It's important to understand that you cannot run one index at a time. Indices interact. RA indices interact more as they take into account overall results of other indices. Index generation is vastly more difficult than simulation.
It's important to understand that you cannot run one index at a time. Indices interact. RA indices interact more as they take into account overall results of other indices. Index generation is vastly more difficult than simulation.
"I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse
It's rare that you would run two absolutely identical gens at Beat to Death, with exactly the same input, and exactly the same set of indices, and receive two different answers. If you do, that means that either choice will make no more difference than pennies at the end of a year. So, pick the one that the pit would prefer. It simply doesn't matter.
"I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse
Sorry. Looking at EV by count, difference is obvious.
The TKO RA TC deviations for A,7 and A,6 vs 2 are
A,7 @ TC >= +1
A,6 @ TC >= +7
for Six Deck S17, DAS game.
In running count mode the A,7 vs 2 is RC = +16 which is closer to +1 true when three decks has been played. But A,6 vs 2 the RC = +18 is far from true count of +7. It doesn't look accurate to use the index deviation A,6 vs 2 at RC = +18.
Not sure where you’re going with all this. Index generation is nothing like simulation. With simulation, you have rules and you follow the rules and collect statistics.
Index generation is another animal. You cannot determine indices via normal simulation. It would take hundreds of billions of normally dealt hands to determine some indices. There are several methods, all of which have flaws. Albeit, the flaws in the better methods are minor. Grosjean made some comments about what he saw as errors in the SBA calculations of Karel’s generated indices. I agreed with Karel and Grosjean has not, to my knowledge, written index generation software. (In no manner whatsoever does this reduce my respect for Grosjeans’s other works. He really doesn’t care much about the subject.) I originally included the effects of resplits in my generation code. I removed the code as it was time-consuming, and didn’t look like it mattered, and SBA ignored them. Cacarulo convinced me otherwise and I restored the code.
RA indices are far more complex as they deal more deeply with the ability of a particular count with a particular decision, and how that decision will affect your overall results – not just that decision alone.
I will never claim that my indices are the ultimate. But, I have confidence that they are better than any other generated indices. That doesn’t mean that I don’t want to hear about suspicious results. But, I really can’t explain the exactness of any result as my mind cannot run billions of hands, and in the case of RA indices, instincts can be incorrect.
"I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse
RA A6 vs 2 @ IRC+18 is simply a mistake in "Modern Blackjack" as said Norm:
"Ahh, found my notes. I originally ran those non-RA. I reran them and corrected the numbers, but missed that one."
https://www.blackjacktheforum.com/sh...l=1#post182873
Bookmarks