💰 Peter Griffin, Arnold Snyder, Don Schlesinger and the History of the "Illustrious 18"

Most Liked Casino Bonuses in the last 7 days 💰

Filter:
Sort:
G66YY644
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 500

Hi everyone, I'm trying to better understand the Illustrious Looks like you have the indices for the multi deck s17 game, but you should pick So for example, I tell myself that the general rule for 12 vs 6 is to stand, but hit.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
A Card Counter's Guide to Odds and Variance

G66YY644
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 500

pterophyllum.ru › games › blackjack › card-counting › high-low.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
The 2 Most Valuable Blackjack Deviations

G66YY644
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 500

Do I have these three adjustments correct? 6-deck, S17 with surrender16 v 10 stand when +0 or greater15 v 10 stand when +4 or greater16 v 9.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
"The Illustrious 18" Blackjack Strategy Deviations

🤑

Software - MORE
G66YY644
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 500

In his September article on the Illustrious 18 (Blackjack Forum Vol. 18 rather than Snyder's recommended 15 indices for shoe games, in a 6-deck shoe​.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
Blackjack Strategy Deviations AKA "The Illustrious 18"

🤑

Software - MORE
G66YY644
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 500

Do I have these three adjustments correct? 6-deck, S17 with surrender16 v 10 stand when +0 or greater15 v 10 stand when +4 or greater16 v 9.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
Why you shouldn't play in high negative counts

🤑

Software - MORE
G66YY644
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 500

In his September article on the Illustrious 18 (Blackjack Forum Vol. 18 rather than Snyder's recommended 15 indices for shoe games, in a 6-deck shoe​.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
CARD COUNTING A 6 DECK SHOE

🤑

Software - MORE
G66YY644
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 500

Do I have these three adjustments correct? 6-deck, S17 with surrender16 v 10 stand when +0 or greater15 v 10 stand when +4 or greater16 v 9.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
Blackjack Card Counting, Running Count Variation Simulation

🤑

Software - MORE
G66YY644
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 500

pterophyllum.ru › games › blackjack › card-counting › high-low.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
How Important Are Card Counting Playing Deviations?

🤑

Software - MORE
G66YY644
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 500

Hi everyone, I'm trying to better understand the Illustrious Looks like you have the indices for the multi deck s17 game, but you should pick So for example, I tell myself that the general rule for 12 vs 6 is to stand, but hit.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
Blackjack 101: 3. Basic Bet Spreads, Rules and Penetration

🤑

Software - MORE
G66YY644
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 500

pterophyllum.ru › games › blackjack › card-counting › high-low.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
Blackjack Strategy: The 3 most misplayed hands in Blackjack

You are probably wasting your time if you are trying to employ more than a few dozen indices. The very biggest number— or 0. And on p.

Most players do not have access to the journals where the important blackjack discoveries were first published, and they do not have access to the materials that led to these discoveries. X; 16 v.

This blackjack history article focuses on the roles of Arnold Snyder, Peter Griffin, and Don Schlesinger in this card counting development.

