I was just skimming through the "Grifter Gambit" and was thinking about this strategy that I did not invent but that I do use very occassionally. Let me disclaim that I use it only for comp purposes and very rarely to lower the thermostat on the casino floor. It's sometimes the only strategy that I use in "home-base" casinos and as a further disclaimer, I heard of it in Ian Andersen's Burning the Tables in Las Vegas.
THE GAME: 6D; 75% pen.; DA2; DAS; LS; RS3; allowed to bet two boxes at will; no mid-shoe entry allowed.
THE STRATEGY: Never play with anyone else at the table. Flat-bet one unit in each of two boxes from the top of the shoe. (Obviously, I'm using Wong's Halves.) I'm dividing the RC by only whole half-decks left unseen such that even if only six cards were used in the first hand, I'm dividing the RC before the second hand by 11 halves. I'm truncating the TC in all instances save two. I'm betting insurance when the TC is greater than 3.33. Also, I'm wonging out never to play the shoe again when the TC is less than or equal to -0.75. I'm playing all other BS deviations from -2 to +10 with what I believe is absolute precision. This is what I've been doing to get free rooms and other services.
THE TESTING: I used the "demo version" of CVCData with the above inputs and came up with a positive expectation of about 0.25% or "a half a unit" per 100 rounds. Needless to say, the risk is enormous and my bankroll is nowhere close minimizing said theoretical risk. I say theoretical because if I input the data incorrectly or if the simulation is incorrect, the risk-of-ruin could actually be 100% for any sized bankroll. Furthermore, I'm extremely new to CV software. Therefore...
THE QUESTION: Can someone else verify what I have tested? I'm hoping that someone with more software experience can give me an answer that I can be more confident with because they are more familiar with sim software than I am. Also, if they feel so inclined and if positive expectation is indeed possible, would it be possible with Hi-Lo and/or would Uston APC be more advantageous than Halves?
THE PAYMENT: If it's true, you just learned of an advanced technique. If it's false, we both waisted our time and I apologize.
Sincerely,
Halves
THE GAME: 6D; 75% pen.; DA2; DAS; LS; RS3; allowed to bet two boxes at will; no mid-shoe entry allowed.
THE STRATEGY: Never play with anyone else at the table. Flat-bet one unit in each of two boxes from the top of the shoe. (Obviously, I'm using Wong's Halves.) I'm dividing the RC by only whole half-decks left unseen such that even if only six cards were used in the first hand, I'm dividing the RC before the second hand by 11 halves. I'm truncating the TC in all instances save two. I'm betting insurance when the TC is greater than 3.33. Also, I'm wonging out never to play the shoe again when the TC is less than or equal to -0.75. I'm playing all other BS deviations from -2 to +10 with what I believe is absolute precision. This is what I've been doing to get free rooms and other services.
THE TESTING: I used the "demo version" of CVCData with the above inputs and came up with a positive expectation of about 0.25% or "a half a unit" per 100 rounds. Needless to say, the risk is enormous and my bankroll is nowhere close minimizing said theoretical risk. I say theoretical because if I input the data incorrectly or if the simulation is incorrect, the risk-of-ruin could actually be 100% for any sized bankroll. Furthermore, I'm extremely new to CV software. Therefore...
THE QUESTION: Can someone else verify what I have tested? I'm hoping that someone with more software experience can give me an answer that I can be more confident with because they are more familiar with sim software than I am. Also, if they feel so inclined and if positive expectation is indeed possible, would it be possible with Hi-Lo and/or would Uston APC be more advantageous than Halves?
THE PAYMENT: If it's true, you just learned of an advanced technique. If it's false, we both waisted our time and I apologize.
Sincerely,
Halves
