For Gramazeka (HO2, AO2, BRH-0, EBJ2)

[Gramazeka]

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 ( Error ? )
Hilo.......1.024%..0.003%..30.15..1.31%.....3.34

I understand that we are playing here, only according to TC, excluding Kelly factor . Correct ? But why such a difference in ROR between systems? 1.30 vs 1.06 ( EBJ, RPC) ? Two almost identical two-level systems...

[Gramazeka]

Really cannot boil down blackjack to a couple handfuls of numbers (EORs) and any particular stat. Everything affects everything and everything must be as close to apples and apples as you can get. SCORE, which assumes optimal betting, solves much of this. But, we still have the problem that different systems have different sweet spots in penetration, and differing kinship with different rules. That's why I once tried running lots of rule combinations with a bunch of strategies over all reasonable penetrations combining them for an overall SCORE. But, even that doesn't get you all the way.

As you can see, I'm a little embarrassed about this)) See the post above.
That's a huge difference 1.30 vs 1.06 !!! Maybe 1.26 ( RPC )?

[Cacarulo]

I understand that we are playing here, only according to TC, excluding Kelly factor . Correct ? But why such a difference in ROR between systems? 1.30 vs 1.06 ( EBJ, RPC) ? Two almost identical two-level systems...

Sorry Grama, I see that we are not understanding each other. Perhaps it is that I am not understanding your question or that you are not understanding my answer. I give up!

Sincerely,
Cac

[Gramazeka]

Good. Let's go in order. Do you think Zenfighter took the Kelly factor into account in the simulation above?
The second question is how much +EV does one unit of TC give? RPC and EBJ. For example Hi Lo 1 TC give +0.5 EV.

p.s. 0.56 ))

[Norm]

HiLo does NOT give .5% EV per TC. That is a back of the envelop estimate that the vast majority take as golden. Worse, people think you can add this estimate to basic strategy EV -- when basic strategy EV is not the same as that achieved with a counting strategy. See:

https://www.blackjackincolor.com/truecount2.htm

And that's for one set of indices. Clearly indices will change this, as well as penetration and other factors. Rules of thumb are estimates and often quite inaccurate.

[Gramazeka]

HiLo does NOT give .5% EV per TC. That is a back of the envelop estimate that the vast majority take as golden. Worse, people think you can add this estimate to basic strategy EV -- when basic strategy EV is not the same as that achieved with a counting strategy. See:

https://www.blackjackincolor.com/truecount2.htm

And that's for one set of indices. Clearly indices will change this, as well as penetration and other factors. Rules of thumb are estimates and often quite inaccurate.

+ 0.56 ? )) ENHC, Sur 10, DAS, Spl 3, RSA,

[Norm]

There is no one number.

[Gramazeka]

What ?

[DSchles]

What ?

The Hi-Lo incremental edge per true count is no single, fixed number. That's because when you employ index departures, they kick in at different levels and obviously affect your advantage at that true count. As you look at your chart, you will see edges anywhere from, say, 0.54 to 0.60.

Don

[Cacarulo]

0.5 % is a rule of thumb for Hi-Lo. It's not uniform. Let's take 6D,S17 with 22 indices as an example:

Hi-Lo

  10      0.000476488880      0.061209382263
   9      0.000962523080      0.054479161165
   8      0.001894033079      0.047515923006
   7      0.003549913439      0.040629630113
   6      0.006461209698      0.033793818826
   5      0.011887739096      0.027073550933
   4      0.021078035653      0.020736322732
   3      0.036924567448      0.014957618139
   2      0.065058029179      0.009545233196
   1      0.118179208902      0.004229703977
   0      0.267033329275     -0.001757881127
  -1      0.188816929980     -0.006267781336
  -2      0.123654982060     -0.010779987732
  -3      0.067056553499     -0.015782591178
  -4      0.038778760688     -0.020796967604
  -5      0.021111953793     -0.026068963357
  -6      0.012343745076     -0.031574742307
  -7      0.006673581358     -0.037552766121
  -8      0.003759524559     -0.043790938820
  -9      0.001920320239     -0.050448226281
 -10      0.001009002920     -0.057649010570

RPC

  10      0.006372829899      0.027301855334
   9      0.008569372839      0.024063123854
   8      0.011653612678      0.020926467757
   7      0.015385171578      0.017679132702
   6      0.020620626037      0.014609527830
   5      0.027652105676      0.011741223029
   4      0.037335565274      0.008935352324
   3      0.049935327772      0.006160542519
   2      0.067904886609      0.003336525709
   1      0.094138976165      0.000473857076
   0      0.162769829314     -0.002723333936
  -1      0.109741408322     -0.005086927518
  -2      0.098787306224     -0.007418290243
  -3      0.070139308069     -0.009979178426
  -4      0.052547268312     -0.012487106009
  -5      0.037899048414     -0.015071285529
  -6      0.028790138055     -0.017582050108
  -7      0.021189757057     -0.020216572978
  -8      0.016134736997     -0.022816386161
  -9      0.011748251658     -0.025605774264
 -10      0.008891312039     -0.028480907976

Calculate the difference between one TC and the next, multiply it by 100 and see what result you get.

Sincerely,
Cac

[iCountNTrack]

This is an old study using pure Combinatorial Analysis to compute advantage at true count. https://www.blackjacktheforum.com/sh...orial-Analysis

The advantage per true count is all over the place

[Cacarulo]

This is an old study using pure Combinatorial Analysis to compute advantage at true count. https://www.blackjacktheforum.com/sh...orial-Analysis

The advantage per true count is all over the place

There are a couple of things in relation to this study that I would like to mention.
At no time is there any reference to the system used, so I assume we are talking about Hi-Lo.
There is only one floored TC that does not exist in SD and it is the one corresponding to "minus one". If others are missing, I think it should be reviewed.
What is being tested is that the differences between one TC and the next are around 0.5%, sometimes more and sometimes less, which is the same as what is seen in the simulation that I published in post #75.
But this is Hi-Lo, if we look at RPC we will see that the percentages are different.

Sincerely,
Cac

[iCountNTrack]

There are a couple of things in relation to this study that I would like to mention.
At no time is there any reference to the system used, so I assume we are talking about Hi-Lo.
There is only one floored TC that does not exist in SD and it is the one corresponding to "minus one". If others are missing, I think it should be reviewed.
What is being tested is that the differences between one TC and the next are around 0.5%, sometimes more and sometimes less, which is the same as what is seen in the simulation that I published in post #75.
But this is Hi-Lo, if we look at RPC we will see that the percentages are different.

Sincerely,
Cac

Sorry i have a bad habit of not indicating the count used when i think of Hi-Lo
As far as the floored TC count, please note that this study was done at the 1/4 deck removed from the deck. So the TV divisor would be 0.75. And the missing TC counts are a result of flooring. For example a TC of -5 will never be possible.