Would anyone like to run a sim?

B

bjcount

Well-Known Member
#21
#21
1357111317 said:
Are you sure that this latest sim was a 1-12 with WO at -2? Because I made a spreasheet with all the TC frequencies and advantages at each frequency for 83% pen from an earlier sim on this thread. I plugged in your bet spread ( except I set a wongout at -1) and got a EV of 38.7$/100 hands, not the 55$/100 hands that you got. Any ideas why this is?
Click to expand...
Which indices are you using? To use the TC frequencies you must be comparing PD's sims (cvcx) with the ones I posted, but there is no TC info on mine. PD was probably using canned sims where the ones I provided were run in CVData with RA indices. I'll run a sim from this lap top to confirm the numbers, give it a few minutes and I'll post it. Just my thoughts - let me know.

BJC
 
Last edited:
1

1357111317

Well-Known Member
#22
#22
bjcount said:
Which sim are you refering to that was $55/100? Which indices are you using? To use the TC frequencies you must be comparing PD's sims (cvcx) with the ones I posted. PD was probably using canned sims where the ones I provided were run in CVData with RA indices. Just my thoughts - let me know.

BJC
Click to expand...
Yeah I was using the frequencies in his 83% pen. Do you think you can run one sim that is exactly the same as one of PD's to see what you get? 75% pen 2 hands of a 1-15 spread 1000 unit bank with the same rules using I18 and Fab 4. I just want to make sure they are pretty close.
 
B

bjcount

Well-Known Member
#23
#23
1357111317 said:
Yeah I was using the frequencies in his 83% pen. Do you think you can run one sim that is exactly the same as one of PD's to see what you get? 75% pen 2 hands of a 1-15 spread 1000 unit bank with the same rules using I18 and Fab 4. I just want to make sure they are pretty close.
Click to expand...
I added some corrections to my prior post. I wouldn't know which sim he used, but if it is a canned sim then the indices I use vs the canned sim are very different.

Give me the rules again and I will run a second sim on this laptop using my ZEN RA indices with an OPT 1-15 spread.

BJC

Note: one of the many benefits of owning CVData/cvcx is you got make changes and see the results which can improve your play.
and I don't make any money pushing their products....PLUG-PLUG Qfit:)
 
1

1357111317

Well-Known Member
#24
#24
bjcount said:
I added some corrections to my prior post. I wouldn't know which sim he used, but if it is a canned sim then the indices I use vs the canned sim are very different.

Give me the rules again and I will run a second sim on this laptop using my ZEN RA indices with an OPT 1-15 spread.

BJC

Note: one of the many benefits of owning CVData/cvcx is you got make changes and see the results which can improve your play.
and I don't make any money pushing their products....PLUG-PLUG Qfit:)
Click to expand...
Yeah i know, one of these days ill get around to buying the sims.

Here are the rules though
H17 ES v X 75% pen two 1-15 spreads DAS DOA Resplit up to 4 hand Resplit aces once, no hits on aces. Zen with I18 fab 4. 1200 unit bank. Uhh I think thats about it. If its not too tough could you run one identical to this but wongout at -4 and only .5 units in neg counts as well?
 
B

bjcount

Well-Known Member
#25
#25
1357111317 said:
Yeah i know, one of these days ill get around to buying the sims.

Here are the rules though
H17 ES v X 75% pen two 1-15 spreads DAS DOA Resplit up to 4 hand Resplit aces once, no hits on aces. Zen with I18 fab 4. 1200 unit bank. Uhh I think thats about it. If its not too tough could you run one identical to this but wongout at -4 and only .5 units in neg counts as well?
Click to expand...
Okay - too many changes to the parameters for me primeman.
Attached are 4 sims from CVCX generated with my ZEN RA indices and your rules. These establish optimum betting spreads based on the playing strategy. Hope this helps you out (notice the BR changes in the 2 sets). The CVData sim is more accurate as it is generating data based on your playing strategy combined with your betting spread.

BJC
 

Attachments

B

bjcount

Well-Known Member
#27
#27
1357111317 said:
Hey thanks bjcount but are any of those ES vs X?
Click to expand...
All are Early Surrender vs Ten.

You can not tell by looking at the sim but I doubled checked the parameters before I answered this post.

BJC
 
B

bjcount

Well-Known Member
#29
#29
1357111317 said:
I just have a question, why is the HA at a count of 0 .52% ish? Shouldnt it be around .3?
Click to expand...
Your basing the HA on the W/L percentage, IMO I wouldn't consider 0 as the HA in cvcx. Note:these were short 50 million hand sims.
Here is Qfit's definition of the win/loss column:
Win/Loss - The expected percentage advantage at each count. Also known as IBA (Initial Bet Advantage) or EV (Expected Value.)

