Bet Spreads

[matt21]

Can't you take a compliment lmao?

Ok, Kasi - i'll take the compliment - thanks :grin:
Matt

 

[sagefr0g]

I think the std per tc doesn't change because that is the std for that true count, for that counting system. It is separate from bets.:joker:

yeah i'm seeing that now that you learned me something new lol. thanks much oh vengeful one.
yeah so i went in and screwed around with the sim and the only time i found those values changing was if i change the penetration, # decks and rules.
so your saying those values are the standard deviation of the true count?
not for maybe the ev? i mean i could see the tc's frequency fluctuating because of the number of decks and penetration but why would they fluctuate as a result of rule change? well there are std error values that i think corresponde to the ev. so i guess your saying that standard deviation at various tc's comes from the variance of the frequency ranges for some tc?
ok so what would those values have a use for? or what's the impact of their meaning. lol i'm not even sure what i'm asking.

The std per hand changes I believe based on the actual bet, one or two hand.:joker:

ok so is that computed from just the average bet i guess or each individual hand. huh?

 

[blackjack avenger]

My Bad Writing

yeah i'm seeing that now that you learned me something new lol. thanks much oh vengeful one.
yeah so i went in and screwed around with the sim and the only time i found those values changing was if i change the penetration, # decks and rules.
so your saying those values are the standard deviation of the true count?

:joker::joker::joker: blackjack avenger
Yes, the SD of the EV at that TC I believe.

not for maybe the ev? i mean i could see the tc's frequency fluctuating because of the number of decks and penetration but why would they fluctuate as a result of rule change? well there are std error values that i think corresponde to the ev. so i guess your saying that standard deviation at various tc's comes from the variance of the frequency ranges for some tc?
ok so what would those values have a use for? or what's the impact of their meaning. lol i'm not even sure what i'm asking.

ok so is that computed from just the average bet i guess or each individual hand. huh?

I think per round, so in the 2 hand sim it takes both hands into consideration to come up with the hourly SD.

 

[Kasi]

yeah so i went in and screwed around with the sim and the only time i found those values changing was if i change the penetration, # decks and rules.

I think you'd find they would also change if you changed your counting system, changed the use of indexes, or changed how you calculated a TC in the first place lol. Not only would the SD change but also the freq and advantage at each TC.

Not that I know what that means either lol. Except maybe why investing in a sim is a good thing lol.

Maybe not even that I have to understand it, maybe all I really need is to have faith in it and go from there lol.

 

[sagefr0g]

I think you'd find they would also change if you changed your counting system, changed the use of indexes, or changed how you calculated a TC in the first place lol. Not only would the SD change but also the freq and advantage at each TC.

Not that I know what that means either lol. Except maybe why investing in a sim is a good thing lol.

Maybe not even that I have to understand it, maybe all I really need is to have faith in it and go from there lol.

yeah really same here. i'm just originally interested in the idea of being able to use two hands in your spread sheet. so in the process i'm learning something new. thats cool!
i tryed looking in the help about what those column std dev's represented but didn't find anything. sooner or later i'll dig out the manual. i'm going with bjavengers statement till then. just don't see why the tc fequencies or their std dev's would change because of rule changes.
that would seem more related to ev fluctuation. lol but i don't even know if ev fluctuates at some given tc for that matter.
edit: oh wait now i think bjavengers saying it is std dev of the ev at some tc. so i'll go with that. hell i'll go which ever way the wind blows lmao.

 

[Kasi]

yeah really same here. i'm just originally interested in the idea of being able to use two hands in your spread sheet. so in the process i'm learning something new. thats cool!

I'm learning too

Here's my new take on co-variance. My spreadsheet will never be able to get to co-variance. Only a sim can.

Co-variance measures the liklihood of the 2 hands finishing with the same result or not. If a TC has a variance of, say, 1.33 like in Sonny's sheet, a covariance of -1.33 would mean that hand 1 and 2 would have the same result 0% of the time and have opposite results 100% of the time. A co-variance of +1.33 would mean hands 1 and 2 would have the same result 100% of the time and the opposite result 0% of the time. A co-variance of 0 would mean that hands 1 & 2 would have the same result 50% of the time and the opposite result 50% of the time in which case the hands are totally independent of each other. A covariance of .44, in this case, being 1/3 rd of the one hand variance would mean that 2/3 of the time they will have the same result and 1/3 of the time an opposite result. In this case co-variance could never be greater or less than 1.33.

So a BS player would experience less variance and co-variance in high counts because he would be doubling less because he is getting more 10's. But a CC with indexes would experience higher variance and co-variance in + counts compared to low counts since he's doubling and splitting less in low counts compared to high counts.

So I think it has nothing directly to do with EV or anything - it just is what it is for that game, system, etc, just like SD, and the sim takes it into account when spreading. Maybe it does though a little bit because I'm not sure one would spread with a disadvantage in the first place.

So, my guess is, if QFIT chose to add a co-variance column for say 2 hands anyway, it would be a different co-variance at each TC. Now if he had such a column, then you could work with that at that count but I'd guess it might call for a different bet at different TC's, not counting the adv change at that TC.