Specifically, he states:. Any time you are at your pivot or higher stand on 16 vs. This article will provide a documented history of one of the most important blackjack discoveries, and seek to restore proper credit to the people who made the real original contributions to the game. The information provided in Theory of Blackjack, in conjunction with the formula presented in this paper, is more than sufficient to develop a count strategy for any balanced count system as complete as any player could practically apply at the tables. But Peter Griffin made no recommendations about how to use this information in the real world of playing at the tables. X; 10 v. In this article, he states:. From the practical point of view, the only pair-splitting indices worth learning at all are splitting X-X vs. Early surrender decisions are a waste of time because early surrender is available in multi-deck games only. Then, on September 30, , Snyder published his own Zen Count, which was the first counting system designed to take into account the actual relative gain from using various index numbers with a real-world type of count. II, 2, p. For shoe players, table-hoppers etc. In his first edition of Professional Blackjack Pi-Yee Press, , Wong advised table-hopping players to ignore index numbers below —2. Masters, wrote that in multiple-deck games he would revise the Zen list of 25 recommended indices to a smaller list of only 18 indices. Forget about it. I think it important to note that the acknowledgement of Schlesinger was not for any comments, public or private, that Schlesinger made regarding the 18 most important indices, but for comments Schlesinger had made in private correspondence regarding the point Marvin L. But Snyder told me he decided not to publish it at the last minute because he felt that publishing the letter would cause Schlesinger public embarrassment. Thus, the negligible difference never has a chance to be negligible! If you want to know how simple the Zen Count tables are, keep in mind that Gwynn simulated the Zen Count exactly as I have published it. The situation is rare and the gain is negligible. Masters made about negative indices being unimportant to table-hoppers. However, his claim of being the originator of or even the first to publish the seminal discoveries about the relative value of various index plays is false. Some sample results, assuming Northern Nevada rules in a single-deck game, using the Hi-Opt I counting system: If flat-betting, the gain from splitting pairs according to the Hi-Opt I indices, instead of basic strategy only, is about. A; 10 v. In single-deck games, the 16 vs. Most players therefore do not have a good sense of the history of many of the important blackjack discoveries, and tend to credit those who have been most aggressive about claiming credit, whether or not these people actually deserve this credit. Basic strategy will take the majority of the potential gain from these decisions. Of this total gain approximately. Most players should ignore these tables. X; 13 v. We get perhaps one or two in a lifetime, as you suggest. This article is based upon a review of over one hundred published and unpublished documents related to the development of the Illustrious 18 and especially the original discovery that most index numbers relate very little to actual player win rates. Schlesinger deserves credit for pointing out that in shoe games where card counters must use large spreads, the doubling indices for 9 v. I queried Griffin on his estimates for the value of early surrender and pair-splitting changes when doubling after splits is allowed. The only double-down decisions of minor value are for 10 and 11 vs. Doubling after splits indices are not worth much simply because of the rarity of occurrence. To show you the value of these decisions, as indicated by this chart, imagine yourself playing in this game, except that the only play variations you are allowed to make are the insurance and 16 v. Basic strategy should always be followed for most other decisions. X; 10 vs. It was because a simpler set of indices would allow players to play longer, with less mental fatigue, little actual dollar cost, and fewer errors. I believe this is the first time that such information has been accurately quantified in a published article. Of the doubling indices, only 10 and 11 vs. Snyder wrote Blackjack Forum Vol. X; 14 v. A; 11 v. Snyder wrote on p. X because this hand might occur at a time when we had a big bet on the table, then we should, in fact, simply learn the full index numbers for all decisions. The 16 vs. X; 15 v. Unfortunately, count system developers did not immediately follow up on this information. He informed me that the average gains from varying from basic strategy for these rules are negligible. In single-deck games, assuming you are using a moderate betting spread, insurance is almost as important as all other strategy decisions combined…. Insurance; 16 v. There is no reason to learn strategy indices you would never use, and there is rarely any reason to continue playing in a shoe game when the true count goes down to —2. The insurance decision is worth times as much as any pair splitting decision in a single-deck game. Using the full 25 indices Snyder recommended for single deck, the sims for the single-deck game show a win rate for Snyder of 1. Furthermore, despite hundreds of books and articles published on blackjack, I have not to this day seen a study which would tell a player which index numbers are most important to learn based on the amount of total gain which can be obtained by their use. Marvin L. The second biggest, 95 or 0. The History of Blackjack's Illustrious 18 Card Counting Indices The simplification of playing and betting strategy in blackjack card counting was one of the most important developments in professional blackjack play. A gain in value. A sophisticated player would memorize strategy indices according to potential profitability… [T]he recommendations of most systems developers to learn and utilize strategy tables for pair-splitting, surrender, and most double-down decisions are ill-considered, since the potential gains from such strategies are so negligible that most players should not chance making errors by attempting to employ such indices. In this respect, I believe that the chart presented near the end of this article contains information which has never been published before and which should provide some revealing facts for consideration by the blackjack playing community. Griffin has shown that, other than for the splitting of tens, no pair splitting variation from basic strategy is worth more than one-thousandth of one percent. In the March Blackjack Forum Vol. At your pivot plus 2, or higher, with any number of decks, stand on 12 vs. A; 10 vs. Over the years, as I grew more expert in the subject I suspected that most of the numbers I had learned some contributed very little, if anything to the overall gain available from the Point Count. Simplify your strategy. Amazing, huh? Any of them might occur some time when we have a big bet on the table. In single-deck games, assuming you are using a moderate betting spread, insurance is almost as important as all other strategy decisions combined… "As for other playing decisions, there are only a few to remember. The Zen 25 were selected for use in any number of decks, including single deck. In , in the first edition of Blackbelt in Blackjack, in his discussion of the Red Seven Count on p. Masters was simply pointing out the obvious and Snyder acknowledged that Schlesinger had sent a letter to Blackjack Forum with a similar comment. X, and 11 vs. Would you believe that I can really roam a casino back-counting, look natural doing it, and miraculously remember the number for v. The hit-stand decision for 16 vs. The optimal set of indices changes not only with the number of decks in play, penetration, play-all versus tablehopping styles, other advanced techniques, and the spread you use, but will also change based on the count system you use. The optimal set for the Hi Lo is not the same as the optimal set for the Zen count, and so on. X; X-X v. Can the Zen Count really win with such condensed strategy tables? In a game with no house edge, these two decisions alone, if based on perfect count information, would gain you an edge of about 0. You know what, Arnold, some of us can actually walk and chew gum at the same time! He just failed to acknowledge the contributions of the real originators of condensed strategy tables. The other. In this article I will show that Schlesinger was aware of this published information, though he failed to acknowledge these prior researchers and authors. The response that Snyder had prepared for publication pointed out that if, in fact, we should all learn the index number for v. How can you sleep giving advice like that? Hard and soft doubling indices are likewise relatively worthless.