Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 44

Thread: Zenfighter: EoR's HITTING 17 - 12 Table 1

  1. #11
    Zenfighter
    Guest

    Zenfighter: Re: EoR's Table 11

    DEALER 3


    HITTING 17 ? 12


     
    17 16 15 14

    A -1.90624 -1.45334 -1.01251 -0.857938
    2 -1.86041 -1.3045 -0.697699 -0.337793
    3 -2.3697 -2.06704 -1.45909 -0.81705
    4 -3.64045 -3.98711 -3.2493 -2.49714
    5 -1.06665 -4.46385 -3.71528 -2.95299
    6 -0.674933 -0.298143 -3.73405 -3.01373
    7 -0.229311 0.234025 -0.461686 -3.01093
    8 0.310966 0.683309 0.877153 1.07256
    9 2.04728 2.26886 2.26782 2.2675
    T 2.34736 2.59695 2.56532 2.53688

    m -41.4418 -21.3389 -15.549 -9.73056

    ss 53.9375 76.6445 74.3943 66.6568

    Cks -0.000008 0.000011 0.00001 0.000009


     
    13 12

    A -0.680733 -0.468455
    2 -0.19499 -0.0560603
    3 -0.40738 -0.25145
    4 -1.74711 -1.25312
    5 -2.18977 -1.40809
    6 -2.29553 -1.55669
    7 -2.33884 -1.6467
    8 -2.44569 -1.8058
    9 2.2906 -1.40942
    T 2.50236 2.46394

    m -3.54105 2.56707

    ss 55.5300 38.5051

    Cks -0.000003 -0.0000253





  2. #12
    Zenfighter
    Guest

    Zenfighter: Re: EoR's Table 12

    DEALER 2


    HITTING 17 ? 12


     
    17 16 15 14

    A -1.92274 -1.43162 -0.980923 -0.7951
    2 -1.86358 -1.37091 -0.727776 -0.362661
    3 -2.38475 -1.82963 -1.22489 -0.598743
    4 -2.92687 -2.56341 -1.95857 -1.31055
    5 -0.0327425 -4.47435 -3.73659 -2.97738
    6 -0.724332 -0.371687 -3.81855 -3.10063
    7 -0.297107 0.0878199 0.301329 -3.17213
    8 0.208907 0.607502 0.791211 0.97125
    9 0.663855 1.05649 1.2058 1.35224
    T 2.31984 2.57245 2.53724 2.49843

    m -38.2286 -17.6677 -12.1932 -6.77434

    ss 44.04844 61.96844 63.2928 59.1213

    Cks 0.0000005 0.0000049 0.000001 0.000016


     
    13 12

    A -0.644221 -0.470851
    2 -0.261085 -0.117387
    3 -0.208378 -0.0681375
    4 -0.647969 -0.22363
    5 -2.20229 -1.4274
    6 -2.3651 -1.63122
    7 -2.48485 -1.79543
    8 -2.53713 -1.8975
    9 1.4998 -2.05301
    T 2.4628 2.42114

    m -1.32547 4.49016

    ss 50.5127 39.4751

    Cks -0.000023 -0.0000055





  3. #13
    Zenfighter
    Guest

    Zenfighter: Re: First practical application

    Playing correlations for your particular hands.

    In order to obtain these ones you will need:

    1) The EoR?s table with the ss
    2) The ss of the tags of your card counting system
    3) Griffin?s correlation formula
    4) A pocket calculator

    Example:

    16 vs T correlation?

    Ci = (Sum Pi*Ei)/ (sqr (cc^2 * ss)

    For the Hilo player we have:

    Sum Pi*Ei = 1*(-0.290299) + 1*(-0.804234) + 1*(-1.72785) + 1*(-2.56834) + 1*(1.64458) + (-1)*(-0.499204) + 4 (-1)*(1.11513) = -7.707459

    Hilo tags sum of squares = (1) ^2 + (1) ^2 + ?..+ 4* (-1) ^2 = 10

    So we have then:

    C = -7.707459 / sqr (10* 19.05456) = 0.558357 (disregard the negative sign)

    By rounding you have:

    16 vs T; correlation = .56 the figure that Don give us in the Illustrious 18 Chart.

