Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: Norm Wattenberger: Effect of Color Dependent Tag Values

  1. #1
    Norm Wattenberger
    Guest

    Norm Wattenberger: Effect of Color Dependent Tag Values

    There have been a few comments lately about the effect of counting Red7's as +1 instead of counting all Sevens as +.5. Clearly there must be some difference in accuracy. But the comments have characterized the difference from insignificant to large. So, I though I'd run some sims. I ran two sims each for three sets of circumstances as follows:

      [*]6D, S17, DAS, 1-15, 4.5/6, Accurate catch 20 indexes[*]6D, S17, DAS, 1-15, 4.5/6, Compromise indexes from BiB second edition[*]SD, H17, nDAS, 1-4, 58% pen, Accurate catch 20 indexes[/list]

      Below are the resulting SCOREs:



      Red7 Level II (counting all Sevens as +0.5) won in all three case; which is hardly a surprise. The damage caused by using the Red Sevens only for the three cases was:

      6D accurate: 2.6%
      6D compromise: 3.2%
      SD accurate: 1.7%

      I'm a bit surprised that the compromise indexes were more impacted than the accurate indexes. I really didn't know how the SD vs. 6D numbers would come out.

      As to the question of whether these are significant differences; that's up to the reader. My own personal opinion is that these are not big differences.

  2. #2
    Don Schlesinger
    Guest

    Don Schlesinger: Re: Effect of Color Dependent Tag Values

    > I'm a bit surprised that the compromise indexes were
    > more impacted than the accurate indexes.

    You heap one sloppiness on top of another, and you compound the problem.

    >I really didn't know how the SD vs. 6D numbers would come out.

    Clear to me that SD should be the least affected. You can't be "wrong" by too much, with only four sevens in the deck. With 24 of them, there is more room to get out of whack.

    Don


  3. #3
    Cacarulo
    Guest

    Cacarulo: Re: Effect of Color Dependent Tag Values

    > There have been a few comments lately about the effect
    > of counting Red7's as +1 instead of counting all
    > Sevens as +.5. Clearly there must be some difference
    > in accuracy. But the comments have characterized the
    > difference from insignificant to large. So, I though
    > I'd run some sims. I ran two sims each for three sets
    > of circumstances as follows:

    > 6D, S17, DAS, 1-15, 4.5/6, Accurate catch 20 indexes
    > 6D, S17, DAS, 1-15, 4.5/6, Compromise indexes from
    > BiB second edition
    > SD, H17, nDAS, 1-4, 58% pen, Accurate catch 20
    > indexes Below are the resulting SCOREs:

    > Red7 Level II (counting all Sevens as +0.5) won
    > in all three case; which is hardly a surprise. The
    > damage caused by using the Red Sevens only for the
    > three cases was:

    > 6D accurate: 2.6%
    > 6D compromise: 3.2%
    > SD accurate: 1.7%

    > I'm a bit surprised that the compromise indexes were
    > more impacted than the accurate indexes. I really
    > didn't know how the SD vs. 6D numbers would come out.

    > As to the question of whether these are significant
    > differences; that's up to the reader. My own personal
    > opinion is that these are not big differences.

    I thought the differences would be larger but I think it depends on other factors like pen, spread and # of indices.
    May I bother you with a couple of sims? Pen = 5/6 and C22 for example. Also, it would be good to check 1-20 and see what the difference is. Maybe you can just post the raw data.
    We should don't forget what the correlations parameters are in both cases:

    DRED-7
    BC = 0.9800
    IC = 0.7852
    RED-7
    BC = 0.9683
    IC = 0.7757

    These differences should be best seen with a 1-20 spread.

    Thanks again for the interesting sims.

