-
Redhook: BC, PE, and IC
Comparing the BC, PE, and IC factors of the various counting systems...
If a counting system could be altered to improve one of these factors (by 5% say), which would most increase the win rate of the system? Which is the second most important? Is there a rule of thumb?
Redhook
-
Cacarulo: Re: BC, PE, and IC
> Comparing the BC, PE, and IC factors of the various
> counting systems...
> If a counting system could be altered to improve one
> of these factors (by 5% say), which would most
> increase the win rate of the system? Which is the
> second most important? Is there a rule of thumb?
Unfortunately, there's no rule of thumb. You need to run sims and calculate the SCOREs.
Sincerely,
Cac
-
Don Schlesinger: Re: BC, PE, and IC
> Comparing the BC, PE, and IC factors of the various
> counting systems...
> If a counting system could be altered to improve one
> of these factors (by 5% say), which would most
> increase the win rate of the system? Which is the
> second most important? Is there a rule of thumb?
> Redhook
The answer depends greatly on the spread you employ and the rules of the game. For shoe games with large spreads, I suppose BC is most important. For SD with small spreads, PE becomes important. I doubt if the correct answer would ever be IC.
Don
-
Zenfighter: Re: Pocket calculations
While the SCORE method will answer your question in a completely satisfactory manner, you can probably get not too bad results with Griffin?s empirical formula, as per Chapter 4 from the TOB.
Let?s use the Hi-Opt I without the ace side count.
BC = .88
PE = .61
Units won per hand = [8(k ? 1) * BC + 5(k + 1)* PE] / 1000
Here k units are bet on ANY favourable deck, otherwise the wager is one.
1) SD with a 1 to 4 spread.
Uwph = (24* .88 + 25 * .61) / 1000 = 0.03637
Increasing a 5% the BC yields: BC = .92
While a 5% with the PE means: PE = .64
For the first case we get
Uwph = (24 * .92 + 25 * .61) / 1000 = 0.03733 (a 2.64% increase)
And for the second
Uwph = (24 * .88 + 25 * .64) / 1000 = 0.03712 (a 2.06% increase)
Increasing here the BC is a winner, but the margin will be wider when multiple-deck spreads are employed.
2) Multiple decks with a 1 to 16 spread.
Uwph = (120 * .88 + 85 * .61) / 1000 = 0.15745
Increasing a 5% the BC yields
Uwph = (120 * 92 + 85 *.61) / 1000 = 0.16225 (a 3.05% increase)
While increasing a 5% the PE
Uwph = (120 *.88 + 85 *.64) / 1000 = 0.16000 (an 1.62% increase)
Despite all the above simplified pocket calculations, one thing remains still clear, and that is, that selecting a point count system with a high betting correlation is of paramount importance for the multi-deck player. We can bet on this without any type of sims.
Hope this helps.
Zenfighter
-
Redhook: Thanks Zenfighter! *NM*
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Bookmarks