Dave: bj math knowledge for monetarily challenged

[Dave]

I was looking into determining playing efficiency today for any given counting system. You experts, I'm sure you know all this already so this isn't for you. Those of you who don't have many bj books or bj software programs, you may want to read this. Many books list that around .6908 is the limit for how good a counting systems pe can be. Do the following below and you can approximate your pe.

Your count system:

R1=(0 1 1 2 2 1 1 0 0 -2)

EOR=( Ace 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 )
find these at bjmath.com/bjmath/eor/peor1ds.htm

IP=0*(.127)+1*(.15)+1*(.213)+2*(.313)......=6.032

s.sc=0^2+1^2+1^2++2^2......=28

s.sr=.127^2+.15^2+.213^2+.313^2....=1.3775

pe=IP/(s.sc * s.sr)^(1/2)=.9712

this will give you a pe on a 0 to 100% scale.
To convert it to 0 to .690 just multiply it by .690. So the Hi-Opt II has a pe of about .6709 .

This is just an algebraic approximation. This method is used for Betting correlation and I saw those tables at bjmath for Playing efficiency and this method actually kind of works fairly well for that too. I'm not an expert on this subject, just passing along something I found out.

[AsZehn]

Or, you could go to www.qfit.com, scroll to the bottom of the page and select strategy efficiencies. You can find BE, PE & IC info for most of the counting strategies. Lots of other useful info also.

> I was looking into determining playing
> efficiency today for any given counting
> system. You experts, I'm sure you know all
> this already so this isn't for you. Those of
> you who don't have many bj books or bj
> software programs, you may want to read
> this. Many books list that around .6908 is
> the limit for how good a counting systems pe
> can be. Do the following below and you can
> approximate your pe.

> Your count system:

> R1=(0 1 1 2 2 1 1 0 0 -2)

> EOR=( Ace 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 )
> find these at
> bjmath.com/bjmath/eor/peor1ds.htm

>
> IP=0*(.127)+1*(.15)+1*(.213)+2*(.313)......=6.032

> s.sc=0^2+1^2+1^2++2^2......=28

> s.sr=.127^2+.15^2+.213^2+.313^2....=1.3775

> pe=IP/(s.sc * s.sr)^(1/2)=.9712

> this will give you a pe on a 0 to 100%
> scale.
> To convert it to 0 to .690 just multiply it
> by .690. So the Hi-Opt II has a pe of about
> .6709 .

> This is just an algebraic approximation.
> This method is used for Betting correlation
> and I saw those tables at bjmath for Playing
> efficiency and this method actually kind of
> works fairly well for that too. I'm not an
> expert on this subject, just passing along
> something I found out.

[Cacarulo]

> I was looking into determining playing
> efficiency today for any given counting
> system. You experts, I'm sure you know all
> this already so this isn't for you. Those of
> you who don't have many bj books or bj
> software programs, you may want to read
> this. Many books list that around .6908 is
> the limit for how good a counting systems pe
> can be. Do the following below and you can
> approximate your pe.

> Your count system:

> R1=(0 1 1 2 2 1 1 0 0 -2)

> EOR=( Ace 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 )
> find these at
> bjmath.com/bjmath/eor/peor1ds.htm

>
> IP=0*(.127)+1*(.15)+1*(.213)+2*(.313)......=6.032

> s.sc=0^2+1^2+1^2++2^2......=28

> s.sr=.127^2+.15^2+.213^2+.313^2....=1.3775

> pe=IP/(s.sc * s.sr)^(1/2)=.9712

> this will give you a pe on a 0 to 100%
> scale.
> To convert it to 0 to .690 just multiply it
> by .690. So the Hi-Opt II has a pe of about
> .6709 .

> This is just an algebraic approximation.
> This method is used for Betting correlation
> and I saw those tables at bjmath for Playing
> efficiency and this method actually kind of
> works fairly well for that too. I'm not an
> expert on this subject, just passing along
> something I found out.

I got something a little bit different although the process is much more complicated.

BC = 0.909/0.918 (S17/H17)
IC = 0.912
PE = 0.652/0.655 (S17/H17)

Sincerely,
Cacarulo