-
El Poet: Re: Cover Betting
> Why wouldn't you jump to 24? That's the
> fifth win at >5.
As I mentioned it's an exception, which is designed to avoid heat. What we're saying is that the round just was practically all low cards, it's deep in a shoe, and I'm trying to get as much as possible out. I won a say $20 bet, and can get away with $60, but not $120 - not for long.
-
Norm Wattenberger: Re: Cover Betting
> As I mentioned it's an exception, which is
> designed to avoid heat. What we're saying is
> that the round just was practically all low
> cards, it's deep in a shoe, and I'm trying
> to get as much as possible out. I won a say
> $20 bet, and can get away with $60, but not
> $120 - not for long.
I need a better description then. Simming a complex betting scheme is not difficult. What is difficult is coming up with a precise method of describing a complex betting scheme to a general purpose simulator. In other words, it's really hard to describe something to a computer that you have trouble precisely describing to a human
-
El Poet: Re: Cover Betting
> I need a better description then. Simming a
> complex betting scheme is not difficult.
> What is difficult is coming up with a
> precise method of describing a complex
> betting scheme to a general purpose
> simulator. In other words, it's really hard
> to describe something to a computer that you
> have trouble precisely describing to a
> human
Amen brother. There is a defined set of rules here, but I may have thought of a short cut to my answer. The progression per se is worthless by definition mathmatically, so could we calculate an average bet at each count based on the frequencies * length of runs. I think I saw a stat on that as something like 2.3. Do you know? We could just put one player in like that and subtract from a optimal player. Am I on to something here that would inform me of how much of a cost & risk this crazy cover may actually be? I would be glad to describe the "rules" if you want to hang in there with me. I also have been inspecting SBA 5.5 screen shots, but cannot tell if "# hands" will control these sequences. Thanks man!
-
Norm Wattenberger: Re: Cover Betting
You won't get the right standard deviations by that method. CVData (and CVBJ V3) can use a 3D matrix with count vs. previous bet vs. previous last hand status. What it cannot do is look back two hands in determining a bet. So you cannot repeat a bet within a count once and then not repeat it after that. What you would need to do is run two sims - something that is slightly less aggressive and something slightly more aggressive. The correct answers would be somewhere between the two sims; and my guess is that the two sims would provide close results.
The reason I'm asking the questions is, I'm wondering if it might be worth it to add the capability of looking back two hands in the next release. It would not be difficult to add to the sim engines without impacting speed. The hardest part would be compatibility between old and new strategy definitions.
-
El Poet: Re: Cover Betting
> You won't get the right standard deviations
> by that method. CVData (and CVBJ V3) can use
> a 3D matrix with count vs. previous bet vs.
> previous last hand status. What it cannot do
> is look back two hands in determining a bet.
> So you cannot repeat a bet within a count
> once and then not repeat it after that. What
> you would need to do is run two sims -
> something that is slightly less aggressive
> and something slightly more aggressive. The
> correct answers would be somewhere between
> the two sims; and my guess is that the two
> sims would provide close results.
> The reason I'm asking the questions is, I'm
> wondering if it might be worth it to add the
> capability of looking back two hands in the
> next release. It would not be difficult to
> add to the sim engines without impacting
> speed. The hardest part would be
> compatibility between old and new strategy
> definitions.
This seems like a sensible and interesting answer. I'll try that.
The idea of adding the look back is well justified in my mind. There are numerous progression books whose distribution probably rivals legitimate advantage publications, sadly. I even studied the issue seriously. You know Cordoza, Dahl, Thomason. They all use stretch step patterns. The point is I see lots of this type of play and have to believe that some of it is cover like mine. Am I understanding your question about look back correctly? Thank you!
-
Norm Wattenberger: Re: Cover Betting
> Am I understanding
> your question about look back correctly?
> Thank you!
Yes. I deliberately made it difficult to test pure progression schemes as I don't want those users. But, progression acts as cover is certainly a legitimate area of study.
-
El Poet: Re: Cover Betting
> Yes. I deliberately made it difficult to
> test pure progression schemes as I don't
> want those users. But, progression acts as
> cover is certainly a legitimate area of
> study.
Okay I'm clearing 100 GB and watching the mailbox (Just kidding everyone - 50 GB)
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Bookmarks