Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35

Thread: Praying Mantis: UBZ II or TKO?

  1. #21
    Cacarulo
    Guest

    Cacarulo: More

    Were the indices in BJA3 calculated from scratch?

    Cac

  2. #22
    Zenfighter
    Guest

    Zenfighter: Re: Halves/Zen concerns

    I think we have to wait for Norm for a double check.

    Meanwhile somehow surprised by Zen beating Halves in shoe games (provided a 1 to 12/16 spread) and after reading you calmly I?ve extracted the following based exclusively in Richard Reid?s OSR formula who evaluate potential gains based exclusively in linear estimates of Betting correlations, Playing efficiency and Insurance correlations. Here are my results:

     
    Overall System Ratings Comparison

    Count 1-12 1-16

    Halves 97.99 98.18

    Zen 96.65 96.58



    The higher IC of the Zen count doesn?t act with enough power to fight the monster BC of Halves.

    Pure math, I know, no cut card placement, so pure linear estimates in gain. Moral? Let?s wait for confirmation.

    Hope this helps, anyway.

    Zenfighter

  3. #23
    Cacarulo
    Guest

    Cacarulo: Another one

    The indices were calculated for full decks. Also, the TC conversion was for full-deck. This was done in both count systems to provide an apple-to-apple comparison.

    For example: Insurance index in Zem is +5 and Insurance index in Halves is +7.

    Cac

  4. #24
    Cacarulo
    Guest

    Cacarulo: I meant Zen. *NM*


  5. #25
    Don Schlesinger
    Guest

    Don Schlesinger: Re: Halves/Zen concerns

    I thought I provided the CVCX comparsion above, for I18. Adding four more indices can't possibly make any major difference to completely reverse the magnitude of the SCOREs.

    There simply is no logic that I can think of behind Zen's outperforming Halves.

    Don

  6. #26
    Zenfighter
    Guest

    Zenfighter: Re: Searching for motives

    If you double the values of Halves tags you should use 2 as the correct TC divisor. Otherwise you would made Halves somehow imprecise. E.g. the insurance index = 7. Probably here lies the problem. If you use Halves the way I count it, then the 1 is the correct divisor obviously. I don't think we have here an apple to apple comparison because that way Halves is at an initial slightly disadvantage with the Zen count.

    Zenfighter


  7. #27
    Parker
    Guest

    Parker: One problem

    > Don't forget the SCORE chapter!!

    Not forgotten at all -- but I need numbers for TKO.

  8. #28
    Don Schlesinger
    Guest

    Don Schlesinger: Right

    I think Halves should be simmed the way Wong uses it.

    Don


  9. #29
    Cacarulo
    Guest

    Cacarulo: That's not the problem

    > If you double the values of Halves tags you
    > should use 2 as the correct TC divisor.
    > Otherwise you would made Halves somehow
    > imprecise. E.g. the insurance index = 7.
    > Probably here lies the problem. If you use
    > Halves the way I count it, then the 1 is the
    > correct divisor obviously. I don't think we
    > have here an apple to apple comparison
    > because that way Halves is at an initial
    > slightly disadvantage with the Zen count.

    If for Halves you use 2 as the TC divisor then you'll have to use 2 for Zen as well (Apple-to-Apple).
    Maybe all these discrepancies have to do with the inclusion of LS. Probably CVCX sims used different indices (published) or the number of rounds were not enough.
    I've generated indices (without LS) using CVdata and SBA and both are the same. This means that my sims should be correct. In any case, I would like to hear Norm's comments.

    Sincerely,
    Cac

  10. #30
    Zenfighter
    Guest

    Zenfighter: Re: That's not the problem

    Rules: 6dks, das, spl3 and spa1.

    EV max indices, precision 3.5 sd Max n of pairs at index 200 million.

     

    Insurance 3
    16 vs T 0
    15 vs T 4
    16 vs 9 5
    12 vs 6 -1
    12 vs 5 -2
    12 vs 4 0
    12 vs 3 2
    12 vs 2 4
    13 vs 2 -1
    13 vs 3 -2
    9 vs 2 1
    9 vs 7 4
    11 vs A 1
    10 s A 4
    10 vs T 4
    8 vs 6 2
    8 vs 5 4
    A8 vs 6 1
    A8 vs 5 1
    T,T vs 6 5
    T,T vs 5 5



    I don?t agree that Zen can out SCORE Halves provided 1-12 and or 1 ? 16 spread in any given standard shoe,

    (4.5/6 and/or 5/6) if the Halves player uses the above printed indices. How can an ace-reckoned two level count (Zen) beat another three level one? (Halves) Can?t be true.

    Sincerely

    Zenfighter

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.