If you find a 6 deck game with good rules HE around .1% but with a bad penetration around 60% to 70% is the game beatable with a 1 to 12 spread?
If you find a 6 deck game with good rules HE around .1% but with a bad penetration around 60% to 70% is the game beatable with a 1 to 12 spread?
Are these results for play all or wonging out at a certain index(the casino i play at has only one table so wonging in and out is not viable)
If I type in Fair 4 decks H17 DAS LS at a spread of 12 hilow ill 18 ENHC, I get 5.58 per hour.But with a spread of 15 I get 4.85,16 gives 5.20,17 gives 5.59.
Also on the close call calc it says to stand on 6,2 v 5 in 1 deck,H17.
Probably just a bug but i have noticed some other discrepencies on other sites such as blackjackinfo for surrender on 1 and 2 deck.
and also the wizs comp dependent plays for 1 deck.He doesnt list things like 4,4,4,4 v 7,8 or 9.he also say to stand on any 3 card 12 v 3 in 1 deck,but from griffins TOBJ there are a few that you should hit.
Is there a definite Bs out there?
> If I type in Fair 4 decks H17 DAS LS at a
> spread of 12 hilow ill 18 ENHC, I get 5.58
> per hour.But with a spread of 15 I get
> 4.85,16 gives 5.20,17 gives 5.59.
The calculator calculates for optimal bankroll growth. As you change the spread, the unit size must be changed to keep the RoR as close to 13.5% as possible. Increasing spread will increase units won per hour, but not always dollars won per hour.
> Also on the close call calc it says to stand
> on 6,2 v 5 in 1 deck,H17.
Thanks I'm aware of that. That decision is amazingly close.
> Probably just a bug but i have noticed some
> other discrepencies on other sites such as
> blackjackinfo for surrender on 1 and 2 deck.
> and also the wizs comp dependent plays for 1
> deck.He doesnt list things like 4,4,4,4 v
> 7,8 or 9.he also say to stand on any 3 card
> 12 v 3 in 1 deck,but from griffins TOBJ
> there are a few that you should hit.
> Is there a definite Bs out there?
It depends on how accurate you want to be. Any human BS has compromises. The wiz is right in saying you should stand on any 3 card 12v3 in SD. TOBJ is a little more right in pointing out exceptions. Most of these calls really don't matter. The EV difference between 6,2v5 hit and double is .000074. Multiply that by the probability of getting 6,2v5 and you have an overall EV difference of .00000007141.
> If I type in Fair 4 decks H17 DAS LS at a
> spread of 12 hilow ill 18 ENHC, I get 5.58
> per hour.But with a spread of 15 I get
> 4.85,16 gives 5.20,17 gives 5.59.
With a spread of 12, your expected hourly win rate is 5,58 units. With a spread of 15 it decreases. With 16 and 17 it increases again. I don't see any pattern in this. How come the expected win rate decreases at 1-15 spread?
Regards, Robert V. Lux
See my response above. This is obvious wth CVCX. The web calculator does not show as much info.
> The calculator calculates for optimal
> bankroll growth. As you change the spread,
> the unit size must be changed to keep the
> RoR as close to 13.5% as possible.
> Increasing spread will increase units won
> per hour, but not always dollars won per
> hour.
I'm sorry, Norm, but that makes no sense to me. So long as you permit precise bet sizes, with no rounding whatsoever, it isn't possible that a spread of 1-15 will win fewer DOLLARS per hour than a spread of 1-12, given a fixed bankroll.
Something is wrong.
Don
I just went to CVCX, fixed a bank at $10,000, used a canned hi-lo, I18 sim, with 3/4, h17, das, and ls (no ENHC) and first a 1-12 spread, then a 1-15 spread. Naturally, the 1-15 won considerably more.
I have no idea what anyone is talking about here, but I don't see how you can LOSE money by spreading bigger, provided your bets may be as precise as needed.
Don
He used a bankroll of $3,000. The smaller the bankroll, the more difficult it is to optimize for max bankroll growth. At a 12:1 spread the optimal Kelly unit size is $2.62. The calculator selects a unit size of $3 providing a 17.4% RoR. At 15:1 spread, the same min bet would give you a RoR of 19.1%. Unacceptable. The unit size is dropped to $2 resulting a lower win rate - although a better SCORE than 12:1. Actually, the optimal Kelly unit size at 15:1 spread in this case is $2.48. Double your bankroll, and you could bet $5 with a superior bankroll growth rate.
> I'm sorry, Norm, but that makes no sense to
> me. So long as you permit precise bet sizes,
> with no rounding whatsoever, it isn't
> possible that a spread of 1-15 will win
> fewer DOLLARS per hour than a spread of
> 1-12, given a fixed bankroll.
I don't allow precise betting. You cannot bet $2.48 in a casino. The calculator is designed to provide results using an optimal betting ramp within casino constraints.
> I don't allow precise betting. You cannot
> bet $2.48 in a casino. The calculator is
> designed to provide results using an optimal
> betting ramp within casino constraints.
I see. But, it produces unrealistic conclusions, such as the one reached by our writer. Raise the bankroll, and these anomalies disappear.
I suggest that you permit precise betting. There is no way to compare systems fairly if rounding adversely affects one system more than another.
Don
Posting Permissions
-*-
Bookmarks