See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 14 to 24 of 24

Thread: What's wrong with my Lucky Ladies sim?

  1. #14


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Freightman View Post
    Hmm. Interesting. Risk Averse side betting.
    Not that there's anything wrong with that...

  2. #15


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Bump.

    Does anyone have any ideas I can try to get this side bet simulation to work? Is there any information I could provide that would help? I didn’t show the strategy that I attached, but that is simple enough I don’t think I messed that up. As far as I can tell the attached strategy just needs to have the system tags, but I attached a full strategy with all the indexes too. This is partly to double check my LL numbers, but also to generically have confidence if I do other side bet sims.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #16
    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
    Install the latest update. If that doesn't fix it, go to Tools-Export, create an export file and email it.

    https://qfit.com/downloads.htm#free
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  4. #17


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Alright, I think I figured it out. It has to do with the "Side Bets are Merged" button at the bottom, and the lower-left sector of the screen named Side Bet. In my first side bet tab (first pic in the original post), the bet is set to 1.0. In the next 4 side bet tabs, the "Side Bet" window is blocked out because the bets are merged. What I did was un-check "Side Bets are Merged", and I noticed that side bet tabs 2 through 5 also had the bet set to 1. I thought that with side bets merged, only the bet on tab 1 would count, so I paid no attention to these other hidden bets. But with the side bets un-merged, I changed the bets in tabs 2 through 5 from 1.0 to 0, then re-merged the side bets and that's when I finally got normal looking EV numbers. According to this sim, doubled halves tags in 6D with the LL9 payout has an index of about 13. So when the sim wasn't working, it was because I was betting 5 times the side bet amount with only the pay table of 1 bet.

    LL fix.jpg

  5. #18
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    1,154


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by bejammin075 View Post
    Alright, I think I figured out
    Can you do this sim with HiLo? I like your work a lot but not Wong halves at all… … Also, do a sim on LL10 because this is what I do.
    Last edited by aceside; 01-18-2022 at 04:12 PM.

  6. #19


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by aceside View Post
    Can you do this sim with HiLo? I like your work a lot but not Wong halves at all… … Also, do a sim on LL10 because this is what I do.
    6 decks (1 deck cut off), Hi-Lo, Truncating TC, Truncating deck estimate, quarter deck resolution, TC divisor is cards in tray, 2 billion rounds, LL10 pay table.

    The EV is slightly positive at +4, but really kicks in at +5 & above. The EV changes very rapidly with the count.

    Hi-Lo LL10 6D.jpg

  7. #20
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    1,154


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    It seems something is not right. For a 6-deck shoe, EV should be -17.6%. At TC +4, EV should be slight negative, I believe. For an 8-deck shoe, EV should be slightly positive.

    If we use ASC, the critical TC should drop one when aces per deck drop one. Can you double check?

  8. #21


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by aceside View Post
    It seems something is not right. For a 6-deck shoe, EV should be -17.6%. At TC +4, EV should be slight negative, I believe. For an 8-deck shoe, EV should be slightly positive.

    If we use ASC, the critical TC should drop one when aces per deck drop one. Can you double check?
    Look how quickly the EV changes with the count. Yes, Shackleford's analysis shows a -17.6 EV off the top for this pay table. The sim I show above at TC 0 shows -18.0%. Don't you recognize those as the same? TC = zero isn't a single point off the top of the deck, rather it is a whole bunch of simulated situations over a range of TC from -0.5 to +0.5. The EV changes by 6% for each 1 TC, and the small difference you pointed out is only 0.4%. The sim above would show an EV of -17.6 above at a TC of +0.07. What is the TC off the top with a single low card as the burn card? TC +0.17. So the difference you are focused on is a fraction of the difference of a single card.

    Then look at TC +4. It's close to the break even point. Simulations depend on the simulated conditions, which I noted. If I changed things at all, like rounding the deck estimate instead of truncating, it is going to change the exact results around a break-even point. The simple idea is that the EV changes very quickly with the count. If you make this bet at +4, you might have a negative expectation if your deck estimation is off or if you determine true count differently than the simulated results. You are better off waiting until +5 to bet this one, to be sure about it.

  9. #22
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    1,154


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by bejammin075 View Post
    The sim above would show an EV of -17.6 above at a TC of +0.07. What is the TC off the top with a single low card as the burn card? TC +0.17. So the difference you are focused on is a fraction of the difference of a single card.
    Wonderful work! This is convincing. The rapid growth of EV with TC is easily understood. The density of 10s is roughly proportional to the TC, so the probability of two-10 hands is proportional to the square of TC. It quadratically increases. Is it possible to do an ASC on top of this?

  10. #23


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Don’t hold me to this, because I side count differently, but I think you could make a simple adjustment. Let’s say you’ve played four of six decks, and you’ve seen 20 aces played when you expected to see 16. You would want to count those four extra played aces as a non-ten valued card, so you would multiply that number of aces by 2 and add 8 to the running count. You would probably use the same index. More aces played means more tens remain, increasing the EV.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  11. #24
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    1,154


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by bejammin075 View Post
    Don’t hold me to this, because I side count differently, but I think you could make a simple adjustment. Let’s say you’ve played four of six decks, and you’ve seen 20 aces played when you expected to see 16. You would want to count those four extra played aces as a non-ten valued card, so you would multiply that number of aces by 2 and add 8 to the running count. You would probably use the same index. More aces played means more tens remain, increasing the EV.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I have done some investigation on ASC on LL10. The result is simple. For each deficit of aces per deck, the critical HiLo TC drops one. For example, if the critical TC for a 6-deck shoe is +4, then it becomes +3 when ASC shows one deficit of aces in the remaining deck. I just need somebody to double check. Thank you for your nice work.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Another Lucky ladies thread
    By seal89 in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-05-2019, 04:56 PM
  2. Lucky Ladies win = WG2 IRS report?
    By Yoshi's Coatails in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 11-14-2018, 12:52 PM
  3. Lucky Ladies
    By saxymusic in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-07-2016, 08:46 AM
  4. Lucky Ladies Count
    By forever21 in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-01-2015, 08:50 PM
  5. I like S17: Lucky Ladies SD
    By I like S17 in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-31-2005, 06:14 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.