Another reason why pen matters

[stophon]

It's more than just seeing more extreme counts i think. Using the effect of card removal numbers given on Wizard of Odd's sight, I computed the follow changes in player advantage for each card played:

Low card: 0.54%
Mid card: 0.027%
High Card: -0.51%

So lets say at first your playing a break even 1 deck game. Half way into the game you've seen the exact number of cards your supposed to have seen, being 10 high cards, 10 low cards, and 6 mid cards. If you compute the numbers, your now playing a game with +0.50% adv.

I have no idea why this phenomena occurs. I just know the numbers back it. Perhaps because the dealer cannot as easily draw those 5 card 21's in a single deck game?

Note: I didn't round anything off of WOZ site, just plugged into excel and went. The only error I can think of is if drawing that second 5 has a different EOR than the first one.

 

[shadroch]

The pen is mightier than the sword!

 

[Automatic Monkey]

It's more than just seeing more extreme counts i think. Using the effect of card removal numbers given on Wizard of Odd's sight, I computed the follow changes in player advantage for each card played:

Low card: 0.54%
Mid card: 0.027%
High Card: -0.51%

So lets say at first your playing a break even 1 deck game. Half way into the game you've seen the exact number of cards your supposed to have seen, being 10 high cards, 10 low cards, and 6 mid cards. If you compute the numbers, your now playing a game with +0.50% adv.

I have no idea why this phenomena occurs. I just know the numbers back it. Perhaps because the dealer cannot as easily draw those 5 card 21's in a single deck game?

Note: I didn't round anything off of WOZ site, just plugged into excel and went. The only error I can think of is if drawing that second 5 has a different EOR than the first one.

What you are describing is the Floating Advantage. We see the same thing in deeply-dealt shoe games, and when you take a shoe game with decent rules down to the last deck there is also a slight player advantage in a neutral count.

 

[stophon]

o_0

I read that article too...
I should have recognized that.

 

[stophon]

Why does the HE edge increase when more decks are put into play?

 

[KOLAN]

Why does the HE edge increase when more decks are put into play?

becose basik strategy not working:laugh:

 

[stophon]

shouldn't that just mean higher risk? the overall chance of drawing the same cards is the same there's just a higher chance of the deck getting more out of proportion right

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Why does the HE edge increase when more decks are put into play?

Because of the lower probability of getting an ace when you have a 10 and a 10 when you have an ace.

Single deck: first card is an ten, you have a 4/51 (0.07843) chance of the second one being an ace.

Eight deck: first card is a ten, you have a 32/415 (0.07711) chance of the second one being an ace.

It doesn't look like much but it's significant. There are a few other effects mixed in, and even one where fewer decks takes away from the player a little bit (fewer splits) but the Floating Advantage is real.

 

[creeping panther]

This is a prime

example as to why we need a pay or "GC" section on this board.

This entire thread makes me cringe.

And you guys wonder why your games get worse, more decks, etc..etc..etc.:vomit:

I can just see a casino troll printing this off and running to the gaming Manager.:bomb::bomb:

This entire thread needs to be busted.

And just look at the title of the thread:whip:

CP

 

[rukus]

example as to why we need a pay or "GC" section on this board.

This entire thread makes me cringe.

And you guys wonder why your games get worse, more decks, etc..etc..etc.:vomit:

I can just see a casino troll printing this off and running to the gaming Manager.:bomb::bomb:

This entire thread needs to be busted.

And just look at the title of the thread:whip:

CP

this was published years ago in BJA by don s.... we have also published with equally brazen thread titles (many times) why increased pen is infinitely better for a casino >> less time spent shuffling = more time for ploppies (>99% of playing world) to regurgitate money into casino coffers.

 

[creeping panther]

Rukus

this was published years ago in BJA by don s.... we have also published with equally brazen thread titles (many times) why increased pen is infinitely better for a casino >> less time spent shuffling = more time for ploppies (>99% of playing world) to regurgitate money into casino coffers.

This is a very fine thread but not on a public site.

Why condense info from Don's book into a few posts for a lazy casino troll to then take it and run. At least let them read thru Don's expansive book to gather the info for themselves.

We are our own worst enemy, in many instances.

CP

 

[RedChipper]

Who cares if they read it here or in the book. The bad games come and stay because players are willing to play them. So spread the word that pen matters and maybe some of the ploppies will quit playing shitty games. Force the casinos to offer some decent rules.

 

[creeping panther]

Red Chipper

Who cares if they read it here or in the book. The bad games come and stay because players are willing to play them. So spread the word that pen matters and maybe some of the ploppies will quit playing shitty games. Force the casinos to offer some decent rules.

I see it happening now. But you will not force anything on the casinos. Why worry about ploppys??,,,I love to see them lose, better for the AP's.

But let us just be smart in what we post on a public forum.

If they are beginning to offer better games, like I think they are, why then rub their noses in it?

"Spread the word"....come on.

Stop spilling our guts.

