See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27

Thread: Illustrious 18

  1. #21


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by 21forme View Post
    If your BR is sufficiently high for the level you're playing, and the variance doesn't matter to you, EV is lower using risk averse indices.
    That simply isn't true and is the reason I urged to reread pp. 375-377. It makes no difference what your bankroll is. By using r-a indices, the lowering of the variance immediately permits you to increase the size of your optimal bet, thereby allowing ultimate e.v. not to suffer.

    There is NO DOWNSIDE to using r-a indices, and people who advocate otherwise are laboring under a misunderstanding of the concept.

    Don

  2. #22


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    That simply isn't true and is the reason I urged to reread pp. 375-377. It makes no difference what your bankroll is. By using r-a indices, the lowering of the variance immediately permits you to increase the size of your optimal bet, thereby allowing ultimate e.v. not to suffer.

    There is NO DOWNSIDE to using r-a indices, and people who advocate otherwise are laboring under a misunderstanding of the concept.
    Just reread those pages. Guess I had the same misconception you did twenty years prior to your writing.

    Sooo, why aren't those indices adjusted up to the RA indices and simply called the indices?

  3. #23


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by 21forme View Post
    Sooo, why aren't those indices adjusted up to the RA indices and simply called the indices?
    The concept doesn't exist in a vacuum. If you use r-a indices, you also have to make adjustments to optimal bets, so that the whole approach is internally consistent. The alternative, as you can see from the article, differs very little from using e.v-maximizing indices, which then require somewhat smaller wagers.

    The bottom line, also stated in the article, is that the former approach is slightly better than the latter. Much ado about nothing? Maybe.

    Don

  4. #24


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Don, I understand what you’re saying and I use the RA indices from BJA3 for exactly the reasons stated here. The way I explain it is that you’re always looking to trade risk for EV; the RA indices show when the trade off becomes worth it.

    I think, though, that there is a time when you’re better off using EV maximizing indices: when something other than your BR and/or desired ROR is limiting your maximum bets. Maybe your optimal bet is higher than table max, or store tolerance, or would create a wider spread than you want, or whatever. In that case, wouldn’t you be better off grabbing the extra EV, since your risk level is already lower than optimal?

  5. #25


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by refinery View Post
    No problem. I'm sure you already knew the 80/20 rule. Now you have a fancy pants way of talking about it.
    Could you explain the 80/20 rule?

  6. #26

  7. #27


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by 21forme View Post
    I just leanred a new term today. Thanks, refinery.
    In computer science, a similar principle sometimes is called Amdahl's law (e.g. speed up the slowest 20 percent of a program to gain 80 percent in speed). Another similar concept is the Law of Diminishing Returns, which corresponds to the Illustrious 18 quite well (e.g. 20 percent of all indices yield 80 percent of all possible gain).
    Last edited by PinkChip; 08-22-2019 at 04:49 AM.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. Illustrious 18 / Fab 4 for H17?
    By Optimus Prime in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-10-2018, 09:57 PM
  2. Illustrious 18
    By moses in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 01-29-2016, 09:49 AM
  3. Illustrious 18 & Fab 4
    By RS in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-19-2013, 02:16 PM
  4. MJ: Illustrious 18
    By MJ in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 03-31-2005, 07:21 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.