See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 90

Thread: Don/other experts, How to find covariance of a game ?

  1. #31


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by aceside View Post
    I have been researching bjanalyst’s count systems because I tend to use a level one system. I’d like to research your FBM ASC system soon.
    Then I lay down the gauntlet to you, as I have done on multiple occasions to the forum, to determine the underlying theory which led me on my path. The clues may be in your own playing records as they were in mine, they are certainly buried in my posts and well before those posts revealing theories on intermediate density.

    There have been no takers.

  2. #32


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    That's top of the deck, ignores counts, ignores indices, ignores cut card, ignores changing number of hands.
    A player has never been advised to play more than two hands because the variance on the expected value will be too huge to handle. Also, the player may waste the 3:2 payout for being under bet. In addition, I prefer play solo. I really donot know how to calculate the covariance of two simultaneous hands.

  3. #33


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Freightman View Post
    Then I lay down the gauntlet to you, as I have done on multiple occasions to the forum, to determine the underlying theory which led me on my path. The clues may be in your own playing records as they were in mine, they are certainly buried in my posts and well before those posts revealing theories on intermediate density.

    There have been no takers.
    I am very interested in your Count system. Let me dig into some earlier posts and do some research first. Thank you for your info.

  4. #34


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by aceside View Post
    A player has never been advised to play more than two hands because the variance on the expected value will be too huge to handle. Also, the player may waste the 3:2 payout for being under bet. In addition, I prefer play solo. I really do not know how to calculate the covariance of two simultaneous hands.
    Wong's Pro BJ has optimal bet sizes (which rely on covariance) for all simultaneous hands from two to seven. You seem to ignore a great deal of the research and literature that has been around for ages. In particular, use Table 86, page 204 of the latest edition, with explanations on page 203.

    And while variance obviously increases with optimal bets on multiple simultaneous hands, so does e.v., by the same percentage, leaving risk of ruin the same.

    Don

  5. #35


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    Wong's Pro BJ has optimal bet sizes (which rely on covariance) for all simultaneous hands from two to seven. You seem to ignore a great deal of the research and literature that has been around for ages. In particular, use Table 86, page 204 of the latest edition, with explanations on page 203.

    And while variance obviously increases with optimal bets on multiple simultaneous hands, so does e.v., by the same percentage, leaving risk of ruin the same.

    Don
    I actually read this part of Wong's book carefully, but my impression is that the result of multiple-hands playing was based on assumption*assumption. We haven't cleared out the covariance problem of two hands only yet, but we have used it to degenerate to multiple hands. Practically speaking, I would not count cards when there are two or more other players on the same table. The real question I have been pushing is this: When the remaining deck is rich with Aces, I would play one hand with a large bet; when the remaining deck is rich with Tens, I would play two hands whenever I have an edge. Is this the correct strategy?

  6. #36


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by aceside View Post
    When the remaining deck is rich with Aces, I would play one hand with a large bet; when the remaining deck is rich with Tens, I would play two hands whenever I have an edge. Is this the correct strategy?
    First time I've ever heard that. I see no basis at all for that strategy.

    Don

  7. #37


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    First time I've ever heard that. I see no basis at all for that strategy.

    Don
    What I can see here is that aceside tries to avoid the problem of multiple hands associated with a dealer Blackjack. The strategy could be applicable to Ace sequencing... Play only one hand and share the Ace with the dealer (on average) instead of playing a "buffer hand" and lose both to a dealer BJ. This problem doesn't exist with decks that are ten rich.

    Is that what you mean aceside?
    G Man

  8. #38


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by G Man View Post
    What I can see here is that aceside tries to avoid the problem of multiple hands associated with a dealer Blackjack. The strategy could be applicable to Ace sequencing... Play only one hand and share the Ace with the dealer (on average) instead of playing a "buffer hand" and lose both to a dealer BJ. This problem doesn't exist with decks that are ten rich.

    Is that what you mean aceside?
    Math is identical for one hand or two hands bet optimally, insofar as aces are concerned. Makes no difference at all.

    Don
    Last edited by DSchles; 03-06-2021 at 07:57 AM.

  9. #39


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by aceside View Post
    I really donot know how to calculate the covariance of two simultaneous hands.
    Then you don't know what covariance is. Covariance by definition requires at least two simultaneous hands.

  10. #40


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by G Man View Post
    What I can see here is that aceside tries to avoid the problem of multiple hands associated with a dealer Blackjack. The strategy could be applicable to Ace sequencing... Play only one hand and share the Ace with the dealer (on average) instead of playing a "buffer hand" and lose both to a dealer BJ. This problem doesn't exist with decks that are ten rich.

    Is that what you mean aceside?
    I propose this new strategy, based on these two reasonings: card counting and ace prediction. Suppose we have a six-deck shoe with the strip rules.

    1. The effect of removal of a ten-valued card is about the same as that of an Ace card, meaning that a Ten and an Ace are equally important for the bet size. However, this assumes that you cannot locate Aces.

    2. If we can locate aces, the Ace card will be a lot more important: it gives an expected return of 51% for the player, but 37% for the dealer, depending on who gets it. The means a huge asymmetry for us to explore.

    When the remaining deck is Ace-rich but Ten-neutral (TC>0), we have the best odds for naturals, so we catch them using a large bet size. When the remaining deck is Ace-poor but Ten-rich (TC>0), we play two hands to take advantage of the player’s privileges: surrender, split, double down, and side bets of insurance and any others.

Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Looking for online casino game experts advice
    By James989 in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 12-08-2017, 08:40 PM
  2. Where can I find Blackjack game conditions outside of United States?
    By seriousplayer in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 06-02-2013, 08:11 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-24-2005, 04:29 PM
  4. covariance: covariance
    By covariance in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-19-2004, 11:39 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.