    As you can see a pocket calculator will suffice.

    You can do it by yourself, just try.

    Sincerely

    Z


  4. #14
    Cacarulo
    Guest

    Cacarulo: Re: First practical application

    Good work ZF! I could check "some" of your EoRs if you want but you'll have to tell me which ones would you prefer. Maybe the ones that you consider more crucial or more different from the ones in ToB.
    Obviously, I don't have the time to check them all

    Just let me know.

    Sincerely,
    Cac

  5. #15
    Zenfighter
    Guest

    Zenfighter: Re: First practical application

    Cac!

    You don't have to worry; I'll need you for sure for the next coming tables, for double checks. You guessed it! Hard doubling vs ace or ten (American rules), not to mention for splitting and/ or resplitting, during the next comming summer. The idea is to keep Don's blood pressure at reasonable levels. :-)

    For the "piece of cake", just relax. They are fine. Comparing them with Griffin's entries
    the only noticeable are slightly discrepancies with the ss, a natural consequence of the single precision digits vs the rounding ones. Nothing to write home, anyway.

    Btw, enjoyed your insurance tables. Note that with the EoR's you gave me I've got:

    Insure if TC => 1.38992

    If you give me data and full deck favorabilities for two, four and six decks, I'll let you
    know what the EoR's derived indexes are.

    Appreciated answer.

    Sincerely

    Z


  6. #16
    Cacarulo
    Guest

    Cacarulo: Re: First practical application

    > You don't have to worry; I'll need you for
    > sure for the next coming tables, for double
    > checks. You guessed it! Hard doubling vs ace
    > or ten (American rules), not to mention for
    > splitting and/ or resplitting, during the
    > next comming summer. The idea is to keep
    > Don's blood pressure at reasonable levels.
    > :-)

    Ok. The splitting part is not going to be easy though.

    > For the "piece of cake", just
    > relax. They are fine. Comparing them with
    > Griffin's entries
    > the only noticeable are slightly
    > discrepancies with the ss, a natural
    > consequence of the single precision digits
    > vs the rounding ones. Nothing to write home,
    > anyway.

    Ok.

    > Btw, enjoyed your insurance tables. Note
    > that with the EoR's you gave me I've got:
    > Insure if TC => 1.38992

    That's pretty good but I still think Snyder's formula is not that accurate. Not to mention trying to get indices for unbalanced systems in TC mode. However and in this particular case it seems that SF is doing a better job than Pete's formula.

    > If you give me data and full deck
    > favorabilities for two, four and six decks,
    > I'll let you
    > know what the EoR's derived indexes are.

    No problem. It would be interesting to see what you get.

    Sincerely,
    Cac

  7. #17
    Cacarulo
    Guest

    Cacarulo: Complete set of Insurance EoRs

    ZenFighter,

    Here you have two sets of Insurance EoRs for any number of decks. The first set is the "traditional" that uses the full pack. The second set adjusts for the ace removed.
    The indices generated by using any of these sets are the same since insurance is a linear play.
    For other plays such as 16vT -which is not linear- a set adjusted for the removal of a ten would
    be more accurate than the traditional.

