Zenfighter: Evaluating volatily with Griffin's help

[Zenfighter]

Opportunity arises slowly in Multiple Decks

 

 

  One Deck	  Two Decks	  Six Decks	 

					 

Cards 	   %	Cards 	   %	Cards 	   % 

seen		seen		seen 

	 

1	0.0192	4	0.0385	33	0.1058 

2	0.0385	8	0.0769	61	0.1955 

3	0.0577	11	0.1058	85	0.2724 

4	0.0769	15	0.1442	105	0.3365 

5	0.0962	18	0.1731	123	0.3942 

6	0.1154	22	0.2115	138	0.4423 

7	0.1346	25	0.2404	152	0.4872 

8	0.1538	28	0.2692	164	0.5256 

9	0.1731	31	0.2981	175	0.5609 

10	0.1923	34	0.3269	185	0.5929 

11	0.2115	37	0.3558	194	0.6218 

12	0.2308	39	0.3750	202	0.6474 

13	0.2500	42	0.4038	209	0.6699 

14	0.2692	44	0.4231	216	0.6923 

15	0.2885	47	0.4519	222	0.7115 

16	0.3077	49	0.4712	228	0.7308 

17	0.3269	52	0.5000	233	0.7468 

18	0.3462	54	0.5192	238	0.7628 

19	0.3654	56	0.5385	243	0.7788 

20	0.3846	58	0.5577	247	0.7917 

21	0.4038	60	0.5769	251	0.8045 

22	0.4231	62	0.5962	255	0.8173 

23	0.4423	64	0.6154	259	0.8301 

24	0.4615	66	0.6346	262	0.8397 

25	0.4808	68	0.6538	265	0.8494 

26	0.5000	70	0.6731	268	0.8590 

27	0.5192	71	0.6827	271	0.8686 

28	0.5385	73	0.7019	274	0.8782 

29	0.5577	75	0.7212	276	0.8846 

30	0.5769	76	0.7308	279	0.8942 

31	0.5962	78	0.7500	281	0.9006 

32	0.6154	79	0.7596	283	0.9071 

33	0.6346	81	0.7788	285	0.9135 

34	0.6538	82	0.7885	287	0.9199 

35	0.6731	84	0.8077	289	0.9263 

36	0.6923	85	0.8173	291	0.9327 

37	0.7115	87	0.8365	293	0.9391 

38	0.7308	88	0.8462	294	0.9423 

39	0.7500	89	0.8558	296	0.9487 

40	0.7692	91	0.8750	297	0.9519 

41	0.7885	92	0.8846	299	0.9583 

42	0.8077	93	0.8942	300	0.9615 

43	0.8269	94	0.9038	302	0.9679 

44	0.8462	95	0.9135	303	0.9712 

45	0.8654	97	0.9327	304	0.9744 

46	0.8846	98	0.9423	305	0.9776 

47	0.9038	99	0.9519	307	0.9840 

48	0.9231	100	0.9615	308	0.9872 

49	0.9423	101	0.9712	309	0.9904 

50	0.9615	102	0.9808	310	0.9936 

51	0.9808	103	0.9904	311	0.9968 

 

 

 

 

 

From the card counter?s viewpoint another important different between one and many decks is the slowness with which
the deck?s original condition changes. Each row of the following [above] table provides a comparison of the fluctuations in various numbers of decks by display of the number of remaining cards [cards seen, in our new table] which would have the same degree of fluctuation associated. TOB

For example, the amount of opportunity likely to be encountered with 21 cards seen in a single deck is equivalent
to what would occur with 60 in two decks and 251 in six decks.

Seeing one card from a single deck entitles us to as much excitement as will glimpsing of 33 cards. TOB

Ditto for having seen 5 cards from a single deck. Here the ?excitement? equals 123 cards from six decks.

Sincerely, enjoy!

Zenfighter

[Don Schlesinger]

Zen,

Thanks, as always, for a super job.

Don

[John Lewis]

in case any other readers are as slow as I ...

It took me a couple of minutes to understand your table.

Comparable "information gain" is displayed horizontally across the 3 deck categories.

Beautiful table.

A superb illustration to those who question the unequalled appeal and satisfaction of SD. Using your chart, for example, it is immediately seen that the information present at end deal of 50% (mediocre, typical) SD pen is roughly comparable to information present at 70% (good, atypical) pen in DD.

Even more dramatically, the table is an illustration to those who question a loathing of shoes. My personal dislike of shoes is redoubled after examining this. That's one hell of a lot of counting and "ass time" for very little information gain.

Information present at 1/2 deck of an SD game is comparable to the information present at 5 decks dealt (268 cards) of a 6 deck shoe!

Playing 6D, one has to sit through roughly 5 decks to gain the information available on playing each second or third deal of a typical SD game (3rd base)! And you're damn lucky if they deal the god awful shoe down that far, anyway.

Or, to examine the betting (vs. aforementioned playing) implication: with 3 players at SD, one has the same betting information available for an upcoming hand on the second round (11 cards played average) as the 6D player has after 194 cards are played -- almost 4 decks!

Every blackjack player should be familiar with this chart. There would be a lot more flights to Nevada and Tunica.

Very nice work.