 

[blackjack avenger]

Think Double D's, Hey Get Your Mind Out of the Gutter!

yeah really same here. i'm just originally interested in the idea of being able to use two hands in your spread sheet. so in the process i'm learning something new. thats cool!
i tryed looking in the help about what those column std dev's represented but didn't find anything. sooner or later i'll dig out the manual. i'm going with bjavengers statement till then. just don't see why the tc fequencies or their std dev's would change because of rule changes.
that would seem more related to ev fluctuation. lol but i don't even know if ev fluctuates at some given tc for that matter.
edit: oh wait now i think bjavengers saying it is std dev of the ev at some tc. so i'll go with that. hell i'll go which ever way the wind blows lmao.

With rule changes
Wouldn't the variance go down if you could not DD after split while the EV would also go down. I think Wong talks about this in Pro. BJ.

Surrender I believe lowers variance and raises EV. I think Sch. talks about this.

So rules do matter.

 

[N&B]

Surrender does lower variance when used correctly. If surrender is offered, take it. Surrender removes 0.065% House advantage in 6D s17 games (From 0.40% to 0.335% house advantage). 15 & 16 vs. 9-10-Ace, and 88 vs. 10 are seven hands worth surrendering according to index.

 

[blackjack avenger]

One is Not the Other

Surrender does lower variance when used correctly. If surrender is offered, take it. Surrender removes 0.065% House advantage in 6D s17 games (From 0.40% to 0.335% house advantage). 15 & 16 vs. 9-10-Ace, and 88 vs. 10 are seven hands worth surrendering according to index.

I think the numbers you quote are for basic strategy only. The advantage changes depending on how an AP plays.

 

[Sonny]

My spreadsheet will never be able to get to co-variance. Only a sim can.

My spreadsheet handles covariance.:grin: Based on Griffin's numbers, the covariance of BJ hands is about 0.5. You can calculate the total variance using this formula:

V = var + (n-1)*0.5

where
V = Total Variance
var = Single-hand variance
n = Number of hands played

This is discussed in Schlesinger's book. My spreadsheet is basically just a copy of his chart with a few added features.

-Sonny-

 

[N&B]

Yes, those pct's are Basic Strategy, and yes surrendering 15 vs. 9 & Ace, and 88 vs. 10 will help more (reduce variance, and lower HA) if used properly.

 

[Kasi]

My spreadsheet handles covariance.:grin: Based on Griffin's numbers, the covariance of BJ hands is about 0.5. You can calculate the total variance using this formula:

V = var + (n-1)*0.5

where
V = Total Variance
var = Single-hand variance
n = Number of hands played

This is discussed in Schlesinger's book. My spreadsheet is basically just a copy of his chart with a few added features.

-Sonny-

Thanks Sonny. Much appreciated.

I think I understand, once I have the co-variance, one can use that formula. My central question is how does one know exactly what the co-variance is as opposed to using that estimate of 0.5? It is, afterall, just an estimate right?

Do you think, whatever the exact co-variance may be, that it would be different at each TC? That it would/could/likely be different at each TC in the same game at the same count if one used indexes as opposed to if one didn't as opposed to if one only played BS?

In other words, would you guess Wong used a sim to figure out the co-variances he mentions in his book and that it is impossible to know the exact co-variance thru some formula? That, ideally, one would like to know it at each TC?

I'm not trying to say it matters much, you know me lol - make a mountain out of a molehill - just trying to get a grasp on the concept lol.

Given your 1.33 variance and .5 co-var assumption in your spsheet, does what it actually mean that 38% (.5/1.33) of the time hands 1 & 2 would have the same result and 62% of the time they would have the opposite result?

 

[KOLAN]

Hi, I am brand new to the forum and it looks like the forums contain a wealth of information (i have spent a few hours browsing various threads). It all looks very excellent!!

I have a small question regarding bet variation.

Up to this point I have been playing a 1-12 spread i.e. 1,2,4,8,10,12 for TC +1,+2,+3,+4,+5,+6. I have an (arbitrary) bankroll of 600 units (taken from business profits) plus 251 units of winnings = 851.

I am thinking of changing to a 1-10 spread in the order of 1,3,6,10,10,10 - doing some calculations (using results from simulations from bjstats.com) in xls, seems that my expected unit return per hour would be about the same, but my gut feel is that the change in spread would adversely impact on my variance and thus RoR?

Background on my game:
I have been playing for just over six months:
4D or 6D, S17, DAS No surrender 70-80% pen
count using Hi-Low Method with I18 indeces
Hours played: 223 (using either $5-$60 or ($5)$10-$120 standard unit)
Status: +251 units (1.13 units/hour)
Hands played: approx 15,000 avg 70 hands/hr (often engage in heads-on play)

Would welcome comments that anyone may have, as to whether it would be smart to do this or not.

Matt

IT IS YOURS RESULTS ?:laugh:

 

[KOLAN]

sorry for thanks for you statistik it is wery helpful
http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/attachment.php?attachmentid=2024&d=1233799149

 

[matt21]

you are welcome KOLAN!

it looks like you were doing Elliott Wave Analysis on my P+L chart? LOL

 

[KOLAN]

you play great before c)))
same times dont need to belive wot people say

 

[KOLAN]

maybe i wrong when you join this forum c or d????