Result Analysis

My PC with QFIT's software is currently out of commission, so I am hoping that someone will be so kind as to perform a standard deviation/percentile analysis on the following trip result:

-190 units, 20 hours played,
8 deck, S17 DAS LS, 6.5/8 pen, 5 players average,
Zen Ill 18 + Fab 4 RA indices, spread 1-12, wonging out at -4

And for anyone curious, yes it does sting to give back almost half of last year's win in one trip!

EDIT: Can a mod please move this to the "Card Counting" section, where it would be more appropriate.

I can't run the sim - BUT wonging out @ -4 was way too late.

I can't run the sim' but it sounds like you played about 1,200 hands.

Losing 9.5 units per hour hurts like hell.

But this is a rather small sample.

I know that it feels big when you are hemorrhaging cash.

We have all been there.

I used wonging at -4 Zen because -2 is common with Hi-Lo, and Zen count values are roughly double those of Hi-Lo: +8 is a common max bet point with Zen, whereas +4 or +5 is typical with Hi-Lo. But this is hardly a "scientific" approach, I agree - so you are likely correct as a long time Zen practitioner! What would you suggest with a 1-12 spread?

Thanks for the moral support. I have been relatively lucky in the past with small losses/big wins, so now I suppose the "scales of justice" are descending with a vengeance to lower me down to a more realistic EV.

CORRECTION to the following significant error:

]"I used wonging at -4 Zen because -2 is common with Hi-Lo, and Zen count values are roughly double those of Hi-Lo."


To find the equivalent True Count going from Zen to Hi-Lo multiply the T.C. by .67

To find the equivalent True Count going from Hi-Lo to Zen multiply the T.C. by 1.5

Thus, −4 in Zen is the equivalent of −3 in Hi-Lo

These are imprecise but work as a quick and handy "rule of thumb."

Thanks for that. -3 Zen would therefore appear to be a superior negative wonging point to -4, if one wants to achieve a similar reduction in the necessary bet spread as yielded by -2 in Hi-Lo. I will use that in the future.

Hi Pelerus, I noticed nobody responded with any numbers for you. I fired up my CVD and entered your parameters. I assumed that you were playing about 3 1/2 shoes per hour, which gives you around 70 rounds per hour if there are 4 other players at the table with you. Though that seems to reduce to 60 hands for you because you wong out at -4. I assumed a $10 unit.

Win rate per hour = $9.00 (0.9 units)
SD per hour = $217.40 (21.74 units)

Thus for 20 hours, EV is 20x$9.00= $180.00 (18.0 units)
And SD is sqrt(20)x$217.4 = $972 (97.2 units)

68% confidence interval (1 std dev) = 180+/- $972 = -$792/+$1152
95% confidence interval (1.96 std dev) = 180 +/- (1.96*$972) = -$1726/+2086

Probability of break-even or profit after 20 hours = 57.3%
Probability of losing 190 or more units ($1,900 or more) = 1.6%

So your result seems to fall in between 2 and 3 standard deviations. A very 'unlucky' result.

Obviously ignore my analysis if you think that my calculated 0.9 unit win rate is way off.

Thanks matt. Less than 1 unit per hour seems a bit on the low end, but maybe that is correct. In any case, your analysis delivers the message that I was over 2 standard deviations below expectation, which I what I had wanted to confirm.