Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Simulator Theory: Approaches and Applications?

  1. #1


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Simulator Theory: Approaches and Applications?

    *Norm: If this is the wrong place to post, please move to correct sub-section. Thanks!*

    Recently, I have taken an interest in building a blackjack simulator for personal use/analysis. Long term is to get it to compute accurate indices for both a single parameter system and any accompanying side count parameters (multi-parametric analysis.) For a while, it seemed like it was to be an easy endeavour: wrong!

    So, right now, I am trying to figure out how I am to approach a simple hit/stand algorithm. Yeah, something so basic as to generating a TD strategy chart for hitting and standing is now working for me right now. The way I was approaching the hit/stand table generation was to use a vacillating procedure. Basically, the program assumes we will stand on all player totals for every dealer up card. The player will stand, and the dealer will draw. If the overall expectation for that round is positive, the computer assumes we will stand again when that specific player total and dealer up card combo appears again. However, if the overall expectation is negative, the computer will assume that we must hit, and switches the preferred action from 'S' to 'H'. So that next time we get that specific player total and dealer up card combo, we will hit.

    *Reference: Assumes single deck, stand on all 17's. Reshuffle after every round.*

    When the computer hits, three things will happen here: 1.) We will draw again; 2.) We will stand; 3.) We bust. If the player draws, and when the player either stands or busts, the overall expectation of that round will be carried down from previous draws. To better illustrate what I was doing:

    Round 0:

    Player
    5 6
    Dealer
    6 T

    *compute draws dealer
    Player
    5 6
    Dealer
    6 T 5

    Since the dealer beat the player, standing 11 vs 6 is a current EV of -1.0.

    Round 1:

    Player
    5 6
    Dealer
    6 T

    *player draws

    Player
    5 6 5
    Dealer
    6 T

    The player will stand and the dealer will draw a card

    Player
    5 6 5
    Dealer
    6 T A

    Since the dealer beats the player, standing 16 vs 6 has a current EV of -1.0
    Since hitting 11 vs 6 produces a loser due to super-sequent hands, hitting 11 vs 6 produces a current EV of -1.0

    Now, over time, the EV for both standing and hitting all player/dealer match-ups should converge to their global EV's and produce the correct strategy chart when we compare standing and hitting EV's. Correct? If so, the above method proved to be..er, incorrect? What was happening was that player hard 5 and 6 vs dealer 4 5 6 would indicate that the optimal action is to stand, that standing hard 12 vs dealer 2 3 is optimal, and that standing on all pairs of twos for all dealer up cards is optimal. This is absurdly wrong and cannot be accurate when comparing to currently computed TD strategies.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    So now, I am at a point where I am trying to figure out *how* to accurately compute the correct EV's for hitting and standing. Using the algorithm outlined in Griffins ToBJ was an idea, but that is for Combinatorial Analysis, not simulation. I could try to compute the EV's for standing on all player hands, and work on computing hitting based on a weighed sum of the probability of a draw card with respect to the next player total's optimal action expectation. Similar to that of a CA, but with a monte carlo method.


    Anyone have an idea that is the best approach to getting past this hurdle? Feeling rather limited in possible solutions.
    Last edited by lij45o6; 10-22-2018 at 01:07 AM.

  2. #2


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    dogman_1234,

    Well, here's one flaw: what happens if the H and S expectations are BOTH negative?

    For example, for 2,10 vs. 2, the S EV is roughly -0.31, while the H EV is roughly -0.24. Thus, B.S. says to hit, but both options are -EV, so does your algorithm switch each time?

    Hope this helps!

    Dog Hand

  3. #3
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,461
    Blog Entries
    59


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Just a quick comment. Index generation is a vastly more complex problem than simulation.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  4. #4


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Dog Hand View Post
    dogman_1234,

    Well, here's one flaw: what happens if the H and S expectations are BOTH negative?

    For example, for 2,10 vs. 2, the S EV is roughly -0.31, while the H EV is roughly -0.24. Thus, B.S. says to hit, but both options are -EV, so does your algorithm switch each time?

    Hope this helps!

    Dog Hand
    I should elaborate that the optimal action is switched for that round if it is negative. That is, even when the global EV for 12 vs 2 is negative for both hitting and standing, if the expectation for that round is negative (the player loses), the computer will switch from whatever that assumed optimal action is.

    But, yes, the computer will be switching back and forth each time, when the player loses that round, that is.

  5. #5


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    Just a quick comment. Index generation is a vastly more complex problem than simulation.
    Like...how much more complex? Mouse to elephant magnitude in difference?

  6. #6
    Senior Member Gramazeka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    1,438


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    dogman 1234, i can send only for you ( ok,and Dog Hand ) russian soft. You can take ideas from there...
    Last edited by Gramazeka; 10-22-2018 at 03:29 PM.
    "Don't Cast Your Pearls Before Swine" (Jesus)

  7. #7
    Senior Member Gramazeka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    1,438


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    dogman 1234 ?
    "Don't Cast Your Pearls Before Swine" (Jesus)

  8. #8


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Gramazeka View Post
    dogman 1234 ?
    Yes?

    I see you don't have PM's enabled. In what way can I contact you?

    What 'russian soft' are you mentioning? Russian software? Legit? Legal?

  9. #9
    Senior Member Gramazeka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    1,438


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Yes, software, legal. My mail [email protected]
    "Don't Cast Your Pearls Before Swine" (Jesus)

  10. #10
    Senior Member Gramazeka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    1,438


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    dogman_1234, I wait your comments...
    "Don't Cast Your Pearls Before Swine" (Jesus)

  11. #11
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,461
    Blog Entries
    59


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by dogman_1234 View Post
    Like...how much more complex? Mouse to elephant magnitude in difference?
    Nothing is linear or calculable in blackjack (other than insurance). Index generation requires curve following. We aren't talking about a simple algorithmic process. There's a great deal of fuzzy logic involved.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

Similar Threads

  1. Opinion or sims on two approaches to 6 deck bet spreads..
    By ZeeBabar in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 01-13-2014, 11:09 PM

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.