CP

 

[Blue Efficacy]

Not saying that we should spill our guts on the boards. Certainly there are many things that should be kept quiet about.

First, if we had a pay section, you know casino people would pay. They certainly do on the Green Chip boards. I really don't see the purpose of this on Wong's site, other than to generate revenue for himself of course.

Second, any casino goon that cares enough to look at AP message boards certainly is already well aware that good pen is tops for the advantage player. I am sure almost every casino knows this, and those that offer good pen do so after weighing the risks of being beaten by AP vs the greatly increased profits that good pen brings them from increased hands per hour and reduced amount of shuffles.

Shuffles are a great "stopping point" for civilians to take their winnings and run if they happen to be ahead a significant amount. Casinos want to limit those opportunities as much as they can, I imagine.

If good pen wasn't profitable, I doubt any casinos would offer shoe games with less than two decks cut off. Casinos that cut off a deck or less do so with a purpose, not out of naivete. I see no threat in stating the obvious.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Not saying that we should spill our guts on the boards. Certainly there are many things that should be kept quiet about.

First, if we had a pay section, you know casino people would pay. They certainly do on the Green Chip boards. I really don't see the purpose of this on Wong's site, other than to generate revenue for himself of course.

Second, any casino goon that cares enough to look at AP message boards certainly is already well aware that good pen is tops for the advantage player. I am sure almost every casino knows this, and those that offer good pen do so after weighing the risks of being beaten by AP vs the greatly increased profits that good pen brings them from increased hands per hour and reduced amount of shuffles.

Shuffles are a great "stopping point" for civilians to take their winnings and run if they happen to be ahead a significant amount. Casinos want to limit those opportunities as much as they can, I imagine.

If good pen wasn't profitable, I doubt any casinos would offer shoe games with less than two decks cut off. Casinos that cut off a deck or less do so with a purpose, not out of naivete. I see no threat in stating the obvious.

I agree. Casinos already know all about pen. There are trade articles written about it. Pretty much anything having to do with counting blackjack is no secret.

The general rule is that if it's published in a readily-available book (e.g. Professional Blackjack, Blackjack Attack) it's open for public discussion.

 

[creeping panther]

Blue

Not saying that we should spill our guts on the boards. Certainly there are many things that should be kept quiet about.

First, if we had a pay section, you know casino people would pay. They certainly do on the Green Chip boards. I really don't see the purpose of this on Wong's site, other than to generate revenue for himself of course.

Second, any casino goon that cares enough to look at AP message boards certainly is already well aware that good pen is tops for the advantage player. I am sure almost every casino knows this, and those that offer good pen do so after weighing the risks of being beaten by AP vs the greatly increased profits that good pen brings them from increased hands per hour and reduced amount of shuffles.

Shuffles are a great "stopping point" for civilians to take their winnings and run if they happen to be ahead a significant amount. Casinos want to limit those opportunities as much as they can, I imagine.

If good pen wasn't profitable, I doubt any casinos would offer shoe games with less than two decks cut off. Casinos that cut off a deck or less do so with a purpose, not out of naivete. I see no threat in stating the obvious.

That certainly is true for Wongs site, but I doubt greatly it is true for Don's site or Snyders. It all depends on the site manager.

CP

 

[pieinthesky]

Pen matters . . .

but here in the not-so-great northeast, it's generally lousy. Anyone have any playing strategies for overcoming bad pen?

 

[stophon]

Well if there was an elite section i highly doubt i would have had access to it so i doubt it would make much of a difference as far as this thread.

Don S defines basic strategy as the correct way to play the first hand of a shoe and gives the HE based on that. So does this mean that the overall HE for playing a shoe is actually not as high as they think it is?

So for example in a one deck game with a starting house edge of .4%
The average cards per hand is 2.4 right?
So lets assume 4-5 players at the table, using on average 13 cards each round.

First round PA: -.4
Second round PA: -.15
Third round PA: +.10
Fourth round (dealt to end of shoe): + .35

So if they deal out 2 rounds the player is playing at .275% disadvantage, 3 rounds .15%.

Edit: Is this wrong? I remember Don saying something about the floating advantage being made up for by loss in advantage at the extreme counts. WOZ's numbers don't back this though.

I bet at the barona game or where ever that offers a game with a .12 HE you could break even pretty easily...

If this is too much info just say and I'll delete. I agree with the posters earlier tho; I'm just manipulating easy to find numbers in an excel sheet and reproducing known facts.

 

[moo321]

this was published years ago in BJA by don s.... we have also published with equally brazen thread titles (many times) why increased pen is infinitely better for a casino >> less time spent shuffling = more time for ploppies (>99% of playing world) to regurgitate money into casino coffers.

And 99% is generous.

 

[moo321]

I agree. Casinos already know all about pen. There are trade articles written about it. Pretty much anything having to do with counting blackjack is no secret.

The general rule is that if it's published in a readily-available book (e.g. Professional Blackjack, Blackjack Attack) it's open for public discussion.

Is there a site that has "trade articles" or info from the dark side? I'd be very curious to read it.