more money for hundreds of pages of toilet paper from a John Patrick or a Bobby Singer and get a system guaranteed to make you a loser.
These tables use the Silver Fox counting system (2 through 7 = +1 and 9, tens, and aces = -1) and are for a game where the dealer stands on soft 17, and include insurance decisions. They are the product of many hours of running programs for each decision. Every index number from -24 to +24 are included, which is approximately 270 different index numbers. All numbers are rounded off to .25 true count.
Bill has had much success using these numbers in actual game conditions, mostly the 2 deck games in Biloxi/Gulfport and some 6 deck games on the Florida boats. He is a graduate of Monmouth University (1983) with a math degree and his father Charles was a full professor at Columbia in the field of accounting. He developed these numbers to help him with his own playing and decided to sell them so that other players can make better decisions. He didn't do it for the money (as he probably won't ever sell enough tables to even pay the publisher!) but to help players beat the casino. He likes to see casinos lose because he doesn't like the way they take advantage of stupid players, and the way they bar or harass anyone who is good at the game. Also he saw that there were no really accurate tables on the market and wanted to fill this void.
These tables use the Silver Fox counting system (2 through 7 = +1 and 9, tens, and aces = -1)..Every index number from -24 to +24 are included, which is approximately 270 different index numbers. All numbers are rounded off to .25 true count.
Using this system, you could win the same amount of money with approximately 100 numbers from -10 to +10, rounded to the nearest 1.00 true count. This kind of effort would be better spent on a system with 2-3 side counts.
thanks for the info, sounds very good, but unfortunatley i use hi-low
I don't recommend High-Low because it ignores the 7s, if that's what you mean. The penalty for that is around 10% of your EV on a risk-adjusted basis.
i was hoping for the most current index number charts for hi-low? but what are the advanteges and disadvanteges of using the 2-7 +1,
9,10,A= -1>?? vs the hi-low. i am very good at using hi-low, but i would switch if it would be more benificial. ive read Wongs, Snyder, and Revere's books and they all use the hi-low so i assumed it was the best level 1?? I have a limited bank roll so maybe the 2-7? would be better forless risk
thanks
any thoughts on those most curent index numbers for hi-low?
High-Low is only the best system if you accept the following abitrary restrictions.
All of these are artificial restrictions. There are several excellent systems with values in the +/- 2 range, with or without side counts, or you could just add the 7s to the High-Low and do about as well with an unbalanced system as you could with a balanced level-2 count.
how would I apply this side count of 7's to playing strategy??
Start your count at -4 x (# of decks) and group the 7s in with the other small cards. A neutral deck will give you a count per deck of -4. To use Wong's High-Low charts, add 4 points to your calculated count per deck; to use Snyder's, add 2 points to your calculated true edge. You will gain more by switching counts, even using numbers designed for another system, than you could from switching to more precise index numbers.
"Using this system, you could win the same amount of money with approximately 100 numbers from -10 to +10, rounded to the nearest 1.00 true count."
True. If you only want to memorize the best 100 indices, or just the I-18 numbers, and you want to round off to 1 TC, that is fine. What he did was give the maximum amount of information and leave it to the player to decide what he wants to use from it.
The system he uses in his tables is not much different than high-low. It basically IS high-low but includes the 7s and 9s. I would suppose these numbers would be close to the high-low indices for most of the decisions. While the advantage of using those two ranks is small, he feels that by eliminating them means eliminating information that is relevant, as a small advantage is still an advantage. Also, the Silver Fox system is slightly better than high-low for decision making purposes, but for betting efficiency it is slightly inferior. I included my e-mail address above if anyone wants to write me.
Either T-hopper has, or no one ever will, figure out how to shuffletrack with an unbalanced count!
