Wizzard of Odds calculates Mau 5 cards agme to be breaking even off-the-top. My friend simulated it to be -0.23%. Will some one clarifies for me which one is correct? Rules:
CSMs 5 ecks, S17, D11, 5 cards early half win against dealer non-A, ES10, DAS, RSA, ENHC dealer takes D/S with BJ. Thanks.
> Wizzard of Odds calculates Mau 5 cards agme to be
> breaking even off-the-top. My friend simulated it to
> be -0.23%. Will some one clarifies for me which one is
> correct? Rules:
> CSMs 5 ecks, S17, D11, 5 cards early half win against
> dealer non-A, ES10, DAS, RSA, ENHC dealer takes D/S
> with BJ. Thanks.
Search in the International Scene section. I'm pretty sure I calculated it before.
> Search in the International Scene section. I'm pretty
> sure I calculated it before.
It was on the main page - link is listed.
> It was on the main page - link is listed.
Thanks. I knew the number -0.23% was from somewhere... now the question is why Wizzaed calculated it to be breaking even? I e-mailed him but no response yet.
5 decks.
Dealer stands on soft 17.
Player may double on any first two cards.
Dealer does not take a hole card. If dealer has blackjack player will lose entire bet, including additional wagers for doubling and splitting.
Double after a split allowed.
Player may surrender on any initial two cards, except against a dealer ace. This is equivalent to "early surrender" against a 10, because the player may invoke it before the dealer checks for blackjack.
Resplitting aces not allowed.
Continuous shuffler.
On my site I previously incorrectly indicated that the 5-card rule does no appply after splitting. Now, I'm told by someone there, it does. My house edge was calculated assuming this rule.
The most unusual and significant rule in this game is the 5-card half-win rule. I show that it is worth 0.77% to the player. For those who disagree with my 0.01% house edge, I would be interested to know what you get for the effect of this rule. This is probably our main point of departure.
Or did they change rules recently? I think it's just mistake because you reported not D2 but D11 on your site.
If D2, it's obvious that we can get more advantage, even more than break-even.
Hi Wizard,
I posted a link in my previous post that includes my methodology and I only get a 0.61% advantage for the rule. Looking closely at the thread however it seems I may have misunderstood something in that post. Immediately before that post I was assuming it was a rule like surrender so I only applied it to upcards 2-T since it's ES10 and it is a form of surrender.
A later post (which I've linked to below) allows the Macau surrender for upcards A-T. In this case the value of the rule is +0.78% and the net CD-EV is -0.060397742299313% (assuming post-split strategy uses the pre-split strategy for a given hand). The Macau surrender was not allowed after splits.
These results are consistent with yoursSo I guess the question is whether the surrender is only 2-T or A-T?
Since you have a copy of my calculator you should be able to reproduce my results
Sincerely,
MGP
> Don asked me to address this post. As I understand it,
> the rules at the Lisboa are:
> 5 decks.
> Dealer stands on soft 17.
> Player may double on any first two cards.
> Dealer does not take a hole card. If dealer has
> blackjack player will lose entire bet, including
> additional wagers for doubling and splitting.
> Double after a split allowed.
> Player may surrender on any initial two cards, except
> against a dealer ace. This is equivalent to
> "early surrender" against a 10, because the
> player may invoke it before the dealer checks for
> blackjack.
> Resplitting aces not allowed.
> Continuous shuffler.
> On my site I previously incorrectly indicated that the
> 5-card rule does no appply after splitting. Now, I'm
> told by someone there, it does. My house edge was
> calculated assuming this rule.
> The most unusual and significant rule in this game is
> the 5-card half-win rule. I show that it is worth
> 0.77% to the player. For those who disagree with my
> 0.01% house edge, I would be interested to know what
> you get for the effect of this rule. This is probably
> our main point of departure.
I just looked at your site and it does say it's not allowed against ace but I suspect your calculations did allow it against ace. Interestingly your strategy card did not show it's use against ace.
The original post in this thread reports a sim result consistent with my value to 2 decimal points so the correct CD-EV for this game is -0.23% with a 0.61% advantage due to the rule.
Sincerely,
MGP
No 5 cards after splits.
Thanks Don for bringing your attention. I read from somewhere(definately from SW's book) that 5 cards early falf win against dealer all up cards worth 0.7%.
1. Macau 5 cards against dealer non-A only.
2. If SW got 0.7%, 0.77% is obviously too high.
Thanks for clarify the issue.
MGP, can you write to me directly at sitemail "at" wizardofodds.com (trying to protect myself against spam bots). Thanks. I think we can cut through this faster that way.
Posting Permissions
-*-
Bookmarks