See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Dramatic SCORE Increase w/ Addition of CD Index Does Not Make Sense

  1. #1
    Senior Member SteinMeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    133


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Dramatic SCORE Increase w/ Addition of CD Index Does Not Make Sense

    The I18 and Sw16 both include the 10v10 index (my non RA is 4+), but they do not address the Composition Dependent (CD) 5,5v10 specifically. Therefore within I18 & Sw16 the default for a 5,5v10 index is the same as 10v10, which in my case is double at +4 (non RA).

    However, when I add the "double 5,5v10 @ 4+" Composite Dependent option in the Hard Double strategy tables of CVCX, (and note that this index is the exact same (+4) as the 10v10 index) the SCORE increases dramatically, which does not make sense to me. Without the CD index, a 5,5 will be treated as a 10, which has the same doubling index of 4. Then why does the SCORE change dramatically with the addition of this CD???

    Here are the results of my sims (750,000,000 iterations each) at H17 DAS RSA 4.75/6 6pl NoPeek10, using the indices generated for my parameters (generated by CVData, and are very close to the basic Sw16):

    Baseline (Sw16 indices, which includes dbl 10v10@4+, but NO composite dependent additions):
    $/hr: 24.86
    SCORE: 18.22
    RoR: 12.1%

    Sw16 indices (same as above), but WITH the addition of a single Composite Dependent index dbl 5,5v10@4:
    $/hr: 36.73
    SCORE:27.19
    RoR: 11.8%


    Note the huge SCORE increase.

    I've run these simulations several times and always get similar results.

    The only reason I can think of the large SCORE increase is; perhaps the software runs BOTH 10v10 AND 5,5v10 for a single instance of 5,5v10 therefore doubling the frequency of 5,5v10. But I doubt if this is it, and probably there's something else that I'm missing.

    Anyone care to share their wisdom in this dilemma?

  2. #2
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,456
    Blog Entries
    59


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Go to Tools-Export, export the configuration to a new file, and e-mail it.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  3. #3
    Senior Member SteinMeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    133


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    Go to Tools-Export, export the configuration to a new file, and e-mail it.
    Will do that. Will be later today though

  4. #4


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by SteinMeister View Post
    The I18 and Sw16 both include the 10v10 index (my non RA is 4+), but they do not address the Composition Dependent (CD) 5,5v10 specifically. Therefore within I18 & Sw16 the default for a 5,5v10 index is the same as 10v10, which in my case is double at +4 (non RA).

    However, when I add the "double 5,5v10 @ 4+" Composite Dependent option in the Hard Double strategy tables of CVCX, (and note that this index is the exact same (+4) as the 10v10 index) the SCORE increases dramatically, which does not make sense to me. Without the CD index, a 5,5 will be treated as a 10, which has the same doubling index of 4. Then why does the SCORE change dramatically with the addition of this CD???

    Here are the results of my sims (750,000,000 iterations each) at H17 DAS RSA 4.75/6 6pl NoPeek10, using the indices generated for my parameters (generated by CVData, and are very close to the basic Sw16):

    Baseline (Sw16 indices, which includes dbl 10v10@4+, but NO composite dependent additions):
    $/hr: 24.86
    SCORE: 18.22
    RoR: 12.1%

    Sw16 indices (same as above), but WITH the addition of a single Composite Dependent index dbl 5,5v10@4:
    $/hr: 36.73
    SCORE:27.19
    RoR: 11.8%


    Note the huge SCORE increase.

    I've run these simulations several times and always get similar results.

    The only reason I can think of the large SCORE increase is; perhaps the software runs BOTH 10v10 AND 5,5v10 for a single instance of 5,5v10 therefore doubling the frequency of 5,5v10. But I doubt if this is it, and probably there's something else that I'm missing.

    Anyone care to share their wisdom in this dilemma?
    This, of course, isn't remotely possible. There's a bug. And while it is possible that the 5,5 double is excluded from the other 10 v. 10 doubles, the inclusion of that single play, and at the rather infrequent +4 TC (and even more infrequent 5,5 holding) can't conceivably cause the kind of increase you're seeing.

    Don

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    In orbit around Saturn
    Posts
    897


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    I confirm the "phenomenon" with KO

    ScreenShot221.jpg

  6. #6


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    This, of course, isn't remotely possible. There's a bug. And while it is possible that the 5,5 double is excluded from the other 10 v. 10 doubles, the inclusion of that single play, and at the rather infrequent +4 TC (and even more infrequent 5,5 holding) can't conceivably cause the kind of increase you're seeing.

    Don
    This must be a bug. There is no single index that can boost SCORE so dramatically.

  7. #7


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by BJGenius007 View Post
    This must be a bug. There is no single index that can boost SCORE so dramatically.
    Rather bad bug, at that.

    Don

  8. #8
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,456
    Blog Entries
    59


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Yes, yes.I'm waiting for the export.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  9. #9
    Senior Member SteinMeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    133


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    Yes, yes.I'm waiting for the export.
    Norm, I aplogize. I left town yesterday after the original post (did not take my computer with qfit software) with plans to return yesterday afternoon (and then to export the files to you then). However am not returning until later today, and will export then. Again my apologies for the delay.

  10. #10
    Senior Member SteinMeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    133


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoebe View Post
    I confirm the "phenomenon" with KO

    ScreenShot221.jpg
    Did you generate the graph yourself with data obtained from CVData, or was it generated within CVData? If generated, can you please briefly explain how.

  11. #11
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,456
    Blog Entries
    59


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Turns out there was a problem with Composition dependent DD indices. H/S and Surr CD indices were not affected. Probably never discovered before since CD DD indices are basically useless. Update available at https://www.qfit.com/downloads.htm. Make sure it is V5.139 and an older page is not cached in your browser.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  12. #12
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,456
    Blog Entries
    59


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by SteinMeister View Post
    Did you generate the graph yourself with data obtained from CVData, or was it generated within CVData? If generated, can you please briefly explain how.
    This is a CVCX chart. CVCX can sim all reasonable indices at once and chart them.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  13. #13
    Senior Member SteinMeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    133


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    This is a CVCX chart. CVCX can sim all reasonable indices at once and chart them.
    Thanks Norm. A nice easy feature within CVCX that I was previously unaware of.

Similar Threads

  1. does this make sense ?
    By Nikky_Flash in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-09-2015, 10:20 PM
  2. Does this make sense to anyone?
    By Koz84 in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-10-2014, 03:54 AM
  3. Soft doubling -- BS doesn't make sense? ??
    By RS in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 06-08-2013, 02:14 AM
  4. MGP: Comp speed that doesn't make sense...
    By MGP in forum Computing for Counters
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 09-05-2004, 09:18 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.