No bust stategy has been simiulated. The house edge is 5% for that strategy. Basic strategy is around 0.5%.
Norm's simulator can't help in this situation. The engine of all Norm's programs is based on the unbiased randomness.
At one point, The mission statement of Shuffle Master ASM included such statement that ASM can protect casinos from card counting. That makes me believe ASM is capable of shifted randomness or alternative randomness. Unless Norm got the secret ingredients from ASM manufacture, I doubt Norm's simulator can create the alternative randomness to complete the simulation you request.
What Tthree said is that your no bust strategy has -5% ev on hand shuffled game while Basic Strategy has -0.5% ev.
Since you are the expert on the subject, why don't you reproduce the mission statement stated, as well as supporting commentary prior to and subsequent to the statement. I would caution you that you need to be right, and if you're not, you're on shaky legal ground. If you're wrong, then, what you are espousing is not protected by free speech.
Well, the manufacture dropped the mission statement in late 90's or early 2000's. But there must be still some people who remember it.
That mission statement originally highlights the selling point of ASM to casinos. Then once ASM is accepted by casinos, the manufacture no longer need to boast.
Your suggestion only deals with how the player plays. The simulator also needs to address the issue how the cards are generated in the distribution I request. My hypothesis is that when TC is extremely high, richness of mid cards is twice that of face cards. To implement the hypothesis, a new engine is needed.
You get out what you put in. The OP said nothing about middle cards. He just wants to know the results of always hitting 12-16 in a negative count and always standing on 12-16 in a positive count. Am I missing something? Or are you reading more into it than needed?
Middle cards are an entirely different issue.
Sorry. You not only stuck your foot in your mouth, it's made its exit out your ass. Using your statement above. Let's make this simple. I will define hi cards as - all faces and aces comprising 20 cards in a 52 card deck. Mid cards as 6,7,8,9 comprising 16 cards and low cards comprising 16 cards 2,3,4,5.
After 26 cards, we have true plus 6 with, per your statement, twice as many mid cards than high cards. In order for this to occur, you have 8 high cards, 2 low cards and 16 mid cards. Extend this to as many decks as you wish. Can you not see the fallacy of this scenario? I trust I need not explain further.
Freighter. Your analogies are hilarious. One group has no relation to another whatsoever. It is what it is. You can have a deck that is rich in just low cards. Just high cards. Just middle cards. Or any combination of the two.
There is this one guy in the sportsbook that
swears the casino is out to get him. He sees a game he likes and then gets 18 different opinions. He still doesn't know whether he is going to choose A or B standing in line.. There is only two choices. Inevitably, he will lose. I mean his team is out of it by the half. So he spends the entire game bitching about the casino is trying to screw him. He truly believes it.
If I could just figure a way to get behind him in line and go the other way, I could increase the national average from 56% to 96%. He is that bad.
Bookmarks