[Zenfighter]

Even more dramatically, the table is an illustration to those who question a loathing of shoes. My personal dislike of shoes is redoubled after examining this. That's one hell of a lot of counting and "ass time" for very little information gain.

Griffin again:

When we recall that the basic multiple deck games are inherently less advantageous, the necessity of a very wide betting range must be recognized

That is; there is nothing wrong with the shoes, provided you are using a generous spread and does have the courage to pull the big bets out, when the times call for. Also the ability to run away from the table can help a lot for, when striving for increased and decent SCOREs
A comparison with Chapter X tables from BJA3:

 

S17, DAS and a play all approach. 

 

1) 26/52 

 

PA Pract. (1-4)	        SCORE 	$70.71 

 

2) 78/104 

 

PA Pract. (1-4)	        SCORE	$55.91 

PA Pract. (1-6)	        SCORE	$81.97 

PA Pract. (1-8)	        SCORE	$98.21 

 

3) 260/312 

 

PA Pract. (1-8)	        SCORE	$25.17 

PA Pract. (1-12)	SCORE	$33.74 

PA Pract. (1-16)	SCORE	$39.89 

 

Back counting approach. 

 

3) 260/312 

 

BC Pract. (1-4)	        SCORE	$62.79 

 

You can see here in the last example, a back counter approaching slightly his single deck?s brethren.
If the shoe player insist into playing through all the negatives, he will never succeed to score in the vicinity
of the pitch games players and despite of the huge differences in penetration between the games.

Sincerely

Zenfighter

[Cacarulo]

[Garry Baldy]

First I want to say that Zenfighter's calculations are just outstanding. Thanks a lot once more.

Could you please add 4- and 8-deckers?

Luck.

Garry Baldy.

P.S. Just jelous. Never played single-decker in my life. And I always forced to play-all the shoes.

[bfbagain]

superlatives to accurately describe your contributions?

I don't think so.

So I'll just say, thank you.

bfb

[Zenfighter]

[John Lewis]

This SCOREs /spread perpective is an essential one, as well, as your post illustrates.

Thank you.

[Zenfighter]

 

One Deck	Eight Decks	 

			 

Cards seen    Cards seen  % 

			 

1		57	0.1370 

2		102	0.2452 

3		138	0.3317 

4		168	0.4038 

5		193	0.4639 

6		214	0.5144 

7		232	0.5577 

8		248	0.5962 

9		262	0.6298 

10		274	0.6587 

11		285	0.6851 

12		295	0.7091 

13		304	0.7308 

14		312	0.7500 

15		319	0.7668 

16		326	0.7837 

17		332	0.7981 

18		338	0.8125 

19		343	0.8245 

20		348	0.8365 

21		352	0.8462 

22		356	0.8558 

23		360	0.8654 

24		364	0.8750 

25		367	0.8822 

26		370	0.8894 

27		374	0.8990 

28		376	0.9038 

29		379	0.9111 

30		382	0.9183 

31		384	0.9231 

32		386	0.9279 

33		389	0.9351 

34		391	0.9399 

35		393	0.9447 

36		394	0.9471 

37		396	0.9519 

38		398	0.9567 

39		400	0.9615 

40		401	0.9639 

41		403	0.9688 

42		404	0.9712 

43		406	0.9760 

44		407	0.9784 

45		408	0.9808 

46		409	0.9832 

47		411	0.9880 

48		412	0.9904 

49		413	0.9928 

50		414	0.9952 

51		415	0.9976 

 

 

Here we have a back counting approach as the only reasonable tool to deal with these eight decks monsters.

 

 

6.5/8 S17 DAS 

 

BC Pract. (1-4)	SCORE	$37.24 

 

7.0/8 S17 DAS 

 

BC Pract. (1-4)	SCORE	$54.27 

 

 

If you can?t get away with it, then do not play at all. A waste of time and energy.

Sincerely

Zenfighter

[Don Schlesinger]

[John Lewis]

So the information present at 1/2 deck SD (again, usually every second or third deal) is comparable to the information at 7 decks dealt on an 8 deck shoe.

You commonly receive as much playing strategy information on your first hand of SD (third base) as an 8 deck player does at 6 decks played. As much betting strategy information for your second hand of SD as your last hand on an 8 decker with 2 decks cut off.

Salivate if they cut off just 1.5 decks vs. 2.

Plus crowded tables and $100 minimums.

Coney Island is comparable to Cancun, too.

Donald Trump is one hell of a salesman. And suckers are born much faster than 1/minute.

[Praying Mantis]

> 3) 260/312

> PA Pract. (1-8) SCORE $25.17
> PA Pract. (1-12) SCORE $33.74
> PA Pract. (1-16) SCORE $39.89

> Back counting approach.

> 3) 260/312
> BC Pract. (1-4) SCORE $62.79
>
> You can see here in the last example, a back
> counter approaching slightly his single
> deck?s brethren.

Does this mean that someone backcounting and enters a 6 deck game in a positive situation and spreading 1-4 will do BETTER than play-all at 1-16?

If I am reading this correctly, that's incredible...why would anyone want to sit at a 6 decker and play all? (maybe a spotter?)

I am still learning the fine points of DD and haven't moved to shoe play, as yet. Getting ready to go there so this information is priceless!

Thanks,

Praying Mantis