Hi,Originally Posted by Phoebe
I remember having done something similar with KO several years ago until I ran into a small problem. Let me explain: In scenario A, I calculate the SCORE for a complete shoe from the beginning until the cut card (5/6).
The SCORE calculation defines an optimal betting ramp for a given spread. Let's call this SCORE, S1 (with a ramp 1).
In scenario B, I calculate a SCORE S2 (with a ramp 2) for the first half (2.5 decks) and another SCORE S3 (with a ramp 3) for the next 2.5 decks. Clearly, S3 is greater than S2 due to the "floating advantage".
Now comes the problem. To determine which of these two scenarios is better, we would have to compare S1 against the SCORE produced between S2 and S3, correct?
But the problem is that it cannot be affirmed that the SCORE of scenario B is simply S2+S3. So, what is the optimal way to calculate it? It's obvious that scenario B is better, but how much better is it?
In all cases, I use the same spread (1:16).
Sincerely,
Cac
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks