See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Results 1 to 13 of 20

Thread: Positive effects on downswing variance of waiting to double at a high bets

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    RA indices already take into account bet size, as well as other indices, bankroll (assuming you are using optimal betting), risk, rules, penetration, variance by count, overall variance, strategy, etc. They are the optimal indices for the growth of limited bankrolls.
    I totally agree. What I was talking about went a little further with big bets out. Not optimal if EV is how you judge optimal. But after trying to relate it to the way other people tend to count, the high correlation between the betting count and the playing count makes this idea have little usage making it not worth pursuing. You need to have the playing index non-negative and the bet to be large. In my example I forgot to include the frequency of large bets, which would have greatly reduced that 4/10th of a penny cost per $100 bet. But for most people there would be no instance where they would have a big bet out with a playing TC of 0. Just when the TC changes a lot after the bet and before the playing decision.

    My doubling playing counts may not be at all correlated to the betting TC so no move in the TC is required to be in that situation when the playing count and betting count have little correlation. Sometimes I forget how many opportunities are forfeited when you commit to a simple count or even a traditional count. Sorry everyone. I see what Bosox has been complaining about. Many of the avenues I pursue just don't exist for most players' approaches. The less complicated the approach the more the avenues to improve are closed off for you. Nothing wrong with the simple approach. It gets the money in the long run. But if you gather more info and/or use information differently opportunities are there to improve things concerning EV, CE, and more specifically changing the variance makeup concerning swings. But that small subset where any count have a big bet out and are at the doubling or splitting index this concept applies. For most that convergence of conditions is too rare to have much of an impact on results.
    Last edited by Three; 12-17-2018 at 10:18 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. Positive Variance for a Year....any thoughts?
    By hitA7 in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-06-2014, 04:11 AM
  2. Expect MORE Positive Variance than NEG Variance?
    By Mickey in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-26-2014, 12:59 AM
  3. Myooligan: waiting bets
    By Myooligan in forum Blackjack Beginners
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-19-2005, 08:37 PM
  4. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 11-27-2002, 07:59 AM

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.