sefwow,
Look Again. Look carefully.
The graphic you inserted has the WRONG house edge
because it lists EARLY Surrender, NOT ES vs. 10.
There is a world of difference !
As an exercise, and to make sure I understand the game that is being described, I'm trying to reproduce the 0.117% result using the referenced tables in BJA3. So far I have been unsuccessful. I have
Benchmark 6d S17 game: -0.546
D9: -0.089
DAS/SPL3: 0.142
DAS/SPA3: 0.388
ES10: 0.241
----------------------------------------------------
Total: 0.136
As you can see, I get a player advantage of 0.136% mainly generated by the DAS/SPA3 and ES10 components.
Don, can you show how you obtained 0.117%? Thanks!
I would think that any tables that get you to simply add and subtract house edges would give you a general idea of what the house edge is but not an exact number. Many of the edge effects of rules are interdependent so you can't simply expect to sum individual numbers and receive an extremely accurate result.
In the case of these tables, I think that you can. The tables do provide separate values for rules that interact with one another, such as splitting and double after split. Having said that, we may still not be able to get an exact answer because, according to the foootnote, the DAS entries assume DOA which is not the case with this game.
I just want to know that I'm using the tables correctly to evaluate this game and that we came up with the correct answer, or as close as we can come, for the OP.
Fair enough. Although I have heard of the tables before I don't really know what the tables look like or exactly how they work.
Good on you for reading the footnotes. The devil is in the details.
I would also be curious to know whether and by how much the CSM factor changes anything. For this, I believe there is a difference due to the cut card effect. With a fixed cut-card shuffle, the shoes with negative counts towards the end last more rounds than the ones with positive counts. I'm too lazy at the moment to think where or when the relevant positive or negative counts are, but in any case, you get more rounds when things are bad and less when they are good.
Re: the cut card effect, tables such as these are generally for the first hand off the top of the shoe/deck, as is basic strategy and its inherent house edge.
I'm getting closer --- I should be using SPA3/RSA2 (single hit 0.069) instead of DAS/SPA3 (0.388), but this still leaves me with -0.183. Had I read the page after the charts as well as the footnote, I would have seen that this game is similar to the example that Don gave and I would have figured out that part much sooner!
Bookmarks