Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Jack Fate: Unit size varies

  1. #1
    Jack Fate
    Guest

    Jack Fate: Unit size varies

    Please advise. Do to my bank size and own personal comfort level I have found myself restricted to a max bet of $150. Being as I always play what I feel is the easiest target, I may find myself at a single deck, 2 deck, or shoe game.

    In order to stay in my comfort zone and get a decent spread, I look for green tables for pitch games, and tables with a $10 or $15 min in shoes.

    Anyone think I am putting myself at a disadvantage by changing my unit size back and forth in such a manner?

  2. #2
    zengrifter
    Guest

    zengrifter: NO, in fact...


    ... it SHOULD CHANGE based on #decks. Its your max bet that should NOT change. $150 max, 1D min 25, 2D min 15, 6D min 10 (wong). zg




  3. #3
    Trapper
    Guest

    Trapper: Wouldn't it be better advice to use optimal bet sizing?

    If you play optimally to a set BR then your unit size and your max bet would change with different numbers of decks, rules, penetration, and the bet spread you can get away with. The only factor that shouldn't change is your ROR (or Kelly fraction).
    I realize that it is simpler to stick to a set max bet for all games and it is a better option than using the same unit size but, for instance, what do you do if the six decker with 1.5 decks cut off becomes a 5/6 pen game with a dealer change? If you aren't increasing your unit size and max bet you are leaving money on the table, no?

    > ... it SHOULD CHANGE based on #decks. Its your max bet
    > that should NOT change. $150 max, 1D min 25, 2D min
    > 15, 6D min 10 (wong). zg

  4. #4
    zengrifter
    Guest

    zengrifter: Perhaps, BUT... (QFIT)

    ...often that degree of bet-size adjustment isn't practical on the fly. This sort of debate has arisen previously and the optimal/precision betting doesn't IMO hold up in real world application.

    I would like to see Norm/QFIT, or anyone qualified, do a comparison sim that shows unequivacably that optimal bet sizing yields meaningful profit improvement/EV in 6D games.

    The above said, this wasn't Jack Fate's question. zg

    > If you play optimally to a set BR then your unit size
    > and your max bet would change with different numbers
    > of decks, rules, penetration, and the bet spread you
    > can get away with. The only factor that shouldn't
    > change is your ROR (or Kelly fraction).
    > I realize that it is simpler to stick to a set max bet
    > for all games and it is a better option than using the
    > same unit size but, for instance, what do you do if
    > the six decker with 1.5 decks cut off becomes a 5/6
    > pen game with a dealer change? If you aren't
    > increasing your unit size and max bet you are leaving
    > money on the table, no?

  5. #5
    Norm Wattenberger
    Guest

    Norm Wattenberger: Re: Perhaps, BUT... (QFIT)


    I guess the effect depends on your definitions of the words significant and practical. The below link shows the differences between optimal betting and using a fixed ramp that is optimal at one point.



  6. #6
    Jack Fate
    Guest

    Jack Fate: Going for practicle

    First , thanks to all who are helping me understand.

    I will try to explain the approach I have been taking.

    My goals are longevity, acceptable ROR, and staying in my comfort zone. I play recreationlly, but would like to use a professional approach, staying within my abilities.

    I play simple HiLo, about 20 index plays which I round into blocks (some would call sloppy, I call simple), and look for the best combination of rules and pen available, with pen having priority.I am playing to a 15K trip bank, replenishable, but I hate to even think about that.

    I adjust basic stratagy to the game at hand, but make no adjustment on index plays in an effort to not overload and stay unencumbered by the thought process. At some point in time I intend to fine tune this once I have all else down pat.

    In regards to pen variations with dealer changes, the worse pen I see, the steeper betting ramp I use. I may go to max bet at a + 3.5 true instead of 4. Or if I get exceptional pen my max bet may go out at a +5 true. I also adjust for other factors and conditions such as heat, comps, ect.

    As I stated above, my max bet stays at $150 regardless. I just seek out lower mins at shoes as to still get a decent spread. This approach sometimes sucks do to having to sit down with players I would rather not, but such is life.

    O.K. , fire away, am I on the right track or should I quit while I'm ahead? Thanks for taking the time to read.

    Regards, Jack.


  7. #7
    zengrifter
    Guest

    zengrifter: Re: Perhaps, BUT... (QFIT)

    > I guess the effect depends on your definitions of the
    > words significant and practical. The below link shows
    > the differences between optimal betting and using a
    > fixed ramp that is optimal at one point.

    The chart tells me that in games with typical pene of 66-85% there is nothing to gain from more precise/optimization of bet-sizing. zg

  8. #8
    zengrifter
    Guest

    zengrifter: Re: Going for practicle


    Your approach is correct. zg



Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.