Losing streak thread - PART FOUR (Sort of)

[DSchles]

I ask again: Have you read chapter 12 of BJA3?

Don

[Shadowless]

I ask again: Have you read chapter 12 of BJA3?

Don

I purchased BJA3 a couple weeks ago and read that chapter recently.

Basically a losing year is possible even with backcounting, but results will come back to around EV in the long run, and that individual team players shouldn't be compensated for individual performance because it's unfair and anything can happen in the short run.

My only criticism is that since the player is wonging in at TC>=1, he is only placing a bet about 25% of the time (26.63% exact), so 376 hands per hour would have to be dealt in order for the backcounter to achieve 100 theoretical bets placed per hour, making it literally impossible for the backcounter to bet 100HPH, let alone 10k hands per quarter (a round needs to be settled in ~9.6 seconds on average, not including shuffle time).

If it was a heads up game he was backcounting, with 75% penetration 234 cards will be dealt. Approximately 42 hands will be dealt to the heads up player per shoe assuming 2.8 cards per round on average -- 9 (8.95) shoes per hour needed to meet 376 hands per hour. Assuming no ASM and 2-3 minutes to shuffle, 18-27 minutes will be taken out of each hour for shuffling, leaving 33-42 minutes of play time to achieve 376 hands per hour, making the requirement for a settled round between 5.27 and 6.7 seconds. However, these calculations don't include the rounds that the backcounter will be playing. If the backcounter bets about 25% of the time, he is playing about 10 rounds per shoe with the assumed above conditions.

That aside, the moral of the simulation is more important, which I had already noted.

[DSchles]

You misunderstand the concept of reporting win rates and results for back-counting. They are based on SEEING 100 hands per hour, not PLAYING them!

Don