See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 16 of 21 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast
Results 196 to 208 of 261

Thread: T count simulation

  1. #196


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Gronbog View Post
    I have been a professional software engineer for 36 years, splitting my career between 2 major software companies. I have a bachelor's degree in math with my major being computer science and a minor in combinatorics and optimization. This all happened before I had even the slightest interest in casino games. When I did become interested, I decided to write my own software in order to help me distinguish the fact from the fiction in what I was reading. That was 23 years ago. The software has evolved to suit my interests ever since then.
    Just out of curiosity could software engineer get license? For example, as a lot of civil engineers get their PE (Professional Engineer) license. Do they have anything like that for software engineers?

  2. #197


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Gronbog View Post
    I have been a professional software engineer for 36 years, splitting my career between 2 major software companies. I have a bachelor's degree in math with my major being computer science and a minor in combinatorics and optimization. This all happened before I had even the slightest interest in casino games. When I did become interested, I decided to write my own software in order to help me distinguish the fact from the fiction in what I was reading. That was 23 years ago. The software has evolved to suit my interests ever since then.
    Hi Gronbog,

    Glad to hear that you are a professional software engineer, could you or is it possible to write a "stand alone" blackjack strategy calculator to generate perfect strategy WITHOUT INTERNET CONNECT base on exact remaining cards ? I am thinking to use it to play online game.

    Here are the perfect BJ strategy calculator : https://wizardofodds.com/games/black...nd-calculator/
    Unfortunately this calculator required internet connection before it can generate perfect strategy.


    James

  3. #198


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by ericfarmer View Post
    This is a question I would be curious to see answered as well. Unfortunately the only games where analysis is feasible are SPL1 (no resplits), unless there is new capability that I'm not aware of?

    Gronbog, let me know if it would be useful/helpful to run optimal play analysis for any rule variants, with the only constraint being that I can only compute necessary variances for SPL1.
    On a continuum from HiOpt II + ASC to Tarzan to perfect play, Tarzan is a great deal closer to the left than he is to the right. In a shoe game, I'd say 0-20-100.

    Don

  4. #199


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by seriousplayer View Post
    Just out of curiosity could software engineer get license? For example, as a lot of civil engineers get their PE (Professional Engineer) license. Do they have anything like that for software engineers?
    No. There is nothing like that for software engineers. In fact, the organization which certifies professional engineers doesn't like that we even call ourselves engineers.

  5. #200


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by James989 View Post
    is it possible to write a "stand alone" blackjack strategy calculator to generate perfect strategy WITHOUT INTERNET CONNECT
    Eric Farmer has such a program. I'm sure there are others, but Eric makes his source code available. You should be able to find links on this forum.

  6. #201
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,570


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    On a continuum from HiOpt II + ASC to Tarzan to perfect play, Tarzan is a great deal closer to the left than he is to the right. In a shoe game, I'd say 0-20-100.

    Don
    Interesting. Just to clarify. Hi Opt II/ASC = 0. Tarzan = 20. Perfect play = 100?

  7. #202


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by moses View Post
    Interesting. Just to clarify. Hi Opt II/ASC = 0. Tarzan = 20. Perfect play = 100?
    Yes. Of course, I have to clarify. The gain is in percentage over the base. So, say HiOpt II + ASC wins $50/hr. Tarzan will win $52.50, or a 5% gain. Perfect play will win $62.50, or a 25% gain. The ratio of the two gains is 5/25 or 20/100.

    Just my estimates, but they aren't to be trifled with! :-)

    Don

  8. #203
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    0 out of 3 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by moses View Post
    Interesting. Just to clarify. Hi Opt II/ASC = 0. Tarzan = 20. Perfect play = 100?
    Can't you tell from Don's post that he pulled those numbers out of the air. I am sure they get the just of the ratios but I wouldn't expect then to be exact. If Don intended them to be taken as exact he would have made that clear by his wording. Clarification would be to put an error range to the estimate, which only Don could do. We have posts on perfect play and Hiopt2/ASC by Eric. They may not be apples to apples sims but if you assume they are then you could fine tune Don's approximation.

    Here is a thread by Eric that might be applicable. Start at his first 2 posts, post #1 and #2:

    https://www.blackjacktheforum.com/sh...452#post214452

    As you can see Hiopt2/ASC bets near perfectly with optimal betting and optimal play coming in at $34.90/hour while Hiopt/ASC with optimal play at $33.18. But with hiopt2/ASC with its full indices it only makes $27.01. The difference between $27.01 and $33.18 is the increased performance from perfect play, which is aided by a 9.99% increase in the optimal bets. This is for S17, DOA, DAS, SPL1, no surrender, 4.5/6.0 pen, floored indices with 1/2 deck resolution, spread 1-16.
    The closest T Count comes to this is
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarzan View Post
    6 Decks 5/6 S17 DAS... Play-All 1-12
    where the comparative stats are:

    Quote Originally Posted by Tarzan View Post
    HiOpt II + ASC Gronbog 65.07
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarzan View Post
    Tarzan Expert+KC=0.10 Gronbog - 65.46
    Tarzan Expert+KC=0.11 Gronbog - 65.66
    So the strongest versions of T Count has a range increase over Hiopt2/ASC of 0.59% to 0.9067% in the shoe game defined.

    So increasing Hiopt2/ASC's $27.01/hr by that amount gets a range of $27.16/hr to $27.25/hr to compare to perfect play of $33.18/hr. Using T Counts strongest version for this shoe game comparison, while assuming the percent increase with 1/2 deck deeper pen, a smaller spread and worse rules would not change much (which you can bet is at least somewhat flawed) making the above projection of T Count into Eric's work reasonable, and using Hiopt2 as 0 and perfect betting and playing as 100:

    T Count would have a number of around 4.

