Is There a "Floating Disadvantage?"

[Overkill]

Hello all,

I've been reading with interest Chapter 6 (The "Floating Advantage") in Don's "Blackjack Attack" - 3rd edition. I also consulted Norm's power-packed graphical representation of the Floating Advantage in his "Blackjack in Color."

If I understand correctly, a positive count is worth more EV in later rounds than in earlier rounds, and this concept becomes less and less pronounced as one plays with an increasing number of decks. The increase in advantage is known as the Floating Advantage.

My question: Apologies if I overlooked the answer to the following, but is there also a Floating DISadvantage? In other words, is the same negative count more deleterious to a player in later rounds vs. in earlier rounds?

I realize that this may not be relevant to card counters as she/he will not vary her/his bet within the range of negative true counts.

But what about for the non-counting basic strategist? Can this, or has this, been simmed?

When in true counts, isn't the basic strategist experiencing slightly more wins (without knowing it) in later rounds due to the Floating Advantage?

I wonder about a Floating Disadvantage because, and this is where most of you will balk , my notebooks are full of entries of manually dealt shoes wherein the player often fares worse toward the end of a shoe.

I am wondering if the Floating Advantage is actually more pronounced in manually-shuffled shoes (vs. machine-shuffled shoes), and if a possible Floating DISadvantage is not only also more pronounced in manually-shuffled shoes (vs. machine-shuffled shoes) but also more pronounced than is the Floating Advantage in manually dealt shoes (which would explain my admittedly small sample of results mentioned above).

Finally, has anyone generated any hypotheses regarding the mechanism of action behind the Floating Advantage? I have an idea or two.