BJ House Edge in various conditions

[James989]

Question: With James989 stating "50% penetration", should we add a cut card effect to it ?

cut card effect for 8 deck should be very small, should around 0.015, but we are talking about difference between 0.708 and 0.609.

[G Man]

I thought the 0.708 was just a typo.

[James989]

I thought the 0.708 was just a typo.

I check with CVDATA, MGP and Beating Bonuses website, all give 0.708

https://www.beatingbonuses.com/bjstr...erate+Strategy

[G Man]

Try http://www.bjstrat.net/cgi-bin/cdca.cgi and you will get -0.6072

The reference you give "beatingbonuses" gives -0.61 which is close enough. No ?

[James989]

Try http://www.bjstrat.net/cgi-bin/cdca.cgi and you will get -0.6072

The reference you give "beatingbonuses" gives -0.61 which is close enough. No ?

You checked the field for Conditioned on no dealer BJ where applicable, this is not equivalent to Peek on Ace rule .

"beatingbonuses" gives -0.71 when Peeks on Ace.

https://www.beatingbonuses.com/bjstrategy.php?decks2=8&h17=stand&doubleon2=any2ca rds&peek2=ace&surrender2=no&charlie2=no&resplits2= 0&shuffle=0&bj=3to2&opt2=1&btn2=Generate+Strateg y

peek.jpg

[G Man]

That means players are losing everything when splitting or doubling vs 10 ?

[James989]

That means players are losing everything when splitting or doubling vs 10 ?

Correct.

[G Man]

This is where the difference comes from.

[James989]

This is where the difference comes from.

I have also sim this with CVDATA, Flat Bet, Hi-Opt 2 Counting Strategy(Full Index), and the HE = -0.588%, which I think is incorrect.

Can you please use CVDATA to verify my results ? Please note that the rule is Peek on Ace, so you have to modify the index for hands vs T.

[Cacarulo]

This is where the difference comes from.

Yes, the OP never clarified that it was ENHC. Good catch.

Sincerely,
Cac

[Cacarulo]

8D,S17,DOA,NDAS,SPA1,SPL1,NS and ENHC

1) TD-EV = -0.7177% (HE = +0.7177%)
2) CD-EV = -0.7164% (HE = +0.7164%)
3) OP-EV = -0.7155% (HE = +0.7155%)

Sincerely,
Cac

[James989]

Yes, the OP never clarified that it was ENHC. Good catch.

Sincerely,
Cac

Dealer have hole card, but just Peeks on Ace, is it consider ENHC ?

I think it is just a "partially" Peek game, and we can't use ENHC rule to calculate it, just my two cents.

[Cacarulo]

Dealer have hole card, but just Peeks on Ace, is it consider ENHC ?

No, in that case, we would be talking about American rules. "Peek" or "no peek" has nothing to do with the house edge.
So let's go back to the previous rules where the player doesn't lose everything against a dealer's blackjack.
Using CVDATA, I get 0.609%, so something must be wrong with the basic strategy or with some setting of the rules.

Sincerely,
Cac