Long term profit is seeing the big picture
- Thread starter tthree
- Start date
tthree,
I simulated the effect of surplus 7 using BS and flat betting for the 6deck shoe game I play. The change in advantage when surplus of 7 = 1/deck is shown below. You can see, 15 and 16 vs dealer's 7 and 8 are not the biggest sufferers. Other hands that suffer more than 4% advantage loss are included.
Sure one needs to consider the frequency of each hand. I wonder if you are aiming at the wrong hands using the information of 7s (or your block of cards). Anyway, something for you to think about.
Change in advantage when surplus of 7 = 1/deck (using BS):
Interesting topic for me.
I simulated the effect of surplus 7 using BS and flat betting for the 6deck shoe game I play. The change in advantage when surplus of 7 = 1/deck is shown below. You can see, 15 and 16 vs dealer's 7 and 8 are not the biggest sufferers. Other hands that suffer more than 4% advantage loss are included.
Sure one needs to consider the frequency of each hand. I wonder if you are aiming at the wrong hands using the information of 7s (or your block of cards). Anyway, something for you to think about.
Change in advantage when surplus of 7 = 1/deck (using BS):
Code:
hand change in advantage(%) hand frequency(%)
15 vs 7 -1.3 0.7
15 vs 8 -1.1 0.5
16 vs 7 -1.1 0.6
16 vs 8 -1.1 0.5
10 vs 4 -4.4 0.3
A3 vs 5 -4.0 0.09
A3 vs 6 -4.1 0.09
A4 vs 4 -4.6 0.08
A5 vs 4 -4.4 0.09
A7 vs 4 -5.0 0.1
22 vs 4 -4.2 0.04
66 vs 3 -5.1 0.04
66 vs 4 -4.9 0.04
77 vs 2 -4.3 0.07
77 vs 4 -5.9 0.07
88 vs 3 -4.3 0.04
88 vs 4 -6.7 0.04
99 vs 3 -4.6 0.04
99 vs 4 -5.6 0.04
Thanks for the sim Psyduck. I believe your frequencies are off. Are you only counting two card totals for your hand in the decisions? For example the hand frequency reference material I have has a frequency of .96 for the top 4 decisions in your list. 77 v 2 or 4 should fall in line with the rest of the splits. After changing the frequencies it looks like that is worth about .1%. Giving that up is like playing a no hole card game or no double after split. Making lots of assumptions that are probably wrong I should expect about twice to three times that. Psyduck since you are having fun with this, the info I have shows a six side count has a smaller increase in PE but a larger increase in profit due to the way the indices affected interact with your ramp in HIOPT II than the 8 side count. The 6 side wins more of the bigger bets while the eight side wins more total bets. They both have sightly smaller gains than the 7 side count.
I truly have no idea how to contribute, in any meaningful way, to this place.
That said, I think the last ten pages are a beautiful thing. A theory, respectful argument. More postulation, many more opposing. For a hobbyist, like myself, this is a wonderful thing.
How's this: stay respectful, and keep it up.
Back to my indices...
That said, I think the last ten pages are a beautiful thing. A theory, respectful argument. More postulation, many more opposing. For a hobbyist, like myself, this is a wonderful thing.
How's this: stay respectful, and keep it up.
Back to my indices...
real world
If employing side counts slows down your play.
If you spend extra time training vs playing.
If you fatigue sooner.
If you make real world errors.
Any one of the above probably erases the gain.
If you play mostly shoes or even pitch with average or poor penetration then there is little value.
If employing side counts slows down your play.
If you spend extra time training vs playing.
If you fatigue sooner.
If you make real world errors.
Any one of the above probably erases the gain.
If you play mostly shoes or even pitch with average or poor penetration then there is little value.
Last edited:
This is the point I have been trying to make for a while in a number of different threads, Avenger. I think many players fall into this catagory of slightly less playing performance and either don't realize it or won't admit it.
In the world of real play, there is so much more going on besides the game that I want to be aware of. I like to keep an eye on the pit people as well as any 'characters' lurking about. I like to have a visual on my planned exit route, any most importantly, I like to count at least one maybe 2 nearby tables as I am playing my table. Especially if my count is hovering around zero or heading negative. The ability to tell my dealer that he is cursed, exit and immediately jump into a game at the next table that the count is going positive is far more valuable to my winrate than higher level counts and side counts.
