These references always spark my interest.. to be clear we are not talking about STing, or ASing either?Originally Posted by Three
I can't say what our anonymous friend is referring to but I get most of the vague references. Most are not talking about ST or steering particular cards. Everyone thinks about something in a certain way. Thinking outside the box is thinking about it in a different way. If you can do that you should be able to connect the dots most of the time. There are always the nay sayers. I always wonder if they are protecting a play or just not capable of thinking outside the box. They sure seem to think they are experts. To me that means they should understand outside the box thinking or at least understand that inside the box thinking may not apply to something different.
So you are saying, if one was to play SD as opposed to 6D (assume same rules for both), then the house edge would be smaller off the top, which would mean greater EV, but the variance would be less??
I thought that the fewer the decks in play, the greater the variance, simply because you have more frequent max betting opportunities?
More frequent but you don't need to spread anywhere near as much. Another way of thinking about it is that generally in a 6 or 8 deck game your max bet has to be a lot bigger to have the same average bet as you would have in a single deck game with a lower max bet. Hence why the variance is greater in the multi deck.
Assuming average bets are equivalent and equivalent playing strategy the game which more frequently goes to the players favour will result in a higher EV. The # of decks, penetration and rules are what influence that. The strategies APs use are just designed to identify those situations as optimally as possible and then maximally capitalize on them
The main reason why a single deck game with mediocre rules will have a lower house edge than a shoe game with much better rules is that the single deck game goes into positive territory much more frequently. That allows the BS player lose less and it helps the AP win more. It's also the reason why there are very few decent single deck games around and those that exist are watched closely.
Volatility is much greater in pitch as true counts can go Wild really quick. Variance is greater in 6&8 deck shoe games because you can blow your brains out with hand after hand of non stop max bets.
In other words, your typical max losses on double deck, especially taking lower spreads into account, are far less than your typical max bet losses on shoe games. Accordingly, your bankroll requirements are also less.
Volatility being greater in pitch games, I understand since removal of cards has a greater effect and so changes in the count from one round to the next can yo-yo. But surely with higher volatility comes also higher variance? If the count goes to max bet early in a 6D shoe so that you end up having your max bet out for almost the rest of the shoe, then is this not the same as the same number of max bet opportunities in a pitch game over x amount of sessions? Granted the fact that having max bet out for the rest of a 6D shoe likely meant one wasn't getting the high cards expected from a high count, but alas one can't know this beforehand.
''In other words, your typical max losses on double deck, especially taking lower spreads into account, are far less than your typical max bet losses on shoe games. Accordingly, your bankroll requirements are also less.''
If I was to place 10max bets (TC5) of $100 on a pitch game and 10max bets (TC5) of $100 on a 6D game (assume same rules for both), then what's the difference? Technically they should be the same 2% advantage, but one has more variance than the other? The only thing I can think of as to why is to do with the chances of not getting the high cards expected from a shoe for whatever reason...e.g. clumped behind cut card.
So basically, the bigger the spread, the higher the variance and one needs a bigger spread in general to beat a 6D game compared to a SD game. If one used the exact same spread on both games, then one would just have to accept that the average bet, win rate and EV will simply be less for the 6D game.
Its an obsession he has with a poster using the name DBS. They are both okay but they have had differences on some dumb topics (figuring out what is in the best interest of casinos is one) and Freightman takes every time he can to make fun of DBS. I dont think it bothers DBS.
You nailed it Zee. Freightman and my disagreements are over trivial insignificant things, but they are very important to Freightman.
Btw Jacblacc911, you’ll know you’ve won an argument with Freightman (it’s true for Sharky too) when they go on tilt and start calling you names. When this happens, just let it go. They are not rational at this point so it doesn’t help trying to make your point anymore.
Posting Permissions
-*-
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks