Analyze this

P

Persnickety1

Member
I have a bankroll of $5000. My bet spread is $3-$50. I bet table minimum ($3) when true count is less than 2, $20 when TC=2, 2X$30 when TC=3, 2X$40 when TC=4, 2X$50 when TC equals or is greater than 5.

I currently don't worry about camouflage. I play a 6 deck, H17, DAS, peek, no surrender but excellent penetration game, where the house has a 0.543 edge according to http://www.qfit.com/blackjack-odds-calculator.htm.

1. What is my risk of ruin, assuming I'm making no errors using High-Low with Illustrious 18? I realize I'm overbetting, but that's all the bankroll I can afford right now. How bad is it?

2. Is my unit $10 because that's my increment per true count, or is my unit $3 because most bets happen when true count is below 2?
 
X

Xenophon

Well-Known Member
Your spread is actually 3-100, if you're betting 3 to two hands of 50. I simmed this, as close as I can get to your description, with CVCX, and come up with an ROR of 6.5%, believe it or not. Your unit is usually considered the minimum bet you place, so it's 3$, for a 1-33 spread. I have a screen snapshot of the simulation if you'd like. I tried up-loading it here but the file's too large.

Does anyone else come up with a similar ROR?
 
Automatic Monkey

Automatic Monkey

Banned
Persnickety1 said:
I have a bankroll of $5000. My bet spread is $3-$50. I bet table minimum ($3) when true count is less than 2, $20 when TC=2, 2X$30 when TC=3, 2X$40 when TC=4, 2X$50 when TC equals or is greater than 5.

I currently don't worry about camouflage. I play a 6 deck, H17, DAS, peek, no surrender but excellent penetration game, where the house has a 0.543 edge according to http://www.qfit.com/blackjack-odds-calculator.htm.

1. What is my risk of ruin, assuming I'm making no errors using High-Low with Illustrious 18? I realize I'm overbetting, but that's all the bankroll I can afford right now. How bad is it?

2. Is my unit $10 because that's my increment per true count, or is my unit $3 because most bets happen when true count is below 2?
Click to expand...

1. Your absolute risk of ruin is 11.38%, which actually isn't bad at all. By absolute risk of ruin, I mean that if 10,000 people played this same game the same way, 1138 of them would lose all their money and die and 8862 of them would take all of the casino's money and die. Your win rate is a little over $15 per 100 hands, assuming penetration down to 1 deck. Also not bad for a guy with $5K bankroll. You did a good job of designing a game plan for yourself.

2. Your unit is whatever you define it as. It's also a slang term for your dick. Most people define their unit as their minimum bet for simplicity. However if you are backcounting or Wonging out of bad counts, your minimum bet is zero .
 
zengrifter

zengrifter

Banned
Automatic Monkey said:
1. Your absolute risk of ruin is 11.38%, which actually isn't bad at all.
Click to expand...
If he resolves to halve his max bet and strictly wong IF his BR drops below $2500 then his effective RoR is less than 2%. zg
 
Last edited:
R

Renzey

Well-Known Member
Persnickety1 said:
My bet spread is $3-$50. I bet table minimum ($3) when true count is less than 2, $20 when TC=2, 2X$30 when TC=3, 2X$40 when TC=4, 2X$50 when TC equals or is greater than 5.
Click to expand...
One picky comment, since I've seen this conclusion jumped to many times. A betting spread of 1 x $3 to 2 x $50 is actually the equivalent of $3-to-$72, one hand at a time -- a 24-to-1 spread.
 
X

Xenophon

Well-Known Member
Renzey said:
One picky comment, since I've seen this conclusion jumped to many times. A betting spread of 1 x $3 to 2 x $50 is actually the equivalent of $3-to-$72, one hand at a time -- a 24-to-1 spread.
Click to expand...
I don't get it... So he doesn't have a 1-33 spread by spreading 1x3 to 2x50?
 
R

Renzey

Well-Known Member
Xenophon said:
I don't get it... So he doesn't have a 1-33 spread by spreading 1x3 to 2x50?
Click to expand...
Actually no. The two $50 hands in high counts will eat up more cards per round than 1 x $100. As a result, his EV will be lower than betting 1 x $100.

Two x $50 is the two hand supplement for betting 1 x $70 (rather than the $72 I mistakenly stated in the last post). But since two hands in high counts is better than one hand (with other players at the table), 2 x $50 will have a higher EV than 1 x $70, but of course, lower than 1 x $100. Two 50's however, will have about the same variance as one $70 bet.
 
EasyRhino

EasyRhino

Well-Known Member
Persnickety, it sounds like you found a solid game for your bankroll.

Do you anticipate any heat in betting 1x$50 or 2x$50 at this particular joint?
 
moo321

moo321

Well-Known Member
Betting 2 hands of $50 is not the same as betting one hand of $100. In general, betting two hands of about $75 carries the same risk of ruin as one hand of $100, but adds 50% to your expectation.

For example, if you were the casino, and you had a roulette game. Having one guy betting $100 is more risky than a table full of people betting $5 on different numbers. The chance that you will lose a lot of money in one night is much lower with many players betting small.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top