See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 43

Thread: Translating playing efficiency into W/L/P

  1. #1


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Translating playing efficiency into W/L/P

    I have an “easy” question.

    There is plenty of information on the betting correlation and playing efficiency of different counting systems but although we understand that a system with a 0.637 playing efficiency is stronger than HiLo at 0.510, it remains a pretty vague concept.

    How does that translate into hands won, lost and pushed?

    I might be slightly off here but I think that on the long run, the 0,510 HiLo PE yields a won/lost/push ratio like 42/50/8. Please correct me if I am wrong.

    In Theory of Blackjack, Peter Griffin shows that it is difficult to go beyond 0.700 playing efficiency with a simple system but that the Gordon count with five side counts (ultimate human capacity) yields a 0.922 PE at single deck. Yet, this is still pretty vague for W/L/T.

    On this forum I believe some supporter(s) of Tarzan said that his PE is actually beyond 0.950 and close to 1.0 with his Tarzan Expert Key Card approach but I can’t remember if it’s SD, DD or even 6D.

    We will never know at real tables what our PE is, or was, but it’s nice to practice with Norm’s CV software and find out what our W/L/T ratio is and try to improve upon it.

    THUS THESE QUESTIONS FOR THOSE TWO GAMES
    DD/H17/DAS
    6D/S17/DAS
    both at 75% penetration pen

    What would be the expected W/L/P ratios (excluding insurance) for PE of 1.0/0.95/0.90/0.80/0.70/0.60/0.55

    I have not read anything correlating PE and W/L/P. Are there tables available somewhere for different systems?

  2. #2


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Playing efficiencies were a cute concept 40 years ago when computers we're slow. Now we can sim 10 billion rounds in minutes so running simulations should be the definitive and authoritative way to compare counting systems

  3. #3


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by iCountNTrack View Post
    Playing efficiencies were a cute concept 40 years ago when computers we're slow. Now we can sim 10 billion rounds in minutes so running simulations should be the definitive and authoritative way to compare counting systems
    Despite all those great sims that give precise SCORES I have yet to see a table comparing playing W/L/P. What is the ultimate WLP? 44%, 45%, 46% with probably more pushes than normal since the most efficient players will make stiffs more often at negatives hands, hitting 15v5 for example when it's the right moment to do so.

  4. #4
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,461
    Blog Entries
    59


    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    CVData provides this. But, it's normally not that important unless you are investigating promotions or bonus/side bets.

    And, I agree with ICount about playing efficiencies, et al.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  5. #5


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    CVData provides this. But, it's normally not that important unless you are investigating promotions or bonus/side bets.

    And, I agree with ICount about playing efficiencies, et al.
    Hi Norm and Icount. I just ran three quick sims with CV Data and here's what I got.
    W L P
    Basic Hi/Lo 43,59 47,73 8,68
    Basic Hi/Lo Wong out 43,01 47,10 9.90
    Hi-Opt II 43,67 47,69 8,64

    However, my ability with CV Data is limited, especially with programming multiparameter systems (MPS).
    It is my understanding that MPS achieve the best Won/Lost/Result but what are the upper limits?

    I don't really care about the PE established decades ago and/or recently upgraded. It's always been a vague concept anyway. W/L/T is more tangible. I know that Betting Efficiency is key but my MPS brings my W/L/T ratio consistently over 44% with your CV software and it makes a difference in the overall win rate compared to traditional main counts.

    I suspect that you have at least one exceptional player on this forum who does way better than 44%.

    OK. Without going as far as five side counts mixed with the Gordon main count, I am wondering what would be a "reasonable" achievable upper human limit. I doubt that Hi-Opt II at 43,67 is the best sim you've seen.

    For that matter it would be very interesting (although may be not that important) to know what would be the upper WLT ratio achieved by a computer.

  6. #6


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    I do not have the answer to your question (Although I have been using a LOT of CVData lately, so if I get some free time later on I might run some sims), but I am curious about why you want to know the W/L/P? As was mentioned previously, PE use to be the best way to compare effectiveness, but not anymore. W/L/P would be even worse than PE. You say PE is vague and that it's easier to wrap your head around W/L/P, but why do you want to understand these concepts? With the technology we have today you can create the best strategy without knowing anything about PE or what the W/L/P of your strategy is. There are so many factors into what makes a strategy effective (in my mind, effectiveness = rate of money earned), and PE is just one of those factors. You don't need to calculate each factor, you can just run numbers and see what your perceived earnings are per strategy.

    I might be wrong, but I can't think of a better way to value how good a strategy is other than by what I earn using it (using the same situations for each strategy, of course).

