#of players impact on hourly EV

matt21

Well-Known Member
#1
I have been making calculations to determine my EV per hour.

In summary the input variables into my hourly EV are:

Deck penetration
Casino advantage (taking into account casino rules, BS, index plays)
# of boxes played at table
# of shoes dealt per hour
Bet variation/spread depending on TC
Frequency of TC occurrence

In my model I have noticed that the # of boxes played at the table has a SIGNIFICANT impact on my hourly EV (and hourly SD) as it affects the number of hands that I play per hour.

To compare the extremes:
If I am playing on my own and 4 shoes of 6D (75% pen) are dealt then i would expect to play around 172 hands.
(I have calculated this by looking at the number of cards in 6D (312), the number of cards per avg black jack hand (2.7), then pen level (as this affects the number of cards dealt).)

If 5 other boxes are played by other players at my table and 4 shoes of 6D (75% pen) are dealt then i would expect to only play around 48 hands.

In my particular model this decreases the EV/hour from 2.13 units to 0.60 units.

Would this also mean that 1-hour playing heads is equivalent to 4 hours of playing at a busy table?

Am I on the right track with my thinking here?

Look forward to any comments that people may have :grin:
 

rukus

Well-Known Member
#2
not sure how you make the leap from #cards and pen to the rate at which cards are actually dealt, BUT your train of thought is absolutely correct. crowded tables = waste of time.

the more people at a table, the slower the deal of any given round (since more boxes need to make decisions and then the dealer must pay/collect each of those boxes). if you play heads up, you control the split second decisions and there is only one box or two to be settled. you can triple or probably almost quadruple the number of rounds per hour by playing heads up vs playing at a full table (depending on the dealer of course). that is why we like to play heads up!
 

shadroch

Well-Known Member
#3
The more people,the more hands played.
The more hands played,the more shuffles.
The more shuffles,the more hands played off the top
of the deck,where the house has an advantage.
 

LordDante

Active Member
#4
shadroch said:
The more people,the more hands played.The more hands played,the more shuffles.
The more shuffles,the more hands played off the top
of the deck,where the house has an advantage.
? don't get it
 

shadroch

Well-Known Member
#5
If I said "more hands per round,"would that help?


Perhaps this selection from Blackjack Bluebook 2 will help you.

"Suppose you were playing double deck and the dealer consistantly placed the plastic cut forty cards from the bottom. At a full table you will usually be dealt only THREE rounds before the shuffle. One third of your bets are made on a fresh deck( where you are always at a disadvantage).......
But in a three handed game,you would get in six or seven hands between shuffles."
 

LordDante

Active Member
#6
shadroch said:
If I said "more hands per round,"would that help?


Perhaps this selection from Blackjack Bluebook 2 will help you.

"Suppose you were playing double deck and the dealer consistantly placed the plastic cut forty cards from the bottom. At a full table you will usually be dealt only THREE rounds before the shuffle. One third of your bets are made on a fresh deck( where you are always at a disadvantage).......
But in a three handed game,you would get in six or seven hands between shuffles."
Precise.
 

blackchipjim

Well-Known Member
#8
playable games

I would pose a another question to the original question then taking into the account no of players. Synder"s profit index as a ref. says playing heads up is always more profitable than with any other players. Is this true or false or do I have a misconception of the index? blackchipjim
 

jack.jackson

Well-Known Member
#9
I aslo wanted to point out, that the # of players, at the table, arent as critical to your winrate, in multipledeckgames, like they are in Single and Double Deck games. Dont ask me why:confused: I think alot depend's whether you play 2 hands or not.
 
Last edited:

matt21

Well-Known Member
#10
here's my thoughts on the posts from Jack,Jackson and blackchipjim

i have not read Snyder's book - ok, let's move that onto my to-do list!!

1. I think the simplest view is to say that , as AP's, we can only expect to make a profit (with some certainty) in the long run. The long run is measured not by how many hours we play, but rather by how many hands we play. If we are playing heads-up then we are playing a lot more hands.

2. Another (more detailed) explanation could be as follows:

EV/hour =
EV @ TC = -1 or below x % of time that TC is -1 or below x $bet @ TC=-ve
plus
EV @ TC = 0 x % of time that TC is zero x $bet @ TC=0
plus
EV @ TC = +1 x % of time that TC is +1 x $bet @ TC=+1

etc etc

this results in EV for one hand - to calculate the HOURLY EV we need to multiply by the number of hands played in the hour. Thus the more hands we play, the higher the hourly EV. This of course presumes that we have +ve EV to begin with by betting more at positive counts.

If there are lots of players at the table, then YOU will be playing less hands per hour.

3. Another way of looking at it:
Let's say that TC hits +4 and there is only YOU at the table. You might be able to play 3 or 4 hands whilst TC hovers at this level. If there are six other players at your table then you will only get to play one hand at TC=+4 and thus are not getting the high EV exposure. You would of course need to set your bet variation such that you can afford to play through negative counts.

Do these explanations make sense? Apologies if there are some overlaps or if i am basically full of it.

Now i dont see any reason why the above logic should not apply equally in SD, DD and multiple deck situations. Although the impact of heads-up vs multi-player may vary between them.

Look forward to more discussion on this :)
 

shadroch

Well-Known Member
#11
In SD,you will be playing at the disadvantage of a new shoe many times more than the person playing multiple decks.You are always at a disadvantage the first hand.The more decks,the fewer shuffles.
 
#12
Number of Players at the Table

My issue with too many players is distraction. Recently I watched a player split sevens against the dealer's ten, a while later another split 4's against a ten. Harder for me to pay attention to the cards when this happens.

Other than that, having other players at the table works through negative counts faster but also burns up positive counts faster.

As a personal preference I choose heads up, and very seldom play with more than two other players.
 
Top