BTW, when counting a neighboring table, you don't have to be super accurate. Just accurate enough to know that table is heading in a better direction than yours. Sometimes you can observe a game accross the pit by watching in a mirrored or reflective ceiling.
In the world of real play, there is so much more going on besides the game that I want to be aware of. I like to keep an eye on the pit people as well as any 'characters' lurking about. I like to have a visual on my planned exit route, any most importantly, I like to count at least one maybe 2 nearby tables as I am playing my table. Especially if my count is hovering around zero or heading negative. The ability to tell my dealer that he is cursed, exit and immediately jump into a game at the next table that the count is going positive is far more valuable to my winrate than higher level counts and side counts.
BTW, when counting a neighboring table, you don't have to be super accurate. Just accurate enough to know that table is heading in a better direction than yours. Sometimes you can observe a game accross the pit by watching in a mirrored or reflective ceiling. 
And I think fatigue is something not adequately considered by many. Personally, I cannot ST every shoe for hours on end, its just too mentally taxing. Similarly, if I'm playing poker for a few hours, then switch to blackjack, I'm drained and really can't continue to count more. Playing a simple count, I can do that for hours on end, 8+ hours easily.
So its funny, I can count for a few and go into the poker room no problem and play a few more there. I really can't do the reverse.
So its funny, I can count for a few and go into the poker room no problem and play a few more there. I really can't do the reverse.
Inexperienced player here. I have had a weird feeling in my last couple of sessions - that of total confidence in my count and TC conversion. For the first time, I don't find myself straining to keep my mind on the task at hand. This took a lot of practice.
I could still be making mistakes, but I'm having a hard time believing it, because the count of the table in front of me now comes so easily, and seems really certain. But, again: this took a lot of work.
I doubt I could run a solid count together with a side count, and do it perfectly. I believe there are people who can do this, but I have reached the level where I can begin to focus on dealer mispays and mistakes in adding up my hand, and policing the dealer seems more profitable to me than any additional counting complexity.
I would be well-satisfied to keep perfect count (and make perfect index plays) while checking the dealer's every move and keeping up with the flow of conversation. I can only do the counting/playing part right now.
No doubt.
I think the ability to listen to the endless back-and-forth about whether a ploppy wants his double-down card face up or face down, without committing aggravated mayhem using a chain-saw and a large can of gasoline, is another +EV skill. There are times during these face-up or face-down debates when I look desperately around for something to stab myself with: "Excuse me: may I borrow a pen, Sir? Yes, I need a blunt instrument with which to self-perforate - suicide, yes - I intend to bleed all over this felt, at which I have suffered so many endless questions and requests concerning the up or downness of the double-down card."
I could still be making mistakes, but I'm having a hard time believing it, because the count of the table in front of me now comes so easily, and seems really certain. But, again: this took a lot of work.
I doubt I could run a solid count together with a side count, and do it perfectly. I believe there are people who can do this, but I have reached the level where I can begin to focus on dealer mispays and mistakes in adding up my hand, and policing the dealer seems more profitable to me than any additional counting complexity.
I would be well-satisfied to keep perfect count (and make perfect index plays) while checking the dealer's every move and keeping up with the flow of conversation. I can only do the counting/playing part right now.
No doubt.
I think the ability to listen to the endless back-and-forth about whether a ploppy wants his double-down card face up or face down, without committing aggravated mayhem using a chain-saw and a large can of gasoline, is another +EV skill. There are times during these face-up or face-down debates when I look desperately around for something to stab myself with: "Excuse me: may I borrow a pen, Sir? Yes, I need a blunt instrument with which to self-perforate - suicide, yes - I intend to bleed all over this felt, at which I have suffered so many endless questions and requests concerning the up or downness of the double-down card."
Yes! An overtone of respect even when diametrically opposed, a chance to actually learn something. I have to thank Tarzan for interjecting himself and creating a better arena for discussion when it was in danger of getting out of hand. So many bright people here. So many strong opinions. Such a pleasure listening to these discussions. And no fights, riots, police (mod) intervention, or virtual arrests. What is happening to this place? Intelligent and civil discussion rules!
