# Thread: Metrics to determine if game is playable?

1. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

## Criteria to determine if game is playable?

Hi guys, what constitutes if a game is playable for you? I reside in the Boston area so I have to deal with subpar games.

I figure, for me, a game is payable if N0 is less than 20k, RoR is less than 12%, and CE = \$10 per 100 rounds. I'm playing off a 10k bankroll and hope to grow it over time. Does this seem reasonable?

MJ

2. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Come on any takers...

3. 1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Originally Posted by MJ1
Hi guys, what constitutes if a game is playable for you? I reside in the Boston area so I have to deal with subpar games.

I figure, for me, a game is payable if N0 is less than 20k, RoR is less than 12%, and CE = \$10 per 100 rounds. I'm playing off a 10k bankroll and hope to grow it over time. Does this seem reasonable?

MJ
YOU control ROR; the game doesn't dictate it to you. A game doesn't come with a ROR attached to it. If you bet full Kelly without resizing, ROR will be 13.5%.

If N0 is 20,000, then SCORE is 50, which is a common threshold for game acceptability for many players. Of course, it's just a broad guideline. But, your CE number doesn't make much sense. For optimal BJ play, CE is half of SCORE, and so should be \$25 in your case and not \$10.

Don

4. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

I have a VERY rare little tiny book by Arnold Snyder from about 40 yrs. ago.
It contains a matrix of no. of decks. S17, etc. vs. how playable the game is.
It was lovely. Of course it contains info on 1,2, and 4 deck ~ as that is what
was available back then; but he was a pioneer par excellence.

5. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Originally Posted by MJ1
Come on any takers...
The cut is the main thing. I seek 80% penetration. 67% or less is not acceptable (don’t get to see enough cards). I seek to play on 4 deck tables. 8 decks is not acceptable (takes too long). I play minimum minimum tables. Even \$15 minimum is too high (spread has to be too high & draws attention).

Number of acceptable tables versus the crowd can drive me away from certain casinos at certain times. I can be forced to play the last spot at a 4 deck cut <1, but will not play with more than 2 others on dbl deck. I always like heads up, but I need at least two spots to spread.
Since I want to not play at -2 true count or less, other tables need t be available when my “going to men’s room “ or “taking this call” has gotten old. —-Tom

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

6. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

There are but a few four deck games in the USA !

If you do not delete your post; tell us what the rules are.
I am seriously doubting that you are playing a winning game.
They will permit an 8 - 1 spread; 6 -1 spread for certain.

Try to learn a stronger count my friend.

7. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Originally Posted by ZenMaster_Flash
Try to learn a stronger count my friend.
Back for just a few days and starting this bullshit again?!

8. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

21forme ...

We have met and seen each other at play. I have substantial respect for you,
but of course, we are entitled to our opinions on this age-old thorny matter.

9. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
If your spread is limited to a set amount due to tolerances by the casino, of course a stronger count is worth it. All the ways a weaker count has to make it up would even have more gain for the stronger count.

10. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Originally Posted by DSchles
YOU control ROR; the game doesn't dictate it to you. A game doesn't come with a ROR attached to it. If you bet full Kelly without resizing, ROR will be 13.5%.
With a limited size bankroll and predetermined bet spread, I frequently have to incur risk greater than I would like due to the table minimum. Most players are not comfortable betting full kelly as the risk is too great. Ideally I would like 8% RoR but due to table minimums this ends up being higher than preferred. So the ratio of CE/WR is less than 0.5 which means risk is greater than 13.5%. So, CE isn't always half of EV.

MJ

Page 1 of 2 12 Last

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•