    A 6 deck shoe was the only info I had to try to make a comparison. I am sure Don was talking about DD, which would have a larger number on the scale of 0 to 100, as defined previously, since strong play is worth so much more in pitch games.
    Last edited by Three; 12-11-2017 at 11:18 AM.

  9. #204
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,570


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Thanks Pastor Don. From one perspective it seems like alot. From another it really isn't all that much.
    Last edited by moses; 12-11-2017 at 11:54 AM.

  10. #205


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Three View Post

    So the strongest versions of T Count has a range increase over Hiopt2/ASC of 0.59% to 0.9067% in the shoe game defined.

    So increasing Hiopt2/ASC's $27.01/hr by that amount gets a range of $27.16/hr to $27.25/hr to compare to perfect play of $33.18/hr. Using T Counts strongest version for this shoe game comparison, while assuming the percent increase with 1/2 deck deeper pen, a smaller spread and worse rules would not change much (which you can bet is at least somewhat flawed) making the above projection of T Count into Eric's work reasonable, and using Hiopt2 as 0 and perfect betting and playing as 100:

    T Count would have a number of around 4.

    A 6 deck shoe was the only info I had to try to make a comparison. I am sure Don was talking about DD, which would have a larger number on the scale of 0 to 100, as defined previously, since strong play is worth so much more in pitch games.
    First you are skewing the comparison, as you state assume the percent increase with 1/2 deck deeper pen. The SCORE simulation is for 1 deck cut off. Second the SCORE for Hi-OPT II + ASC would be higher with 1/2 deck cut off. Where did you get the number $33.18/hr for perfect play?

    You left out Norm's simulation:

    HiOpt II + ASC CVData+CVCX 65.96 65.96

  11. #206
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by seriousplayer View Post
    First you are skewing the comparison, as you state assume the percent increase with 1/2 deck deeper pen. The SCORE simulation is for 1 deck cut off. Second the SCORE for Hi-OPT II + ASC would be higher with 1/2 deck cut off. Where did you get the number $33.18/hr for perfect play?

    You left out Norm's simulation:

    HiOpt II + ASC CVData+CVCX 65.96 65.96
    I said in my post that Eric did a perfect play and perfect betting sim and gave the link. That is where the base lines for my comparison came from. I also said that I was making an assumption that the percentage increase would be the same for T count over Hiopt2/ASC in Eric's sim as it is in Gronbog's sim that Tarzan posted. And I pointed out this assumption was flawed and it was just a matter to what degree because the penetration was better in Gronbog's sim but the rules were better in Eric's sim and Eric's sim used a larger spread, 1-12 rather than Eric's 1-16. This is probably because the larger spread was needed to make the lower EV approaches profitable enough in Eric's sim. This was the best comparison that could be made using these sims and you have to understand that your assumption is flawed and why. You can call it garbage in and garbage out if you like but I think it would be reasonably close to what sims with the same inputs would show. After all the difference between T Count and Hiopt2/ASC isn't that much in shoe games. If it were the assumptions that we know are flawed would cause more concern.

    I purposely dismissed the sims from Norm's software because they were there only to validate the results from the other software. Adding in a sim using a third set of software didn't seem to make anything more certain. There was no perfect play with Norm's software but Eric did both perfect play and Hiopt2/ASC using his software. I felt including Norm's software's results would muddy the waters rather than make them clearer.

  12. #207
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,570


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Create confusion. Confound this understanding.

  13. #208
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by moses View Post
    Create confusion. Confound this understanding.
    All I was trying to do was get some numbers on how far T Count is between Hiopt2/ASC and perfect play that are based on sim results. With Eric's work being the only thing I could find that makes a comparison between perfect play and counting I was forced to use that as a template for the comparison. It only did 6 deck shoe with one penetration level. I stated the assumptions the data was based on and pointed out that they are flawed assumptions. The degree they are flawed is debatable but I think they aren't going to skew things much. I don't see how that is confusing. Until someone does more sim work with Hiopt2/ASC versus perfect play that fits Tarzan's parameters better this is the best we can get.

    Don can feel free to comment on the work I did.

    My take about the effect of the assumptions. I see the lower pen of Eric's sim would hurt T count because the playing advantage would really start to get separation in that extra half deck. This would tend to make the number 4 on the 0 to 100 scale in Eric's sim as a slightly high estimate. Eric's sim also used a higher spread, 1-16 versus Tarzan's 1-12. Higher spreads can gain from both BC and PE. This may favor T Count if the betting is as strong as Hiopt2/ASC but my guess is the level 1 nature of T Count has it lacking a tad for betting and beating Hiopt2/ASC for playing making the increased spreads effect hard to define which count it favors so I am calling it a wash. Tarzan's sims used better rules which should favor T Counts stronger play. All in all that looks like the effects of the assumptions based on the sim differences would tend to cancel each other out to have little or no effect one way or another. But that is a guesstimate and should be taken with a grain of salt.

    Again Tarzan presented a comprehensive comparison of many many combinations of games and ways of attacking them. The limitation caused by the sims I had to use only allowed me to compare one, which was probably one of the ones that T Count performed closest to Hiopt2/ASC.

Page 16 of 21 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Could someone run a simulation for me please?
    By BigJer in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-31-2013, 07:55 PM
  2. Two hands bet strategy simulation for REKO count in single deck.
    By seriousplayer in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-30-2012, 01:38 PM
  3. Two hands bet strategy simulation for REKO count in single deck.
    By seriousplayer in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-30-2012, 08:13 AM

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.