Negative ev

[aceside]

The above results of Cacarulo can be well explained by penetration consideration. Let’s assume the dealer must complete her hand even if the players all bust. The player uses 2.74 cards per round on average; the dealer 2.93 cards. Therefore, the number of cards that are dealt out in each deck are:

a) 1 player, 6 rounds (heads-up): 1x6x2.74 + 6x2.93 = 34.02;
b) 2 players, 5 rounds: 2x5x2.74 + 5x2.93 = 42.05;
c) 3 players, 4 rounds: 3x4x2.74 + 4x2.93 = 44.60;
d) 4 players, 3 rounds: 4x3x2.74 + 3x2.93 = 41.67;
e) 5 players, 2 rounds: 5x2x2.74 + 2x2.93 = 33.26.

[moo321]

I am on my way out at this moment, but you seem to get really higher advantages at similar counts compared to my data.

Probably the use of full indexes and later seat position. The same count is more valuable if you also get more information by seeing other people's hit cards before making your playing decisions.

[moo321]

So: SD H17, DAS. 1-6 spread. Four players, which is what your screenshot purports to show. SCORE was 11.49 (compare to your 48.82!). Hourly win was $23. Edge at 0 was -1.37%. At <= -1. it was -3.07%. Edge at +1 was -0.66%.

As I said, something is wrong.

Don

I ran a sim using only Illustrious 18 indexes, and the player sitting at first base out of 4 players. Got pretty similar results:



6 to 5.jpg

I don't know if you did this, but it appears several others were making mistakes in this area. You have to use full indexes and have the player sitting at third base. These are huge factors in single deck. Much more important than shoe games. Full indexes at 3rd base may be 3-4 times as profitable as Ill18 at first base. Much more so if you talk about a stronger count, like Zen or Hi Opt II. Might be 6-8 times better with one of those counts.

[aceside]

You keep saying that 3rd base is several times more advantageous than 1st. This is extremely hard to believe. I don’t simulate myself. Just looking at the picture you posted above. Where is the button for you to choose 3rd base over 1st base?

[Freightman]

You keep saying that 3rd base is several times more advantageous than 1st. This is extremely hard to believe. I don’t simulate myself. Just looking at the picture you posted above. Where is the button for you to choose 3rd base over 1st base?

third base as anchor position in a single dick game is valuable as you get to see more cards prior to making a play decision.

Or as a heads up player catching the burn card is also extremely valuable. For example, playing calves, catching the five as a burn card justifies a Multi unit bet.

[aceside]

But there is a disadvantage at 3rd base too. The count when you place your bet is off from the real count number when you receive your cards. Do you agree?

[Freightman]

But there is a disadvantage at 3rd base too. The count when you place your bet is off from the real count number when you receive your cards. Do you agree?

You have to look at the long game which you are clearly not doing. Play decisions in a single deck game can easily very card by card having the benefit of being to able to view more cards as anchor than your table mates gives you a huge advantage.

[ShipTheCookies]

But there is a disadvantage at 3rd base too. The count when you place your bet is off from the real count number when you receive your cards. Do you agree?

This myth has been disproven many times. I have no idea why you keep typing here. You clearly don't know squat about blackjack!

[Archvaldor]

I ran a sim using only Illustrious 18 indexes, and the player sitting at first base out of 4 players. Got pretty similar results:





I don't know if you did this, but it appears several others were making mistakes in this area. You have to use full indexes and have the player sitting at third base. These are huge factors in single deck. Much more important than shoe games. Full indexes at 3rd base may be 3-4 times as profitable as Ill18 at first base. Much more so if you talk about a stronger count, like Zen or Hi Opt II. Might be 6-8 times better with one of those counts.

Yes the general principle you allude to is true at very least in theory. At the quarter-deck level you can get quite an accurate prediction of each actual card.

Worth adding there is a synergy between playing efficiency and betting at extremely deep penetration which isn't much discussed or even widely known mainly due to the rarity of deeply dealt single-deck.

Hi-lo is a great system but its playing efficiency is really quite weak: it became everyone's default system mainly because PE is almost irrelevant in the modern shoe game. Any one actually attempting this should definitely be using a system optimized for PE. I imagine computer-perfect play would demolish this game.

[Cacarulo]

I don't know if you did this, but it appears several others were making mistakes in this area. You have to use full indexes and have the player sitting at third base. These are huge factors in single deck. Much more important than shoe games. Full indexes at 3rd base may be 3-4 times as profitable as Ill18 at first base. Much more so if you talk about a stronger count, like Zen or Hi Opt II. Might be 6-8 times better with one of those counts.

I don't know what you're referring to when you say that several others were making mistakes in this area. The only difference we have is the number of indices used. I used the top 22, and the analysis was always based on the player sitting at third base. It's very likely that using more indices will significantly improve the SCORE, although I’m not sure if it would be enough to reach a value of 90 with a 1-6 spread. That's my concern.

Question: How did you calculate the indices? Specifically, how did you estimate the remaining decks? This is another important point to consider.

Sincerely,
Cac

[aceside]

This myth has been disproven many times. I have no idea why you keep typing here. You clearly don't know squat about blackjack!

This discussion is going to endless loops of circular arguments. It seems to me you are going to cite True Count Theorem, but I dismissed it long ago.

I haven’t seen a single deck game for several years. I will exit from here!

[Freightman]

third base as anchor position in a single dick game is valuable as you get to see more cards prior to making a play decision.

Or as a heads up player catching the burn card is also extremely valuable. For example, playing calves, catching the five as a burn card justifies a Multi unit bet.

Received an email for my response above making reference to a single dick inquiring if I had a mistake. Indeed I had as I had intended as a single deck. For clarity, single dick is factor in the vaunted FBM ASC Advanced.

I also noted reference to the count system of “calves”. One way or the udder, I’ll get around to correcting that one.

[DSchles]

I used full indices. The player always sits at third base in CVCX. This isn't exactly my first rodeo doing these things.

Don