I didn't forget about this experiment. It just took some time for me to get to it.
Under the conditions suggested above, for doubling over hitting A,A vs 3 I now get +8 as the index S17 (was +9). This matches Cac's simulation result. However, I'm still getting +8 for H17 where Cac's simulation result is +7.
Some suggestions regarding the H17 difference:
- Encountering this hand with at least three aces and a 3 removed at +7 and +8 is a rare event occurring only 122,878 and 98,232 times respectively over the course of 100 billion rounds I simulated. As such, the EVs that were computed are separated by only 0.5 standard deviations (the standard deviation of the difference in the EVs) giving a probability of about 30.85% that doubling might be correct at +7.
- My software never computes indices in isolation. It always includes the effects of other related index plays. It does this automatically and I've never found a practical reason to prevent it. In the case of A,A vs 3 at +8, the only relevant index play which can also be triggered downstream would be 12 vs 3 (stand) at +2 (there are others but their indices are too negative for them to be relevant in this situation). I would be interested to see what index Cac and others get for this situation (A,A vs 3, at least 3 aces removed, H17) when 12 vs 3 is also enabled. This would tend to increase the value of hitting and therefore tend to make the index for doubling higher.
Bookmarks