How is the optimal Bet calculated?
Example.JPG
How is the optimal Bet calculated?
Example.JPG
Essentially, calculate house edge, calculate true count necessary to break even, then what is the increase in edge per true count thereafter, and calculate bet necessary to correspond.
In simpler terms, .5 he means you bet minimum for true counts less than 1, which is breakeven. True 2 is .5 advantage, your bet is now, let’s say 2 units versus 1. True 3 which is 1% advantage, is double the edge of true 2, so your proportionate bet is 4 units. True 4 has a 1.5% advantage, which is 50% more than True 3 advantage, which means your bet is 6 units, and so on.
Well, yes and no, but mainly no. The algorithm for calculating optimal bet size and ramp is the subject of a great deal of very scholarly mathematics and isn't as simple as you make it out to be. In any event, minimum and maximum bets, which may be subject to artificial constraints not having to do with the algorithm, aside, all intermediate true count bet sizes are strictly determined by bankroll times advantage divided by variance for that particular true count.
And, of course, given the use of indices, edges are not as simplistic as simply assuming 0.5% increases, which can be seen by looking at the chart.
Don
Of course, you’re right, in all respects - which brings up the point as to what is the best answer based on your target audience - the right one or the simple one - I can see an entertaining Talmudic discussion on this point
In any event, for myself, I do nothing which is outside my tolerance or Ror, as I often jump around between dual ramps, based on my own set of criteria, which kind of smudges things - but I do know ror is nothing on my lower and not much higher on the upper, and my bets very often float between the lower and upper. and it works for me - I often consider my simple explanation when doing my schtick routine.
Oh, by the way, will be in New York on Sunday - only have free time on Monday, did you still want that discussion on the FBM ASC?
It really is messy given restraints and interactions. I start with the math in CVCX. But, then I use an iterative technique that requires tens of millions of instruction executions to maximize SCORE.
"I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse
Sure, I respect your point of view. But I am very fond of a quote attributed to Einstein and that I invoke quite often: "Everything should be as simple as possible, but not simpler.' So, while I don't mind occasionally dummying things down for the masses, I draw the line, in so doing, at anything that isn't 100% factual. In short, it can be "simpler," but it has to be right at the same time. I just have somewhat of a mania of trying to be accurate in print at all times.
Don
What do you mean by restraints and interactions? I assume a restraint would be min & max bet, risk, that sort of thing. I'm not really sure about interactions, at least not a way I can articulate what I think you mean by it.
How would an optimal bet ramp look without the restraints & interactions? Or is it that there are restraints & interactions in blackjack that would make the question impossible to answer?
"Everyone wants to be rich, but nobody wants to work for it." -Ryan Howard [The Office]
Well for one, change the spread and all those numbers change. Remember that we are looking for overall top SCORE at a specified risk. Interactions come into play for the actual bets, since we don't bet pennies or oddball numbers. You can't just round all the optimal bets as changing one changes the risk and may require adjusting other bets, which then changes how optimal the first change was. It's an iterative process, particularly if you select the option to avoid rainbow stacks.
Last edited by Norm; 08-27-2019 at 07:57 AM.
"I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse
"I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse
Bookmarks