# Thread: NCounter: Betting when 4D let vs 2D left at 6D shoe

1. ## brownian bridge: Re: Maybe this will help

> blackjackincolor.com/blackjackeffects2.htm

> Maybe it won't!

> Don

If you mean, data generated by 3-decades-old Intel 286 CPU are a little old,
I agree. and maybe it's equally true to theories based on those data.

anyway, I show you my idea.

Let

D:total deck number
t/(52D):depth of shoe
r:RC before round
r+a:RC after the round
n:number of cards used at the round

assumption 1: "Brownian Bridge" can be used as model for the movement of RC.
assumption 2: EV of the game will be the function of expected value of a/n and variance of a/n.
assumption 3: optimal playing indices will be function of expected value of a/n and variance of a/n.
assumption 4: E(a/n) will be equivalent to TC/52
assumption 5: Var(a/n) will be the function of r, n, t, and 52D.

investigation of these functions will include the answer to floating advantage.

2. ## G Man: Re: Betting when 4D let vs 2D left at 6D shoe

> But in my very poor understanding, as penetration goes
> very deep,
> uncertainty level will be reduced.

Who said the contrary? This is probably the basics of the floating advantage.

You have a nice handle, you brought Shannon's therory in the discussion but you don't even know what it means...

What's the point you're trying to make?

3. ## brownian bridge: Re: Betting when 4D let vs 2D left at 6D shoe

> Who said the contrary? This is probably the basics of
> the floating advantage.

> You have a nice handle, you brought Shannon's therory
> in the discussion but you don't even know what it
> means...

> What's the point you're trying to make?

Sorry, now I have no interest in that sort of thing.

Page 2 of 2 First 12

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•