Or, I checked/unchecked a rule you weren't looking for.

BJC
 
nightspirit

nightspirit

Well-Known Member
#31
#31
1357111317 said:
Since I have not invested in Casino Verite yet ( I will eventually), I was just wondering if someone run like to run a sim with the following parameters

Zen balanched with I18/Fab 3
6D
H17
75% pen
DAS Resplit everything DOA
ES v X
2 hands of a 1-15 spread.

I think thats about it. Thanks for your help.
Click to expand...
Primes here are my results. I used CVCX to calculate the optimal bet ramps for CVData and also included my own generated indices (more than 4 for ES vs. 10).
 
Last edited:
1

1357111317

Well-Known Member
#32
#32
Thanks nightspirit. One thing though, what were the exact rules that you used though? Because at a count of 0 the advantage is -.17 which is under the -.3%ish that it should be for an ES v X.
 
nightspirit

nightspirit

Well-Known Member
#33
#33
np, I used the rules you from your first post. What do you mean with -0.3%? Do you mean the edge for the basic strategy player? But then you must keep in mind when you are counting and using indices then the edge at a tc of 0 changes.

edit: of course this gain is not limited to the tc of 0 ;)
 
Last edited:
1

1357111317

Well-Known Member
#34
#34
You didn't do multiple hits on aces did you? And I am not sure but I think it should have only been split aces once, would that make much more than a couple hundreadths of a percent difference?

Also do you have a copy of the indices used? I wouldn't mind getting my hands on a copy of them.
 
nightspirit

nightspirit

Well-Known Member
#35
#35
1357111317 said:
You didn't do multiple hits on aces did you? And I am not sure but I think it should have only been split aces once, would that make much more than a couple hundreadths of a percent difference?

Also do you have a copy of the indices used? I wouldn't mind getting my hands on a copy of them.
Click to expand...
No multiple hits on split aces but RSA like you mentioned somewhere in the thread. Yes would make a big difference, RSA is a valuable rule for the counter. I can run a sim with SPA1 then we see the difference.

The indices I used for the sims are attached.
 

Attachments

1

1357111317

Well-Known Member
#36
#36
Would it really make that much of a difference? The odds of getting 3 aces are roughly 24/312*(23/311)*(22/310+22/309) or 0.08% or once in 1236 hands.

Also are those indices for 1D estimation? And are the indices the exact same for 6D?
 
Last edited:
nightspirit

nightspirit

Well-Known Member
#37
#37
1357111317 said:
Would it really make that much of a difference? The odds of getting 3 aces are roughly 24/312*(23/311)*(22/310+22/309) or 0.08% or once in 1236 hands.

Also are those indices for 1D estimation? And are the indices the exact same for 6D?
Click to expand...
I get in increase in c-SCORE of 17% if RSA is allowed for your game. I ran the sims again because incidentally I used the wrong strategy for pairs. The pictures from left to right: CVCX SPA1, CVData summary SPA1, CVCX RSA, CVData summary RSA.

(Dead link: http://img16.imageshack.us/gal.php?g=h17es10spa1cvcx.jpg)

The indices are EV-maximized, 4D, 75% with half deck resolution. There is probably a small difference for 6D but I wanted to have a compromise between DD and 6D.
 
nightspirit

nightspirit

Well-Known Member
#39
#39
1357111317 said:
Thanks again nightspirit. A couple more questions though, How many rounds were those sims? Also how come your indices arn't quite the same as the indices on arnold snyders site, http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/Zen_Count_Indices.htm.
Click to expand...
I ran 2 Billion rounds with CVCX and 1 Billion with CVData (it's displayed under 'Status' in the summary table).
There are a lot of factors who can be the reason for different indices, flooring was used for my indices I believe Snyder used rounding. I don't know for how many decks his indices where generated and if half deck or full deck accuracy was used for the deck estimation. I also don't know which generator he used to get the indices, maybe John Imming's UBE or he used his algebraic method. :confused:
 
1

1357111317

Well-Known Member
#40
#40
Alright so if I am not mistaken then your system calculated the TC dividing the running count by the nearest half deck (ie 4.5,2,3.5 etc). Then if you get a fraction you floor it ( ie 2.4=2, -4.2= -5, 4.7 = 4)? Then once the TC is at the indice number or above/below it then you use the indice?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top