    Sincerely,
    Cac

  4. #4
    Cacarulo
    Guest

    Cacarulo: Sims for Red 7

    I've made some changes into my simulator and tonight I'll post my own sim comparison. I'll use the following rules just in case you wanted to check the SCOREs against yours: 6D,S17,DOA,DAS,SPA1,SPL3,NS,5/6,C22,5000 million rounds and heads-up. The systems to be compared are:

    1) Red-7

     A = -2 
    2 = 2
    3 = 2
    4 = 2
    5 = 2
    6 = 2
    R7 = 2
    B7 = 0
    8 = 0
    9 = 0
    T = -2


    2) Double Red-7

     A = -2 
    2 = 2
    3 = 2
    4 = 2
    5 = 2
    6 = 2
    7 = 1
    8 = 0
    9 = 0
    T = -2


    Both will use the same set of indices which I calculated for Double Red-7.
    Also, I will post the differences between these two systems but simulated in TC mode. Again, the indices used will be the ones calculated for Double Red-7 in TC mode.

    Sincerely,
    Cac

  5. #5
    Norm Wattenberger
    Guest

    Norm Wattenberger: Great

    I'm running this for 1-20 now. Looks like it will come out with greater than a 4% difference. But it's only 40% done.

    > I've made some changes into my simulator and tonight
    > I'll post my own sim comparison. I'll use the
    > following rules just in case you wanted to check the
    > SCOREs against yours:
    > 6D,S17,DOA,DAS,SPA1,SPL3,NS,5/6,C22,5000 million
    > rounds and heads-up. The systems to be compared are:
    > 1) Red-7
    > A = -2
    > 2 = 2
    > 3 = 2
    > 4 = 2
    > 5 = 2
    > 6 = 2
    > R7 = 2
    > B7 = 0
    > 8 = 0
    > 9 = 0
    > T = -2
    > 2) Double Red-7
    > A = -2
    > 2 = 2
    > 3 = 2
    > 4 = 2
    > 5 = 2
    > 6 = 2
    > 7 = 1
    > 8 = 0
    > 9 = 0
    > T = -2
    > Both will use the same set of indices which I
    > calculated for Double Red-7.
    > Also, I will post the differences between these two
    > systems but simulated in TC mode. Again, the indices
    > used will be the ones calculated for Double Red-7 in
    > TC mode.
    > Sincerely,
    > Cac

  6. #6
    Cacarulo
    Guest

    Cacarulo: Re: Great

    > I'm running this for 1-20 now. Looks like it will come
    > out with greater than a 4% difference. But it's only
    > 40% done.

    That's what I'm getting but contrary to what I've said it turns out that lower spreads make these percentages larger.

    Sincerely,
    Cac

  7. #7
    Cacarulo
    Guest

    Cacarulo: Here are the SCOREs

    1) Red Seven (counting R7's as +1 & B7's as 0) in RC mode

     play-all | rounds played = 100.00% 
    spread ev/h sd/h ror% n0 di score ekb avb unit kelly
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    1 - 4 0.736 23.818 13.53 104688 3.09 9.55 770.66 1.664 12.976 1.000
    1 - 8 1.895 37.559 13.53 39301 5.04 25.45 744.59 2.193 13.430 1.000
    1 - 12 2.888 49.611 13.53 29507 5.82 33.89 852.19 2.626 11.734 1.000
    1 - 15 3.604 58.542 13.53 26387 6.16 37.90 950.94 2.943 10.516 1.000
    1 - 16 3.833 61.403 13.53 25663 6.24 38.97 983.66 3.044 10.166 1.000
    1 - 20 4.744 72.916 13.53 23621 6.51 42.34 1120.64 3.450 8.923 1.000


    2) Red Seven (counting all 7's as 0.5) in RC mode

     play-all | rounds played = 100.00% 
    spread ev/h sd/h ror% n0 di score ekb avb unit kelly
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    1 - 4 0.759 23.817 13.53 98370 3.19 10.17 747.00 1.664 13.387 1.000
    1 - 8 1.932 37.423 13.53 37520 5.16 26.65 724.88 2.189 13.795 1.000
    1 - 12 2.948 49.556 13.53 28267 5.95 35.38 833.16 2.628 12.002 1.000
    1 - 15 3.667 58.328 13.53 25301 6.29 39.52 927.77 2.941 10.778 1.000
    1 - 16 3.904 61.244 13.53 24615 6.37 40.63 960.85 3.044 10.407 1.000
    1 - 20 4.817 72.528 13.53 22671 6.64 44.11 1092.02 3.445 9.157 1.000


