See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Custom sims differ from archived sim in result data

  1. #1


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Custom sims differ from archived sim in result data

    When I examine the archived Hi Opt 1 sim and compare it with a custom one I create simply by attaching the Hi Opt 1 sim and not altering any settings (except the BJ payout to 12:10 which still resulted in the Sim Parms listing showing 15:10), I get vastly different results. Optimal for the archived one is nearly 3x the custom one. Any idea what is causing this discrepancy? I notice the output has very different optimal bets, leaving some count rows empty, but still doesn't account for this 3x difference in win/hr.Archived Hi Opt 1 Sweet 16 Fab 4.jpg_Custom Hi Opt 1.jpg

  2. #2


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Somewhat related: I'd like to understand the blank rows as well. Never understood why that happens.

  3. #3


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by refinery View Post
    Somewhat related: I'd like to understand the blank rows as well. Never understood why that happens.
    It's a quirk in how true count is calculated with multiple players at single deck. With three players (four hands, with the dealer), you'll use, on average, 10.8 cards per round, so close to one-quarter of a deck. For the next round, say your running count is +2. The TC is now 2 x 4/3 = 8/3 = 2.67, which is floored to 2. But what if the RC is +3? Then the TC is 3 x 4/3 = 4! So, there's no way to get to 3!

    The same thing happens at various other levels of the deck, and with various TCs. Play with it a little bit, and you'll see that you can't get to TCs of 3 or 7. It's just a quirk of arithmetic; don't let it bother you.

    Don

  4. #4


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    That makes sense. Specifically it's because the finest granularity of the TC conversion is in quarter-deck sizes and no finer. If people were inclined to estimate remaining decks beyond quarter decks then that could be a nice feature request. Being new, I have no idea if it is typical for single deck players to estimate remaining decks super finely, like to the card.

  5. #5


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    there's no way to get to 3!
    Is that 3 factorial?

  6. #6


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    It's a quirk in how true count is calculated with multiple players at single deck. With three players (four hands, with the dealer), you'll use, on average, 10.8 cards per round, so close to one-quarter of a deck. For the next round, say your running count is +2. The TC is now 2 x 4/3 = 8/3 = 2.67, which is floored to 2. But what if the RC is +3? Then the TC is 3 x 4/3 = 4! So, there's no way to get to 3!

    The same thing happens at various other levels of the deck, and with various TCs. Play with it a little bit, and you'll see that you can't get to TCs of 3 or 7. It's just a quirk of arithmetic; don't let it bother you.

    Don
    Thanks Don for the neat explanation! I never let it bother me; I just shrugged and went about my day. But I do enjoy understanding it

  7. #7
    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 bjoe View Post
    not altering any settings (except the BJ payout to 12:10
    The only parameter you changed is a massively bad rule. So yes, the results will change dramatically.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  8. #8
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,461
    Blog Entries
    59


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by bjoe View Post
    That makes sense. Specifically it's because the finest granularity of the TC conversion is in quarter-deck sizes and no finer. If people were inclined to estimate remaining decks beyond quarter decks then that could be a nice feature request. Being new, I have no idea if it is typical for single deck players to estimate remaining decks super finely, like to the card.
    There is the TC conversion divisor in the strategy, which would give poor results for Hi-Opt I at quarter deck. Then there is the accuracy of estimated remaining decks, which can be set to exact cards if you wish.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

Similar Threads

  1. Custom REKO indices checkup
    By sbrugby in forum Software
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-26-2017, 11:01 AM
  2. CVCX archived sims / indices?
    By LoneWoLF in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-03-2016, 03:48 AM
  3. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-28-2015, 04:50 PM
  4. CVData question: backing up archived sims
    By Davis in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-19-2013, 03:36 AM
  5. V-man: CV Data Custom Bonus Question
    By V-man in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-25-2004, 03:54 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.