There are some other forum functions that get messed up when people are on Ignore, so when I realized you got tired of your trolling and took your nonsense elsewhere, I cleared the list. If you plan on staying around and professing your stupidity here, I will place you back on Ignore.Originally Posted by Dbs6582
My comments were not in relation to Floating advantage, which is what your question is inferring. I was referring to the concentration of high, low and intermediate card groupings. So, I’ll try to answer both scenarios.
DD, 26 cards played, no floating advantage. Your regular true 4 bet.
DD, 78 cards played, last hand, heads up. Your RC is 2. Assume .5 house edge. True 4 normally equates to 1.5% advantage, but you’re closer to 2% advantage, or true 5 equivalent. What’s your true 5 bet? Notwithstanding your ramp which is weak, the actual betting structure is actually pretty easy to figure out on a manual basis, which is a story for a different day.
Now, as for quality of true count, assume 26 cards left as above, RC of 6, true is 12, playing hi lo, workout the various numbers of high and low cards required to produce true 12 by varying the number of 7,8 and 9’s.
Last post for a while. Need to get my go bag ready for my next trip.
Okay all you pseudo experts (Actual experts like Mr. Schlesinger and Mr. Wattenberger are also invited to respond. Oh what the Hell, fuck it, even Mr. Snyder, Mr. Renzy, Mr Vancura, Mr. Fuchs, Mr. Thorpe, Mr. Jacobsen, and Mr. Grosjean...or anyone else I left out...are invited to respond...but I have no anticipation that any of them will for what ever reason) that keep telling me I am wrong about the LDR and its appication to blackjack, but can not explain why there is no statistically significant difference between the Hourly EV for the sim results I posted in my OP to this thread, here is my challenge. If you know so much about the game, it should be easy for you to identify which sim results were obtained using a 50 unit, 60 unit, 100 unit, 150 unit, 1000 unit, 1M unit, or 10M unit shoe bankroll for the 6 deck shoe game detailed in my OP for this thread. If you can correctly identify which shoe bankroll produced which sim results...AND explain why there is no statistically significant difference between the sim results, I'll drop the topic.
I am certainly not claiming to be an expert, in fact I am far from an expert, but I can run sims and read their results. If I were an expert I would not be asking this question because I would know the answer. But, in the absence of a logical explanation for why there is no statistically significant difference between sim results, I can only conclude that there is no statistically significant difference and the 50 unit shoe bankroll does produce the same results as the 10M shoe bankroll, to include Hourly EV.
Sim TBA IBA DI SCORE N0 Factor 1K U ROR
A .617 .701 5.09 25.94 38,552 1.038 .61
B .618 .702 5.10 26.06 38,377 1.042 .60
C .617 .701 5.10 25.98 38,487 1.039 .61
D .617 .701 5.09 25.96 38,522 1.039 .61
E .617 .701 5.10 25.97 38,505 1.039 .61
F .617 .701 5.10 25.97 38,509 1.039 .61
G .616 .700 5.08 25.85 38,678 1.034 .62
Last edited by Wave; 04-07-2020 at 02:44 AM.
ZeeBabar, the day before you made the above post you started your own thread on apparently the exact same subject, why the need for the same type of question here? If the question that you asked in your own thread was not sufficient enough to clear it up satisfactorily for you, you could have just reworded it differently in your own thread.
I’m not gonna run through sims myself to confirm but my suspicion is that on a poor penetration, six deck, surrender game in which you’re only spreading one to four... you’re not going to lose more than the 50 units in a shoe very often regardless (unless you go max bet super early at true 2 or something)... so that’s going to lead to the results you’re seeing
If you use a spread that will generate a more substantial edge/ hourly, like at least one to 10... and you only show up at the table with 50 units as opposed to 100 then the results will be far more dramatic
Regardless... it’s never advisable to shuffle away a situation in which you have an edge, for one in which you don’t have an edge
That's why I keep asking for an explanation of this phenomena, hoping someone out there can provide one, but to date no one has been able to. Saying, basically, you must keep betting in + counts because you have the advantage does not explain the sim results, especially when considering hands won % actually drops as the count rises; the advantage from higher counts is not due to an increase in winning hands %, it is due to more blackjacks with higher 3:2 payouts and better DD and SP opportunities. It also does not recognize Mean W $/% and SD for a measurable event with only 3 possible outcomes...winning shoe, losing shoe, or push shoe. It can't be insufficient sample size or biased sample because each sim measured 10.2B hands. There has to be an explanation for the lack of statistically significant difference between the efficiency measures and Hourly EV win rates between the sim results and shoe bankrolls, but no one seems to be able to identify what it is. In the absence of said explanation I'm inclined to trust the sim data and conclude there is no statistically significant difference since that is the method by which we are able to determine advantage and index plays.
Posting Permissions
-*-
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks