Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Frank Jones: Question for Don/Late Surrender and Volatility

  1. #1
    Frank Jones
    Guest

    Frank Jones: Question for Don/Late Surrender and Volatility

    In the six-deck game with A.C. rules the house edge for the strict basic strategy player is reduced from .412% to .339% or about 17% with late surrender. The question is what is the effect of the late surrender upon the volatility or standard deviation of that game. I would assume that its effect upon volatility or S.D. is negligible at best.

  2. #2
    jblaze
    Guest

    jblaze: Re: Question for Don/Late Surrender and Volatility

    You can pretty much add that difference to your profit and keep the ROR the same because of LS. If you play for $100/hr with 5% ROR, you can play for about $115 now with LS for the same 5% ROR. Rough estimates, but I don't know why you would need it super precise.

    > In the six-deck game with A.C. rules the house edge
    > for the strict basic strategy player is reduced from
    > .412% to .339% or about 17% with late surrender. The
    > question is what is the effect of the late surrender
    > upon the volatility or standard deviation of that
    > game. I would assume that its effect upon volatility
    > or S.D. is negligible at best.

  3. #3
    Don Schlesinger
    Guest

    Don Schlesinger: Re: Question for Don/Late Surrender and Volatility

    > In the six-deck game with A.C. rules the house edge
    > for the strict basic strategy player is reduced from
    > .412% to .339% or about 17% with late surrender. The
    > question is what is the effect of the late surrender
    > upon the volatility or standard deviation of that
    > game. I would assume that its effect upon volatility
    > or S.D. is negligible at best.

    The s.d. is about 1.14 to 1.15 for the game you mention, without surrender. Surrender lowers the s.d. by about 0.01 only, as you suspect, simply because the frequency of surrender is rather low.

    The importance of surrender, and its effect on both e.v. and s.d., becomes much, much greater for a bet-spreading card counter.

    Don

  4. #4
    Fred Renzey
    Guest

    Fred Renzey: Re: Question for Don/Late Surrender and Volatility

    > What is the effect of the late surrender
    > upon the volatility or standard deviation of a multi-deck
    > game? I would assume that its effect upon volatility
    > or S.D. is negligible at best.

    BJ Bluebook II does contain "nutshell" discussions of both, the effects of the number of players on overall penetration (pg 169) and late surrender's effect on net earning power when increasing the stakes due to increased EV along with decreased ROR (pg 165).

  5. #5
    Don Schlesinger
    Guest

    Don Schlesinger: Re: Question for Don/Late Surrender and Volatility

    > BJ Bluebook II does contain "nutshell"
    > discussions of both, the effects of the number of
    > players on overall penetration (pg 169) and late
    > surrender's effect on net earning power when
    > increasing the stakes due to increased EV along with
    > decreased ROR (pg 165).

    You need to be careful about how you state the last part, Fred. Since LS increases edge while decreasing variance, if betting optimally, players should, for the same bankroll, be able to bet more than in a game without surrender. This increases e.v., as you mention, but also increases s.d., simply becuase you're betting more. The net result is that ROR remains the same (it has to, if you're betting optimally), e.v. increases, and s.d. also increases.

    Naturally, if you bet exactly the same stakes for both games, then e.v. increases, s.d. decreases, and ROR decreases, too, but you are no longer comparing apples to apples, because you aren't betting optimally in the LS game.

    Don

  6. #6
    Fred Renzey
    Guest

    Fred Renzey: Re: Question for Don/Late Surrender and Volatility

    > Since LS increases edge while decreasing
    > variance, if betting optimally, players should, for
    > the same bankroll, be able to bet more than in a game
    > without surrender. This increases e.v., but also increases s.d., simply becuase
    > you're betting more. The net result is that ROR
    > remains the same, e.v. increases, and s.d. also increases.
    > Don

    Sorry Don,
    I meant to chronologize that when LS enters the picture, first the EV goes up while ROR goes down, so then you bet more to bring ROR back up to where it was -- and the result is a double gain in earning power from higher EV being compounded by bigger bets.
    Fred

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.