Do negative TC advantages roughly mirror the positive ones?
Example:
You have a game with a -.5 off the top advantage and roughly a .5 increase per true count.
So
-3 TC = -2%
-2 TC = -1.5%
-1 TC = -1%
0 = -.5%
1 = 0%
2 TC = .5%
3 TC = 1.%
roughly correct?
thnx for your time
> Do negative TC advantages roughly mirror the positive
> ones?
Roughly, but not perfectly. First, slightly more rounds at each absolulte value pair of TCs, such as -1, +1, -2, +2, begin with the negative counts than with the positive ones. Although that isn't what you're asking (I'll get to that in a minute), if you try to do any calculation of overall advantage, you need to understand that the corresponding frequencies aren't identical.
> Example:
> You have a game with a -.5 off the top advantage and
> roughly a .5 increase per true count.
> So
> -3 TC = -2%
> -2 TC = -1.5%
> -1 TC = -1%
> 0 = -.5%
> 1 = 0%
> 2 TC = .5%
> 3 TC = 1.%
> roughly correct?
Define "roughly." :-) If you use indices, the increases in edge aren't perfectly linear. Even if you don't use indices, the negative edges don't continue to decrease linearly. At about -13 or so, they start to revert slightly, or at least stop declining. This isn't true with the positive edges, which keep increasing, but, again, not linearly, as, with very high counts, there are a large number of pushes at 20-20.
So, your assumption is a bit too simplistic to call "true," although it is "roughly" true within reasonable ranges around zero.
> thnx for your time
You're welcome.
Don
HiLo, Full indexes, Flooring, 6D, S17, DAS, LS, 5/6, 25 billion rounds:
As Don said, the edge tends to level off at very low TCs. The chart below displays the increase in EV at each TC. You can ignore the extreme TCs as they are rare and often involve strange card subsets.
The two charts posted assumed full indexes. Suppose we use no indexes. I ran another 25 billion rounds. The charts are very different. With full indexes, the advantage gain per TC is larger at positive TCs. With no indexes, the gain per TC reduces as the TC increases. The below charts are the same as the previous charts; only they chart both full indexes and no indexes.
What about the Illustrious 18 and Fab 4? I ran another 25 billion rounds. These charts include the Ill18 & Fab4 Advantage by TC and Gain by TC:
After 75 billion rounds my PC wants to rest a bit.
When posting to this website, we'd appreciate it if you would stick with a single username. This avoids confusion and allows us to get to know you a little, as well as enhancing your credibility as you establish yourself as a regular poster.
In additon, if you plan on hanging around it would facilitate things if you take a few moments to create a profile.
Simply click on "Create Profile," found in the collection of links in tiny print at the top of any forum index page.
The only required information is a username and a password. Any other info you wish to provide (including an e-mail address) is optional.
Creating a profile provides the following benefits:
1. No one will be able to impersonate you by posting under your username.
2. You can be given "bypass moderation" so that your posts will appear on the forum immediately when you make them.
3. You will be able to self-delete any of your posts, should you ever have the need.
It also makes your Host/Moderator's job easier (that would be me).
As always, we thank you for your cooperation.
Thank you Don and Norm for your time and effort in answering my question. Also, thanks to Norm's tired computer. Who obviously worked the hardest.
Ok,
I had to ask that question before I could ask this one :-)
I am aware of proper ODP departure points.
What if you are in a very crowded casino and if you leave your full table you have to wait until that shoe is finished and the shuffle before you can play again. What is an idea for ODP for this scenario?
Or another way to look at it, it is a casino with one full table
Don,
In another thread you touched on this idea using a seat of the pants methodology.
Your words from that thread:
"When you start a shoe with typical rules,...,you have at best, about a 1% edge, if you play all. So, it stands to reason, with a seat-of-the-pants logic, that if you make the count negative enough so as to be 1% below the off-the-top edge, you negate that 1% edge and have about zero expectation for the balance of the shoe. Such a point would occur at TC = -2, for a count such as Hi-Lo."
Ok,
I ran and got my BJA3 and looked at page 244, table 10.59
4.5/6 H17 DAS, play all spread 1 - 16 pract. advantage .81%.
off the top disadvantage pg 394 is -.616
My math
The % increase in advantage from TC 1 to TC 3 is about .54% per true.
So seat of the pants:
You have an advantage of .81%
Off the top disadvantage of -.616
So you should leave the table if you have a disadvantage of approximately -.81 + -6.16 = -1.426% ?
Which would roughly mean a TC of -2 ?
However, if I am roughly right, then I see a problem. As soon as you declare your departure point you have a higher advantage, so the numbers above change? Is it still approximately correct or do we need a different formula?
Have I just touched upon one of the reasons the original ODP was so time consuming?
Assuming I am close enough, does this methodology work for 6 and 8 deck shoes with various rules?
Does this work with double deck?
I now have a headache! I hope I have not given anyone else one!
If you guys wrestle through this one I will try to leave you alone for awhile! :-)
Appreciate your time!
Catch 20 more likelyBut my PC begged me not to run any more tonight.
Come to think of it - for so many years counters haven't been splitting tens. Ten Splits are probably a sign you aren't a counter - not that you are.
I have to admit though, some of the names the poster is coming up with are pretty comical.
> What about the Illustrious 18 and Fab 4? I ran another
> 25 billion rounds. These charts include the Ill18
> & Fab4 Advantage by TC and Gain by TC:
If I must say so myself, it is quite astonishing to compare the green and red lines between the only counts that are truly worth looking at -- say betweem -7 and +7 -- as the rarity of the the extreme counts contributes little or nothing to the global edge.
To those who keep begging for more indices to add to the I18 and Fab 4, these charts should serve as an everlasting reminder: You don't need any more!!!
Don
P.S. But, yes, do learn the Catch 22, and dump the ten-splitting.
All these charts displayed advantages by TC. But if you want to look at the actual value of an index set; you need to bring True Count frequencies into the equation. So he is the final chart but in terms of dollars per hour won/lost:
On the right side of the chart, green indicates the $ won by TC with no indexes. Red is the additional gain with the Illustrious 18 & Fab 4. Blue is the additional gain using Full Indexes. There is barely any gain with full indexes. On the left, you see the amount lost by removing indexes.
Posting Permissions
-*-
Bookmarks