chgobjpro: Question re: CVCX Online Viewer

[chgobjpro]

I use Revere Adv Plus Minus Strategy. Which one of your Strategies is closest to that one? I use 84 indices that were calc'd with SBA.

[Norm Wattenberger]

Sorry, offhand I have no idea. Hard to come up with a match with 84 indexes that I don't know.

> I use Revere Adv Plus Minus Strategy. Which one of
> your Strategies is closest to that one? I use 84
> indices that were calc'd with SBA.

[Brick]

Is it possible to increase ev by 1% when using many more index numbers than the Ill 18 suggest? If not,what ev can be achieved?

thanks,
Brick

[Norm Wattenberger]

In shoe games, not close. 0.15% would be a stretch with a multi-level count. At single deck with very good penetration and a multi-level count, you can get better than 0.5%. You can experiment with the below link and password 100. There are Ill18 and Full index sims.

CVCX Online Viewer

[Don Schlesinger]

> In shoe games, not close. 0.15% would be a stretch
> with a multi-level count. At single deck with very
> good penetration and a multi-level count, you can get
> better than 0.5%. You can experiment with the below
> link and password 100. There are Ill18 and Full index
> sims.

Be careful how we interpret "e.v." Percentage advantage is a somewhat useless statistic these days, as we gravitate to SCORE comparisons. I think that may be what Brick meant.

In any event, a CVCX comparison of the best Strip game (S17, DAS, LS), play-all 4.5/6, head-up Hi-Lo, shows a SCORE of 40.00 for the "all indices" sim and 36.50 for the I18 and Fab4. That's an increase of 9.6% for using all the indices.

Don

[Brick]

Thanks Norm and Don, how many are "all indices"?

[Norm Wattenberger]

In the case of HiLo, 142.

> Thanks Norm and Don, how many are "all
> indices"?

[buddha]

> In shoe games, not close. 0.15% would be a stretch
> with a multi-level count. At single deck with very
> good penetration and a multi-level count, you can get
> better than 0.5%. You can experiment with the below
> link and password 100. There are Ill18 and Full index
> sims.

Since memorizing additional indices (and Playing Efficiency) doesn't help much in shoe games, I have a question: Why is it that Level-2 strategies that have worse Betting Correlations (e.g., Zen, HOII, Omega II,Canfield Master)outperfom Level-1 strategies (like Hi-Lo, KO, Red Seven)in shoe games?

[Don Schlesinger]

> Since memorizing additional indices (and Playing
> Efficiency) doesn't help much in shoe games, I have a
> question: Why is it that Level-2 strategies that have
> worse Betting Correlations (e.g., Zen, HOII, Omega
> II,Canfield Master)outperfom Level-1 strategies (like
> Hi-Lo, KO, Red Seven)in shoe games?

They don't outperform unless they're used with side counts of aces. Then, it's no longer a fair fight, since one set of counts uses the side count while the other doesn't.

In any event, once you use the side count, the BEs of the ace-neutral counts rival those of the ace-reckoned counts, while the PEs are much higher. This, of course, leads to the outperformance that you mention.

Don