Are the more effective systems kinder to the bankroll?

[thedweller]

Are more effective systems, i.ie Halves or Uston APC, kinder to the bankroll?

Will multiparameter systems yield the expected win faster? If that is the case, is this something that is discernible in practical play and not only in simulations and theoritical discussions?

2. I need someone to run a simulation for me. It's a 6-deck game blackjack game with about 58% penetration. Early surrender vs dealer 10 included and hits and resplits allowed on Aces. I want to compare High-low to Halves Count, each using a pen of 1-16. Could someone be willing to do that for me? I would be most grateful.

 

[E-town-guy]

Wong says the halves count is more efficient than the hi-lo count as its a better approximation of the player's true edge thus it yields a higher EV. Betting $10-100 Wong calculates you make $16/hr with the hi-lo using the appropriate indices, whereas with the halves count you make an astonishing $17/hr, again with the appropriate indices.

I don't have a sim program but sounds like with 58% pen its a tough game to beat. You also forgot to mention whether its H17 or S17.

A kinder system for the bankroll is to i) find a game with better rules and pen or ii) leave the game at neg. counts.

No matter what you do the standard deviation is still going to be high which means you can expect large flucuations. If its hard to take you can play lower limits until you build your BR.