Really interesting stuff Tthree. I think the thread got a bit derailed with the promo debate but I admire you for questioning the system rather than just taking a cookie cutter approach. It's always interesting to me how you can get some wildly different opinions when comparing less effective yet simple systems to more advanced yet more difficult counts.
If you don't me asking what count you are using and what side counts you've added? Do you use different approaches for pitch games vs shoes? Right now I'm using Zen with full indices but would like to add more.
If you don't me asking what count you are using and what side counts you've added? Do you use different approaches for pitch games vs shoes? Right now I'm using Zen with full indices but would like to add more.
I use HIOPT II with an ace side count. The only decent games around me are shoe games. I have been considering attacking some good pitch games in other areas of the country. This has me wondering about adding a side count more geared for playing efficiency. I researched various forms of side counting for HIOPT II and think I found the strongest. It should allow me to have an advantage after the shuffle in the best pitch games. That is like wonging in while actually starting a fresh shuffle. I have a lot of preparation to be ready for this approach but I think it is going to be worth it. I don't think the second side count would be to hard in a pitch game. One side count is easy at this point even with a shoe.
On one of my readiness check sessions I ran into two shoes were my knowledge of the aces made a losing shoe into a nice profit. The first had a high count (lots of tens) but badly depleted aces. The modifications to playing decisions at a high count that didn't warrant a big bet made a lot of doubling and splitting opportunities that I would not have done with an ace reckoned count (My bet size indicates what an ace reckoned count would think the count was). The other had a slightly ten rich deck but a huge number of excess aces. I got a lot of blackjacks at big bets as well as made some doubles and split decisions (both doubling and splitting and not doubling or splitting) that were profitable based on the ace rich deck. An ace reckoned count would have had a smaller bet out and made poorer decisions. Most of the time the ace side count makes smaller gains but these two extremely ace rich and ace poor opportunities became profitable because of the extra information.
On one of my readiness check sessions I ran into two shoes were my knowledge of the aces made a losing shoe into a nice profit. The first had a high count (lots of tens) but badly depleted aces. The modifications to playing decisions at a high count that didn't warrant a big bet made a lot of doubling and splitting opportunities that I would not have done with an ace reckoned count (My bet size indicates what an ace reckoned count would think the count was). The other had a slightly ten rich deck but a huge number of excess aces. I got a lot of blackjacks at big bets as well as made some doubles and split decisions (both doubling and splitting and not doubling or splitting) that were profitable based on the ace rich deck. An ace reckoned count would have had a smaller bet out and made poorer decisions. Most of the time the ace side count makes smaller gains but these two extremely ace rich and ace poor opportunities became profitable because of the extra information.
I won't argue that the extra information won't help, but the question is whether it helps over 400,000,000 rounds, not whether it helped in a meaningless sample.
These two shoes you speak of are purely anecdotal, and, if taken as anything but an illustration of how to begin constructing a strategy, are worse than useless as to how you should actually play. Tiny samples, such as 100 hours of play, can actually lead to the wrong conclusions about what works, or how well it works.
These two shoes you speak of are purely anecdotal, and, if taken as anything but an illustration of how to begin constructing a strategy, are worse than useless as to how you should actually play. Tiny samples, such as 100 hours of play, can actually lead to the wrong conclusions about what works, or how well it works.
Where can I find some information on RA composition dependent insurance, Avenger? I recently brought this up on the other site as something I was trying to look into, a bit more, as Insurance is so very important, especially with large spreads. The response I received from a couple members, including one author who I respect a lot, (but doesn't post on this site) was to not give it much consideration. Basically I have heard a few comments regarding this but haven't read any solid information anywhere and searches have yeilded nothing of value.
Practically, it comes down to: for a really good hand (like a 20) you could take insurance a bit before the "strike point", for a superb hand (a blackjack) take insurance really before the "strike point" (some people always take even money), and for a really really bad hand (maybe a 16 without LS?), you might want to wait a TC before taking insurance to not risk losing both bets (this one hasn't been confirmed by any math, but I'm pretty sure it's correct ). Just my general impressions from our discussion.
). Just my general impressions from our discussion.