Sent.
In any case; best of luck. I saw that there has been a withdrawal from Kharkiv. Still seems more dangerous than Kviv. Putin is anything but predictable and Kharkiv is closer to artillery range. But, you know the situation better.
Sent.
In any case; best of luck. I saw that there has been a withdrawal from Kharkiv. Still seems more dangerous than Kviv. Putin is anything but predictable and Kharkiv is closer to artillery range. But, you know the situation better.
"I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse
"Don't Cast Your Pearls Before Swine" (Jesus)
Please don't tell me you don't have CVDATA/CVCX. It's going to make it much harder for you to compare counting systems or to check my SCOREs.
Unfortunately, I don't have SBA either. Many years ago my computers were stolen and I lost many programs and information.
Sincerely,
Cac
Of course I have all CV ... 5 version. I just wanted to get my thoughts right using the SBA help box. You are a legendary source of information whose contributions are greatly appreciated. If you have problems with your computer, we will donate you equipment and restore programs.
"Don't Cast Your Pearls Before Swine" (Jesus)
I think you may be using a cruder TC calculation that doesn't allow BC's potential to play out normally in the systems you're examining. Although I may be wrong. For example I don't understand how RPC is more powerful than EBJ in your simulations? -
https://web.archive.org/web/20101221...ames;read=1489
Last edited by Gramazeka; 05-17-2022 at 11:58 AM.
"Don't Cast Your Pearls Before Swine" (Jesus)
When one compares one system with another, the correct thing to do is to do it through the SCORE or DI or N0, whichever you like best. When using these indicators, an optimal betting scheme is used in such a way that the ROR reached is 13.53% and the SCORE is maximized (or N0 minimized). In this process, the bets must be exact. One can choose integer bets but in that case the ROR would no longer be 13.53% and the comparison would not be fair. Perhaps in "system A" when using integer bets the ROR obtained is 12.57% and in "system B" it is 14.85%. This is not comparable.
Sincerely,
Cac
Ok, please your comments-
"EVs as a function of the TCs
System....TC1....TC2....TC3....TC4....SDH....Var
Halves....0.291..0.810..1.316..1.859..1.143..1.31
EBJII......0.317..0.815..1.324..1.891..1.148..1.32
RPC.......0.354..0.867..1.434..2.071..1.146..1.31
Highlow..0.317..0.832..1.339..1.925..1.145..1.31
Std.err....0.005..0.006..0.008..0.011
Theoretical Kelly bets for a 20000$ bankroll
Halves....44.43$....123.66$....200.92$....283.82$
EBJII......48.03$....123.48$....200.61$....286.53$
RPC.......54.05$....132.37$....218.93$....316.18$
Highlow..48.40$....127.02$....204.43$....293.89$
Practical Kelly bets for our 'green' player
Halves....50$....125$....200$....300$
EBJII.......50$....125$....200$....300$
RPC.......50$....125$....225$....325$
Highlow..50$....125$....200$....300$
Frequencies of the different TCs
System--TC1----TC2----TC3-----TC4----TC5 >--Total
Halves..11.64..6.70...3.86....2.67...2.95...27.82
EBJII....11.67..6.62...3.76....2.18...2.75...26.98
RPC.....11.78..6.50...3.59....2.02...2.37...26.26
Highlow11.81..6.50...3.69....2.10...2.57...26.67
That's all folks!
Epilog: It seems to me, that for PRACTICAL purposes, what we have here are seasoned apples.
When dealing with 6dks and 'monster' 8dks, every-
body is able to dream, being myself a halves player, I also have mine. I'm dreaming to buy me a winter house in southern California, but I don't know why, I've the terrible suspicion that I'm deceiving myself.
Regards
Z"
"In the card counting section of Richard's new e-book, I looked at the following table:
System.....c-Score
Halves.......32.33
EBJ II.........31.39
RPC..........30.89
Highlow.....29.76
The players as stated there, are spreading their bets (1-10) vs. 6dks, USA rules, S17, DAS and LS, but using only generic BS to play their hands.
Watching EBJ II scoring higher than RPC was admitedly a little surprise to me, but after looking at their respective betting correlations,
it soon vanished. Well I thought, you've to count
four 9s more for every pack, that's a little more
effort, up to everyone, of course.
Vegas Strip rules
EBJ II.........BC = .989
RPC..........BC = .986
I wanted to check the above numbers under more
'realistic'circumstances, that's four card counters using a full IL 18 table of indexes to
vary the play of their hands and the somehow more agressive betting spread (1-16).
Here are the conditions for the sims:
1)5000 million hands for every count.
2)6dks., USA HC, S17, DAS and SP3
3)Penetration was set to 234 cards (4.5/6)
4)Total bankroll = 150 times max. bet
5)IL 18 appropriate indexes for each one.
6)Betting ramp as follows:
TC<2=0
TC-2=1
TC-1=1
TC 0=1
TC 1=4
TC 2=8
TC 3=12
TC4 or >=16
Under the above conditions I've got these:
System..Win rate..SE....Score...ROR....Uns.won/100
Halves..1.072%..0.003%..33.58..1.23%.....3.66
EBJ II....1.050%..0.003%..31.70..1.30%.....3.50
RPC.....1.057%..0.003%..31.91..1.06%.....3.37
Hilo.......1.024%..0.003%..30.15..1.31%.....3.34
I would like to hear your comments, suggestions
and opinions as well, after all, that's the main
reason we're all around here, to learn a little
more every day in this BJ "shelter" called
BJ math.
Regards
Z"
Last edited by Gramazeka; 05-17-2022 at 12:25 PM.
"Don't Cast Your Pearls Before Swine" (Jesus)
Bookmarks