Which system is better?

nightspirit

Well-Known Member
#61
Automatic Monkey said:
Now 17% improvement might be a little high. I suspect there is a problem with that sim, because he has HO2 outperforming High-Low without an ace sidecount, and that should not be, not with any kind of a spread.
That should not be? Because of what? Insurance correlation is far better from HO2 than from Hi-lo, that might be the reason.
 
#62
nightspirit said:
That should not be? Because of what? Insurance correlation is far better from HO2 than from Hi-lo, that might be the reason.
Not a big enough effect in a multi-deck game though. You can play all night without making an insurance bet in a shoe game. I'm thinking more like 11%, not 17%. In a single deck game you'd get even more than that.
 

nightspirit

Well-Known Member
#63
Automatic Monkey said:
Not a big enough effect in a multi-deck game though. You can play all night without making an insurance bet in a shoe game. I'm thinking more like 11%, not 17%. In a single deck game you'd get even more than that.
Where is your 11% from?

I don't have the link handy right now but Zen is also outperforming Halves in 6 decks according Cacarulo, though the BC isn't that good from Zen. I won't question Cacarulo's sims here.
 
Last edited:

rukus

Well-Known Member
#64
nightspirit said:
I don't have the link handy right now but Zen is also outperforming Halves in 6 decks according Cacarulo.
i would LOVE to see that one when you find the link. some of my "adversaries" here think halves is the be-all, end-all :devil::devil::devil::joker::joker::joker:
 
#65
It Aint So

I was going to write a post saying if Cacarulo(?) says it's so then it probably is regarding HI Opt vs Hi lo.

However, obviously he is insane if he is so disparaging Halves:joker::whip:

I think this would be the interesting study for Zen.
Since it is suppose to be the Politically correct balance between BC and PE.

for Zen
half of play at DD, other half at shoes
vs
another 2 counts of equal level 2?
One with high BC using both playing scenarios
One with high PE using both playing scenarios

This may answer the question.
Is Zen the best count when playing a wide variety of games?
 

nightspirit

Well-Known Member
#66
rukus said:
i would LOVE to see that one when you find the link. some of my "adversaries" here think halves is the be-all, end-all :devil::devil::devil::joker::joker::joker:
Okay, I think found it. It's in Don's Domain over at advantageplayer.com.

(Dead link: http://www.advantageplayer.com/blackjack/donsdomain/secure/forums/dons-main/webbbs.cgi?read=11614)

Those who are not a member there should buy BJA3 then you can access these pages. :cool:
 
#67
nightspirit said:
Where is your 11% from?

I don't have the link handy right now but Zen is also outperforming Halves in 6 decks according Cacarulo, though the BC isn't that good from Zen. I won't question Cacarulo's sims here.
A lot of these results depend on conditions, and the results are often close enough that the conditions can change which one is "better." For my standard game I use a S17, 8D shoe with 1.5 deck pen, and Wonging out. This I choose as my standard because it's inevitably the kind of game an East Coaster ends up playing. So it's possible that both my numbers and Cacarulo's are correct given the different parameters. But I have just never heard of Hi-Opt II without the sidecount outperforming anything; that is usually considered an unwise way to play.

For my kind of game HO2+A is a couple of percent better than Mentor, which is a fraction of a percent better than RPC (which I use), which is a percent better than Halves. Zen and High-Low somewhat underperform these. You will spend several lifetimes at the table waiting to see the difference between the first four.
 

nightspirit

Well-Known Member
#68
blackjack avenger said:
I was going to write a post saying if Cacarulo(?) says it's so then it probably is regarding HI Opt vs Hi lo.

However, obviously he is insane if he is so disparaging Halves:joker::whip:

I think this would be the interesting study for Zen.
Since it is suppose to be the Politically correct balance between BC and PE.

for Zen
half of play at DD, other half at shoes
vs
another 2 counts of equal level 2?
One with high BC using both playing scenarios
One with high PE using both playing scenarios

This may answer the question.
Is Zen the best count when playing a wide variety of games?
You don't know Cacarulo? He is one of the top researchers in the field of blackjack and you can trust his sims.
http://www.advantageplayer.com/blackjack/donsdomain/meetthemasters.html

Clearly without insurance Halves is stronger because of the great betting correlation. Under the conditions of Cacarulo sims Zen is in front but there might be conditions where Halves has a better SCORE. I would say they are on par.

