Norm Wattenberger: Effect of Cover on time it takes to get to the "long run"

[Norm Wattenberger]

Call this another in my series of posts on why most players don't do as well as they expect. I decided to try a new twist on looking at the cost of cover betting. Here, I am looking at the impact of cover betting on N0. N0 is defined as "the number of rounds that must be played such that the accumulated expectation equals the accumulated standard deviation." Or very loosely, the number of hands required to hit the "long run."

I looked at five common types of cover betting:

A. No bet change after a push
B. No large bet increases
C. No large bet decreases
D. No bet decrease after a win
E. No bet increase after a loss

For all sims: DD, 66% penetration, H17, DAS, Spread 1-6, three players. The chart below shows N0 (hands) using each type of cover:



Think that's scary? Cover betting rarely involves only one of the cover types. The real problem is that they interact and the cost of combining cover methods is worse than you might think. The following chart is the same as the first except three bars have been added. They are three combinations of the above: B & C, A, D & E and all of the cover types.



Now before panic sets in, it should be realized that results are enormously dependent on many variables. In particular, the betting ramp, the number of players and the number of decks. Crowded tables and shoe games will not see anywhere near this impact and strict adherence to cover betting is not really required. Nonetheless, I think it is important to see the kind of effects that can appear on actions that may seem minor.


CVCX Online

[OldCootFromVA]

Very illuminating. Thank you.

[i like S17]

Nice post Norm. What about others, such as never hit 12, never hit 16, always double 10, etc.

[Coug_Fan]

> Nice post Norm. What about others, such as never hit
> 12, never hit 16, always double 10, etc.

How about the effect of tipping?