Hi Don
Yes, that is exactly, what I am saying. It of course decreases the expected return to player, and quite predictably almost as much as ENHC. The numbers look approximately like this:
ENHC: -0,11% Divided by card;
No-peek T: -0,10%
No-peek A: -0,01%
Divided by action;
Doubling (11 vs T): -0,08%
Splitting (88 vs T, 88 vs A, AA vs A): -0,03%
The loss comes from both lost doubles, and from lost profit of now-non-doubles, and similarly with splitting.
In basic strategy it results in these changes:
|
Peek T + A (Don) |
Peek A (Parrotbird) |
No peek (ENHC) |
11 vs T |
D.D |
Hit |
Hit |
88 vs T |
Split |
Hit |
Hit |
88 vs A |
Split |
Split |
Hit |
AA vs A |
Split |
Split |
Hit |
… and then, I imagine, a myriad of indices, which I would like to know, and that was the reason behind my original question.
Parrotbird
Bookmarks