Charlie_S: better system

[Charlie_S]

I simulated two betting-playing systems.
The result was this.

system A
EV(%): 1.649
win rate/100rounds (unit): 10.66
SCORE: 111.0

system B
EV(%): 1.665
win rate/100rounds (unit): 10.06
SCORE: 112.1

Which system is better?

[21forme]

For practical purposes in the real world, there's no difference. Play whichever one is easier.

[Don Schlesinger]

> I simulated two betting-playing systems.
> The result was this.

> system A
> EV(%): 1.649
> win rate/100rounds (unit): 10.66
> SCORE: 111.0

> system B
> EV(%): 1.665
> win rate/100rounds (unit): 10.06
> SCORE: 112.1

> Which system is better?

First, I'll answer your question, then I'll make a comment. SCORE was designed to determine the relative rankings of systems, given certain parameters. If you accept that premise, then, since 112.1 is higher than 111.0, system B is "better," provided you respected the identical parameters in both sims.

But, with a less than one percent difference, it hardly matters. What does matter is that most counters would be more than content to play a game in which they average winning about two units per hour, or per 100 rounds. You are indicating a win in excess of 10 units per hour, so I hope that this was just some kind of academic, theoretical exercise, because, if you think you're ever going to play such a game in the real world, you're going to be rudely disappointed.

Don

[Charlie_S]

Thanks for your reply, Don,

I tested two systems.

system A:
count system for betting
A 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 T
-1 1 1 1 1.5 1 0 0 -0.5 -1
this is HiLo plus side count of (5s-9s)x0.5

system B:
count system for betting
A 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 T
-1 0.5 1 1 1 1 0.5 0 0 -1
this is HiLo plus side count of (7s-2s)x0.5

Playing strategy is HiOpt1 with indices, same for both systems A and B.
this is HiLo plus side count of (As-2s)x1

betting units
TC < 1 : 1 x 2 hands
1 =< TC < 2: 4 x 2 hands
2 =< TC < 3: 8 x 2 hands
3 =< TC < 4: 12 x 2 hands
4 =< TC : 16 x 2 hands

according to my sim result, side count system A is better in win rate, but, side count system B is better in SCORE.

[Don Schlesinger]

> according to my sim result,
> side count system A is better in win rate, but, side
> count system B is better in SCORE.

Which, of course, is possible. System A appears to have a higher BC than B, and it may have you betting more money (identifying more high-bet opportunities) than B. If that's true, then your s.d. for A will be higher than for B, and while A might win you slightly more money, it will also risk more money. Apparently, the extra risk isn't worth the extra reward, according to SCORE.

Don

[Charlie_S]

Don,

I appreciate your clarification on the above issue.
I should have compared the standard deviations between the two systems.
Thank you.

[Wolverine]

Assuming a $25 minimum table, and a 2D game...

How do you propose to "ideally" bet (with the count as outlined) TWO green chips on two squares (most casinos force you to bet double the minimum per square to play two squares) and then manage to get $800 per square (a total of $1600) on the felt when the count is +4 or greater? That must be some act you have in order to pull that one off! I wish you luck and good variance!!!

My experience with $25 tables...when you shift from green to black, you are going to get noticed. You shift from green to 8 black--you'll get barred. Your experience may differ!