  7. #7


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by AerialSnack View Post
    I do not have the answer to your question (Although I have been using a LOT of CVData lately, so if I get some free time later on I might run some sims), but I am curious about why you want to know the W/L/P? As was mentioned previously, PE use to be the best way to compare effectiveness, but not anymore. W/L/P would be even worse than PE. You say PE is vague and that it's easier to wrap your head around W/L/P, but why do you want to understand these concepts? With the technology we have today you can create the best strategy without knowing anything about PE or what the W/L/P of your strategy is. There are so many factors into what makes a strategy effective (in my mind, effectiveness = rate of money earned), and PE is just one of those factors. You don't need to calculate each factor, you can just run numbers and see what your perceived earnings are per strategy.

    I might be wrong, but I can't think of a better way to value how good a strategy is other than by what I earn using it (using the same situations for each strategy, of course).
    Thanks Snack! Hope to see your sims later that would ne nice to compare W/L/T of a few "main' systems (and even better adding side counts).

    I am not disputing the fact that betting and SCORES are the most determing factors in blackjack but it is also a fact that the better your W/L/P ratio is the more you will earn. I understand as suggested by Norm that it may not be that significant for a classic counter but there are different ways to count as one elite member of this forum showed.

    It's great to be good but why not be better? Since BJ is a math game I figure it's possible to know exactly how good one can be at playing his cards but yet no one has clearly quantified that. I know I don't have the math skills and programming skills to figure that out.

    To me a 0,922 playing efficiency (compared to 100% for his computer) as stated by Griffin as the possible upper limit is vague. What does that mean? It's not like the greatest player ever could win 92,2% of his hands. It's impossible. Proving and saying something like the upper PE limit is 45 wins, 46 losses and 9 pushes per 100 hands with two or three side counts would be a clear concept. That's all I am looking for and that's the sense of my question.

  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


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    You can easily increase the percentage of hands won by never doubling. Of course, this will destroy your EV. Percentage of hands won is not a relevant stat for most situations.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  9. #9


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    You can easily increase the percentage of hands won by never doubling. Of course, this will destroy your EV. Percentage of hands won is not a relevant stat for most situations.
    And this is, of course, the most compelling argument as to why such a statistic is basically irrelevant. Yes, there is certainly a way to play every hand so as to maximize the number of hands won. But, will this maximize SCORE? No, not necessarily. Suppose systems A & B. We do the sims and A wins more hands than B, but B's SCORE is higher. After we have the intellectual satisfaction of knowing A wins more hands, who is going to play A instead of B? Not me!

    Don

  10. #10


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    Yes, there is certainly a way to play every hand so as to maximize the number of hands won
    Yes there is and it can be of value for tournament players but I don't see the relevance for normal play against the house. You still don't know the distribution of the W/L/P results. In a SPL3 DAS game with insurance, wins and losses can be anywhere from +8 units to -8.5 units.

  11. #11


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Hi Norm, Don and Gronbog. I have much respect for you guys and I am well aware of the fact that not doubling down may increase W/L/P but far from me the idea of taking away EV, on the contrary. The idea is to add EV with optimal card play to whatever count one is using.

    Here's what we know about blackjack. Humans can bet perfectly like a computer, can play insurance perfectly like a computer but cannot play their cards perfectly like a computer. So how efficient can one be at playing his cards in terms of W/L/P? What is the upper limit? What do you guys know about W/L/P of the top systems?

    To my knowledge, Gronbog has run the most complex simulations ever with the three different Tarzan counts and I tought he knew that his W/L/P was (but Gronbog you also say you don't know W/L/P). If Gronbog knows Tarzan W/L/Ps I understand it is confidential information that belongs to Tarzan to reveal it or not but the revealed T-counts SCORES did beat Hi-Opt II mainly because of card play and not because betting.

    And I suspect that Tarzan is even better at the tables than his SCORES indicate because of simulation programming limitations. He probably is the human who did take solo blackjack to its top level.

    To me there's not such a thing as a small improvement. You improve or you don't.

    I was hoping you could give us an answer as to what is the optimal W/L/P that you have seen in sims and what was the count used.

  12. #12
    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
    A sim can tell you what the WLP happens to be when optimizing for the best win rate. But, you don't optimize for the most hands won. As I said, if you want a higher number of won hands, don't double. But, that's an idiotic way to play. You're on the wrong track. The point is bankroll growth, not percentage of won hands.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  13. #13


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    A sim can tell you what the WLP happens to be when optimizing for the best win rate. But, you don't optimize for the most hands won. As I said, if you want a higher number of won hands, don't double. But, that's an idiotic way to play. You're on the wrong track. The point is bankroll growth, not percentage of won hands.
    Well, I am not a complete idiot, Norm. I would not hesitate to double down my 12 against dealer 5 when the deck composition is appropriate! That being said, I'll try to go deeper into mastering CV Data.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 100% playing efficiency?
    By sefwow in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 02-05-2016, 01:16 PM
  2. 4legsgood2legsbad: playing efficiency
    By 4legsgood2legsbad in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-31-2003, 06:51 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.