I just wanted to point out that Insurance plays such a big roll especially in multideck games where PE isn't so important, that the loss in betting correlation as in Hi-Opt II is recompensed by a high insurance correlation.
 

nightspirit

Well-Known Member
#69
Automatic Monkey said:
A lot of these results depend on conditions, and the results are often close enough that the conditions can change which one is "better." For my standard game I use a S17, 8D shoe with 1.5 deck pen, and Wonging out. This I choose as my standard because it's inevitably the kind of game an East Coaster ends up playing. So it's possible that both my numbers and Cacarulo's are correct given the different parameters. But I have just never heard of Hi-Opt II without the sidecount outperforming anything; that is usually considered an unwise way to play.

For my kind of game HO2+A is a couple of percent better than Mentor, which is a fraction of a percent better than RPC (which I use), which is a percent better than Halves. Zen and High-Low somewhat underperform these. You will spend several lifetimes at the table waiting to see the difference between the first four.
I agree with everything you said. I was also impressed by the results of Hi-Opt II w/o A. And if you can handle the sidecount you have the most powerful level II system even outperforming some level 3.
But as often said Hilo or KO will do the job as well.
 
#70
tongue in Cheek

nightspirit said:
You don't know Cacarulo? He is one of the top researchers in the field of blackjack and you can trust his sims.
http://www.advantageplayer.com/blackjack/donsdomain/meetthemasters.html

Clearly without insurance Halves is stronger because of the great betting correlation. Under the conditions of Cacarulo sims Zen is in front but there might be conditions where Halves has a better SCORE. I would say they are on par.

I just wanted to point out that Insurance plays such a big roll especially in multideck games where PE isn't so important, that the loss in betting correlation as in Hi-Opt II is recompensed by a high insurance correlation.
I am well aware of him. The post was tongue in cheek.

I believe SCORE and NO with an optimal bet ramp for each count is the best way to fairly compare counts. Maybe a secondary comparison could be a 1-10 spread in multi deck with wonging in and/or wonging out representing real world game play. With DD a play all with a 1 - 6 or 8 spread being realistic. The indices should probably be the ILL 18 fab 4 for multi and the catch 22 fab 4 for DD. Maybe a few more indices for DD. The games would need to be the standard games in the US for Americans.:joker::whip:

Probably the most important variable to consider is SCORE when comparing games and counts.
 

nightspirit

Well-Known Member
#71
blackjack avenger said:
I believe SCORE and NO with an optimal bet ramp for each count is the best way to fairly compare counts. Maybe a secondary comparison could be a 1-10 spread in multi deck with wonging in and/or wonging out representing real world game play. With DD a play all with a 1 - 6 or 8 spread being realistic. The indices should probably be the ILL 18 fab 4 for multi and the catch 22 fab 4 for DD. Maybe a few more indices for DD. The games would need to be the standard games in the US for Americans.:joker::whip:

Probably the most important variable to consider is SCORE when comparing games and counts.
I agree. The comparision has already be done in BJA3, see pg.171 and 172. ;)

Here Halves is ahead in the 6 deck games and Zen in the DD games.
 
#72
Know (NO) that also

nightspirit said:
I agree. The comparision has already be done in BJA3, see pg.171 and 172. ;)

Here Halves is ahead in the 6 deck games and Zen in the DD games.
Also, not surprised by the results.
in general:
BC counts good for shoes
PE counts good for hand held
 
#74
jaredmt said:
I guess that is because the TC changes more rapidly in hand held games?
That's part of it, you see more extreme counts in handheld games. And another reason is you can't get the spreads down in SD or DD that you can in shoe. You can get shuffled up or backed off instantly. In a decent SD game you can actually beat it with a flat bet if you use a good PE count and 18 indices plus insurance. But you can't get away with more than 1-4 spread and even that's pushing it. So you have to make up for it with better plays.
 

bj bob

Well-Known Member
#75
Automatic Monkey said:
But you can't get away with more than 1-4 spread and even that's pushing it.
Quote from Ascuaga's management policy handbook regarding dealing to suspicious simians. :grin::grin:
 
Top