    1) Full Pack

         +--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+ 
    | 1D | 2D | 3D | 4D |
    +----+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+
    | A | 1.80995475113122 | 0.89619118745332 | 0.59553349875931 | 0.44593088071349 |
    | 2 | 1.80995475113122 | 0.89619118745332 | 0.59553349875931 | 0.44593088071349 |
    | 3 | 1.80995475113122 | 0.89619118745332 | 0.59553349875931 | 0.44593088071349 |
    | 4 | 1.80995475113122 | 0.89619118745332 | 0.59553349875931 | 0.44593088071349 |
    | 5 | 1.80995475113122 | 0.89619118745332 | 0.59553349875931 | 0.44593088071349 |
    | 6 | 1.80995475113122 | 0.89619118745332 | 0.59553349875931 | 0.44593088071349 |
    | 7 | 1.80995475113122 | 0.89619118745332 | 0.59553349875931 | 0.44593088071349 |
    | 8 | 1.80995475113122 | 0.89619118745332 | 0.59553349875931 | 0.44593088071349 |
    | 9 | 1.80995475113122 | 0.89619118745332 | 0.59553349875931 | 0.44593088071349 |
    | T | -4.07239819004525 | -2.01643017176998 | -1.33995037220844 | -1.00334448160535 |
    | m | -7.69230769230769 | -7.69230769230769 | -7.69230769230769 | -7.69230769230769 |
    | ss | 95.82113388341763 | 23.49239035071819 | 10.37380933322661 | 5.81648974843682 |
    | ck | 0.00000000000000 | 0.00000000000000 | 0.00000000000001 | 0.00000000000001 |
    +----+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+
    | 5D | 6D | 7D | 8D |
    +----+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+
    | A | 0.35640035640036 | 0.29680930002473 | 0.25429116338207 | 0.22242817423540 |
    | 2 | 0.35640035640036 | 0.29680930002473 | 0.25429116338207 | 0.22242817423540 |
    | 3 | 0.35640035640036 | 0.29680930002473 | 0.25429116338207 | 0.22242817423540 |
    | 4 | 0.35640035640036 | 0.29680930002473 | 0.25429116338207 | 0.22242817423540 |
    | 5 | 0.35640035640036 | 0.29680930002473 | 0.25429116338207 | 0.22242817423540 |
    | 6 | 0.35640035640036 | 0.29680930002473 | 0.25429116338207 | 0.22242817423540 |
    | 7 | 0.35640035640036 | 0.29680930002473 | 0.25429116338207 | 0.22242817423540 |
    | 8 | 0.35640035640036 | 0.29680930002473 | 0.25429116338207 | 0.22242817423540 |
    | 9 | 0.35640035640036 | 0.29680930002473 | 0.25429116338207 | 0.22242817423540 |
    | T | -0.80190080190080 | -0.66782092505565 | -0.57215511760966 | -0.50046339202966 |
    | m | -7.69230769230769 | -7.69230769230769 | -7.69230769230769 | -7.69230769230769 |
    | ss | 3.71537051073731 | 2.57680099699930 | 1.89142187639558 | 1.44712306129057 |
    | ck | 0.00000000000000 | 0.00000000000001 | 0.00000000000001 | 0.00000000000001 |
    +----+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+