    3) Red Seven (counting R7's as +1 & B7's as 0) in TC mode

     play-all | rounds played = 100.00% 
    spread ev/h sd/h ror% n0 di score ekb avb unit kelly
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    1 - 4 0.754 23.705 13.53 98786 3.18 10.12 745.04 1.669 13.422 1.000
    1 - 8 1.843 35.630 13.53 37370 5.17 26.76 688.78 2.110 14.518 1.000
    1 - 12 2.766 46.095 13.53 27775 6.00 36.00 768.20 2.472 13.017 1.000
    1 - 15 3.409 53.570 13.53 24688 6.36 40.51 841.70 2.727 11.881 1.000
    1 - 16 3.618 56.010 13.53 23969 6.46 41.72 867.14 2.811 11.532 1.000
    1 - 20 4.415 65.370 13.53 21928 6.75 45.61 967.98 3.129 10.331 1.000


    4) Red Seven (counting all 7's as 0.5) in TC mode

     play-all | rounds played = 100.00% 
    spread ev/h sd/h ror% n0 di score ekb avb unit kelly
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    1 - 4 0.776 23.677 13.53 93189 3.28 10.73 722.79 1.668 13.835 1.000
    1 - 8 1.883 35.628 13.53 35787 5.29 27.94 673.98 2.112 14.837 1.000
    1 - 12 2.817 46.019 13.53 26695 6.12 37.46 751.87 2.472 13.300 1.000
    1 - 15 3.469 53.467 13.53 23752 6.49 42.10 824.01 2.728 12.136 1.000
    1 - 16 3.679 55.870 13.53 23067 6.58 43.35 848.53 2.810 11.785 1.000
    1 - 20 4.488 65.222 13.53 21120 6.88 47.35 947.85 3.128 10.550 1.000


    Take a look at the differences in percent. The ranges go from around 4% to 6%!

    Sincerely,
    Cac

  8. #8
    Don Schlesinger
    Guest

    Don Schlesinger: Nice job

    > Take a look at the differences in percent. The ranges
    > go from around 4% to 6%!

    I am not the least bit surprised by these results. To me, it was axiomatic that counting all the sevens is clearly superior to counting half the sevens as twice the amount. The latter leads to greater fluctuation or results, which is always bad.

    If you increase s.d., you lower SCORE.

    Don

  9. #9
    Cacarulo
    Guest

    Cacarulo: Moreover

    > I am not the least bit surprised by these results. To
    > me, it was axiomatic that counting all the sevens is
    > clearly superior to counting half the sevens as twice
    > the amount. The latter leads to greater fluctuation or
    > results, which is always bad.

    > If you increase s.d., you lower SCORE.

    K-O and even Hi-Lo are better than Red Seven!

    Conditions: 6D,S17,DOA,DAS,SPA1,SPL3,NS,5/6,heads-up,5000 million rounds

    1) KO + C22 (exact EM-indices)

     play-all | rounds played = 100.00%  
    spread ev/h sd/h ror% n0 di score ekb avb unit kelly
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    1 - 4 0.651 22.192 13.53 116043 2.94 8.62 755.97 1.548 13.228 1.000
    1 - 8 1.728 34.199 13.53 39179 5.05 25.52 676.93 1.966 14.773 1.000
    1 - 12 2.664 45.066 13.53 28621 5.91 34.94 762.41 2.316 13.116 1.000
    1 - 16 3.531 55.353 13.53 24575 6.38 40.69 867.73 2.642 11.524 1.000
    1 - 20 4.352 65.203 13.53 22446 6.67 44.55 976.87 2.950 10.237 1.000


    Sincerely,
    Cac

  10. #10
    Norm Wattenberger
    Guest

    Norm Wattenberger: Re: Moreover

    > K-O and even Hi-Lo are better than Red Seven!

    An interesting result. One can debate whether counting only Red 7's is difficult or not. But it is certainly more difficult than counting all 7's

Page 1 of 2 12 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.