Question of EV and Wonging?

[LordDante]

Ok
Here it goes!
I'm backcounting 2 tables at the same time.
In one table there are 5 people sitting, each one is using only one place to bet.
In the other there are 2 people and using one place to bet too.
The count (TC) rises in both tables at the same time, table one +5(3 decks remaining).
Table two +3(same 3 decks remaining).
In Which one do you play(wong in)?



P.S. i played in the +5, i just want to know if i did the right thing(used the 2 spots remaining with max bets).

Thanks in advance

 

[callipygian]

The count (TC) rises in both tables at the same time, table one +5(3 decks remaining).
Table two +3(same 3 decks remaining).
In Which one do you play(wong in)?

I would play in the one with TC +5, but if you're willing to play at TC +3, why didn't you jump into the TC +5 table when it was TC +3?

 

[LordDante]

I would play in the one with TC +5, but if you're willing to play at TC +3, why didn't you jump into the TC +5 table when it was TC +3?

The count in that table was -1 before it rised at +5, in one single deal of 5 ppl
The other one jumped in the same time to +1 to +3.

The question is: is it more profitable to stay at a table playing only two hands or within the other table with more hands per positive count?

Thank you for your feedback callipygian

 

[callipygian]

The count in that table was -1 before it rised at +5, in one single deal of 5 ppl
The other one jumped in the same time to +1 to +3.

With three decks remaining, jumping from -1 to +5 requires 18 high cards. Each person can only receive 2 high cards, unless each person hit TT.

You don't need to go into a huge card by card, just make sure you're counting correctly. It's not common to have jumps of TC +/- 2 with three decks left.

The question is: is it more profitable to stay at a table playing only two hands or within the other table with more hands per positive count?

From a profit standpoint, I'm almost positive that the table with TC +5 is the better bet for EV. However, from a variance standpoint, it's better to play more single hands against the dealer. My intuition says that the variance argument isn't going to hold up against a TC +2 difference, but I don't have math to back that up.

Basically, if your bankroll is small, you're more likely to choose the table that will allow you to make more, smaller bets. Playing two hands at TC +5 (probably with max bets or at least 0.75*max) incurs high variance for small bankrolls. But it is more profitable in the long run.

 

[LordDante]

With three decks remaining, jumping from -1 to +5 requires 18 high cards. Each person can only receive 2 high cards, unless each person hit TT.

You don't need to go into a huge card by card, just make sure you're counting correctly. It's not common to have jumps of TC +/- 2 with three decks left.



From a profit standpoint, I'm almost positive that the table with TC +5 is the better bet for EV. However, from a variance standpoint, it's better to play more single hands against the dealer. My intuition says that the variance argument isn't going to hold up against a TC +2 difference, but I don't have math to back that up.

Basically, if your bankroll is small, you're more likely to choose the table that will allow you to make more, smaller bets. Playing two hands at TC +5 (probably with max bets or at least 0.75*max) incurs high variance for small bankrolls. But it is more profitable in the long run.

Yes is something odd, never seen that before, small pairs (splits) and doubles that get a small card.
thank you callipygian, it seems i made the right decision.

 

[blackjack avenger]

Second Worst Post Ever!

Ok
Here it goes!
I'm backcounting 2 tables at the same time.
In one table there are 5 people sitting, each one is using only one place to bet.
In the other there are 2 people and using one place to bet too.
The count (TC) rises in both tables at the same time, table one +5(3 decks remaining).
Table two +3(same 3 decks remaining).
In Which one do you play(wong in)?



P.S. i played in the +5, i just want to know if i did the right thing(used the 2 spots remaining with max bets).

Thanks in advance

My Post, second worst ever!


A player uses on average 2.7 cards per round, dealer also?
52 cards in a deck derrrrr (even I know that):joker::whip:

so assuming 1.5 decks cut.

at the table with 5 players + dealer + new player = 7 players times 2.7 cards per round = 18.9 cards per round, we will round this up to 19. So with 1.5 decks remaining to be played = 78 cards, at 19 cards per round there were 4.10 rounds remaining and we will round up to 5 rounds because the deal does continue beyond the cut card.

So at the table with 5 players our hero would have 5 rounds at TC5


now the other choice
1.5 decks remaining to be dealt
2 other players
4 players total = 11 cards per round = 8 rounds to go at tc3

so we have 5 rounds at tc5 with 5 other players
or
8 rounds at tc3 with 2 other players

I think not enough information to answer the question completely.
Need the exact cut
the advantage at those TC's

I will guess that the correct answer is the tc5 because it is probably twice the advantage of tc3. Now the possible exception would be if you could play 2 hands at the tc3 table but not the tc5 table. Then I like the tc3 table.

 

[callipygian]

Yes is something odd, never seen that before, small pairs (splits) and doubles that get a small card.

D'oh!

You realize I got the "high" and "low" mixed up, right?

Either way, yes, it's hard for TC to change that much in one hand - you need 18 low cards to come out.

it seems i made the right decision.

There are some great posts I read that dealt (indirectly) with this issue.

Do a search on "covariance" and I'm sure it will come up. Basically, the debate is whether it is better to play two hands (realizing that the covariance is high if dealer pulls a blackjack or busts) or whether it is better to play a single hand multiple times (and play fewer of the total cards given that other players will take a larger proportion of them).

 

[LordDante]

My Post, second worst ever!


A player uses on average 2.7 cards per round, dealer also?
52 cards in a deck derrrrr (even I know that):joker::whip:

so assuming 1.5 decks cut.

at the table with 5 players + dealer + new player = 7 players times 2.7 cards per round = 18.9 cards per round, we will round this up to 19. So with 1.5 decks remaining to be played = 78 cards, at 19 cards per round there were 4.10 rounds remaining and we will round up to 5 rounds because the deal does continue beyond the cut card.

So at the table with 5 players our hero would have 5 rounds at TC5


now the other choice
1.5 decks remaining to be dealt
2 other players
4 players total = 11 cards per round = 8 rounds to go at tc3

so we have 5 rounds at tc5 with 5 other players
or
8 rounds at tc3 with 2 other players

I think not enough information to answer the question completely.
Need the exact cut
the advantage at those TC's

I will guess that the correct answer is the tc5 because it is probably twice the advantage of tc3. Now the possible exception would be if you could play 2 hands at the tc3 table but not the tc5 table. Then I like the tc3 table.

Excellent post man.
Yes a 75% of penetration so 1.5 deck in a 6 deck game
I use the Zen count, I don't know exactly my true advantage at those TCs.
Yes i use 2 hands in my max bet(+5) of 6 units each and one hand in my plus 3. In the TC5 i used a 8 unit bet in each hand
With 2 more players(in the table of +3) in the hand i would had opened 2 hands with 75% of my 4 unit bet in each hand.(increasing my ROR but reducing variance)
Yes the problem stayed in my mind since yesterday because i didnt know exactly which table gave me more +EV in the total of rounds played.
I know both gave me advantage.

Thank you both for your answers(yes i realized you got mixed but thats :cool2.(i will search the topic of covariance)