    2) Full Pack - Ace

         +--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+ 
    | 1D | 2D | 3D | 4D |
    +----+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+
    | A | 1.88235294117647 | 0.91376356367790 | 0.60326770004189 | 0.45026030673983 |
    | 2 | 1.88235294117647 | 0.91376356367790 | 0.60326770004189 | 0.45026030673983 |
    | 3 | 1.88235294117647 | 0.91376356367790 | 0.60326770004189 | 0.45026030673983 |
    | 4 | 1.88235294117647 | 0.91376356367790 | 0.60326770004189 | 0.45026030673983 |
    | 5 | 1.88235294117647 | 0.91376356367790 | 0.60326770004189 | 0.45026030673983 |
    | 6 | 1.88235294117647 | 0.91376356367790 | 0.60326770004189 | 0.45026030673983 |
    | 7 | 1.88235294117647 | 0.91376356367790 | 0.60326770004189 | 0.45026030673983 |
    | 8 | 1.88235294117647 | 0.91376356367790 | 0.60326770004189 | 0.45026030673983 |
    | 9 | 1.88235294117647 | 0.91376356367790 | 0.60326770004189 | 0.45026030673983 |
    | T | -4.11764705882353 | -2.02741290691034 | -1.34478424801005 | -1.00605037287182 |
    | m | -5.88235294117647 | -6.79611650485437 | -7.09677419354839 | -7.24637681159420 |
    | ss | 100.76124567474051 | 24.08348855724444 | 10.54644370454471 | 5.88879914330485 |
    | ck | -0.00000000000000 | -0.00000000000000 | 0.00000000000000 | 0.00000000000000 |
    +----+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+
    | 5D | 6D | 7D | 8D |
    +----+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+
    | A | 0.35916314986082 | 0.29872419873457 | 0.25569608693667 | 0.22350270647809 |
    | 2 | 0.35916314986082 | 0.29872419873457 | 0.25569608693667 | 0.22350270647809 |
    | 3 | 0.35916314986082 | 0.29872419873457 | 0.25569608693667 | 0.22350270647809 |
    | 4 | 0.35916314986082 | 0.29872419873457 | 0.25569608693667 | 0.22350270647809 |
    | 5 | 0.35916314986082 | 0.29872419873457 | 0.25569608693667 | 0.22350270647809 |
    | 6 | 0.35916314986082 | 0.29872419873457 | 0.25569608693667 | 0.22350270647809 |
    | 7 | 0.35916314986082 | 0.29872419873457 | 0.25569608693667 | 0.22350270647809 |
    | 8 | 0.35916314986082 | 0.29872419873457 | 0.25569608693667 | 0.22350270647809 |
    | 9 | 0.35916314986082 | 0.29872419873457 | 0.25569608693667 | 0.22350270647809 |
    | T | -0.80362754781359 | -0.66901773674930 | -0.57303319483129 | -0.50113497468133 |
    | m | -7.33590733590734 | -7.39549839228296 | -7.43801652892562 | -7.46987951807229 |
    | ss | 3.75223421803959 | 2.59807323554546 | 1.90479049284131 | 1.45606530097737 |
    | ck | 0.00000000000000 | -0.00000000000000 | 0.00000000000000 | 0.00000000000000 |
    +----+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+


    In particular I use the first set (1D) for calculating algebraic insurance indices from 1D to 8D.
    Please, let me know what indices do you get with these EoRs.

    Sincerely,
    Cac

  8. #18
    Zenfighter
    Guest

    Zenfighter: Re: Comparisons

     

    Decks EoR?s derived

    1 1.39093
    2 2.33007
    3 2.64313
    4 2.79965
    5 2.89357
    6 2.95618
    7 3.0009
    8 3.03444



    It?s worth remarking, that all indexes derived by algebraic approximations using Pete?s formula
    are more precise, in the sense that they approach closer to the true figures. The only exception seems to be the single deck one.

    So it seems to me, that Arnold?s formula is still a practical tool under these circumstances:

    a) Aimed basically at one level balanced counts.
    b) Will give you fair indexes if you limit yourself to single deck exclusively.

    As a standard tool Moss formula is proven to be superior. The data is conclusive.

    Sincerely

    Z

  9. #19
    alienated
    Guest

    alienated: Re: First practical application

    Thanks for posting these, Zenfighter. I've had a lot of fun in the past utilizing the EOR tables in ToB, and greatly appreciate your contributions in this area.

  10. #20
    Zenfighter
    Guest

    Zenfighter: Re: Glad to see you round here

    Coming from the author of the best descriptive EoR?s articles I?ve read in my life, I can?t resist the temptation to link them here (they can be accessed for free on the Web, anyway), in order that DD?s subscribers will appreciate the beautiful inferences that can be extracted from any given table.

    Alienated articles:
    1. www.cardcounter.com/best.pl?read=7
    2. www.cardcounter.com/best.pl?read=6


    Priceless, gotta believe!

    Sincerely

    Z


Page 2 of 5 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.