Stickum11 said:
I guess I am just looking for the best bet spread, I have heard of the $1 or $25, but a spread seems smarter to me?
Of course a spread of $1 at -counts and jumping to $25 at the first +count is, to me anyway, absolutely nuts.
I know there are those who for some reason I cannot fathom seem to think it is better to bet "aggressively" just because one wants more $/round and it is a low $min-$max game. I guess if the limits were $100-$2500 you'd bet more conservatively or something.
A good quarterback takes what the defense gives you. A good BJ player takes what the game gives you.
The best spread is an optimal spread. You can't improve upon it - that's why they call it optimal. It will give you the best bang for your buck.
Bet with an optimal spread with $2000 and you will have a low ROR. Bet $1 at -counts and $25 at any +count, sure your $EV will go up per round. It probably won't even double while your variance might increase over 5X from what it was. With the same $2K your risk might go from 2% to 20%. You might need triple the roll to keep your risk the same and still be playing a game with a much lower SCORE than if you had bet optimally. N0 hands might increase 50%. Why bet a spread that only lowers a game's desirability?
In a 3/4 game maybe your max bet would come at +6. In a 3.5/4 game maybe it would come at +8. For certain, an optimal spread would be different at +1 thru +8 for each of the 2 pen levels. In a play-all situation I'm talking about. Maybe you could have a roll 300 or more units less in the better game than the worse game with the same risk while enjoying more $/rd. In the better game, N0 might be half of what it is in the worse game if you bet optimally in both cases.
Indexes might have a fairly significant impact too.
But, if play-all, like Thunder said, you probably just aren't gonna make much than 5-7 cents per round depending.
With the same $2K roll, you could have an ROR 5 times less in the better game than the worse one.
And of course, spreading to multiple hands or never playing a count below +1 or +2 (back-counting, if allowed) would change things too.
I could take my guesses at an optimal spread - maybe something like 4,9,13,18,22 with 25 at +6 for the 3/4 game. Maybe 3,6,9,12,15,19,22 with 25 at +8 for the 3.5/4 game. So that's $12 in the better game at TC+4 vs $18at +4 in the worse game. There is no "one spreads fits all" under changing conditions.
Maybe if someone like the Prince of Sims as I like to think of him lol, aka PrinceDragon wants to run a CVCX sim with 1 player, using Hi-Lo and all indexes with a 1-25 spread in play-all for a 4D, S17, DAS, Dbl on any 2, no re-split or re-hit aces, split to 4 hands, 100 hds.hr, no surrender, betting Kelly to a $10K roll, for a 3/4 and 3.5/4 game, it might show what I mean. Might not lol. That 3.5/4 game, with indexes, might have a SCORE around 100 - wouldn't totally surprise me.
And now you're talking 20 cards cut-off - might be time for another sim lol.
Nice opportunity to learn what a sim is telling you and what you have to tell it, measure results vs sim(s), learn indexes if so inclined, etc all with very low risk for not very much money.