Casino Verite

[Essexboy]

This is a weird one, playing CVBJ on a mates computer game played well for teh first 10 or so hours then wierd patterns emerged.

I started losing a very high number of hands and didnt receive a BlackJack at all after the 10 hour(ish) point of play, is it buggy ? Was it the antiviral software on his laptop causing the problem ? Or is this normal ? Ive never had a similar thing happen in real life.

He had no idea what I was talking about not being a player so banging my head against a brick wall here.

Personally i thought it was well worth buying it myself, how does everyone else feel about it ?

 

[QFIT]

CV is practice software, not a simulator. To that end, there are several bias options that could have been set. These force the cards to come out unnaturally to improve practice time. Or, it could have just been luck.

 

[Diver]

Personally i thought it was well worth buying it myself, how does everyone else feel about it ?

The investment is a pittance compared to the gain from improving your skill set. Be sure to take a look at the many other features in addition to the practice sessions.

 

[Finn Dog]

CV is practice software, not a simulator. To that end, there are several bias options that could have been set. These force the cards to come out unnaturally to improve practice time. Or, it could have just been luck.

Norm: what bias option do we set to most closely resemble actual casino conditions with respect to the randomness of the cards? That is, what do we check or uncheck?

Thanks,

FD

 

[assume_R]

Norm: what bias option do we set to most closely resemble actual casino conditions with respect to the randomness of the cards? That is, what do we check or uncheck?

Thanks,

FD

No bias reflects casino conditions. The other options are to help you expedite practicing specific situations, such as tough basic strategy changes. So under normal random conditions (no bias) something may happen one out of every 100 hands, and this may not give you enough practice. So Norm has kindly provided us some bias to make those occur maybe 10 out of every 100 hands, just so we can learn faster.

 

[Finn Dog]

No bias reflects casino conditions. The other options are to help you expedite practicing specific situations, such as tough basic strategy changes. So under normal random conditions (no bias) something may happen one out of every 100 hands, and this may not give you enough practice. So Norm has kindly provided us some bias to make those occur maybe 10 out of every 100 hands, just so we can learn faster.

So does that mean your "long term" results on CVBJ is never suppose to track your EV?

Thanks,

FD

 

[sagefr0g]

cvcx question

for the image below it says 67 hands/hour under betting.

but ok i've also got play two hands checked.

so the question is, am i correct in thinking that would be a total of 134 hands/hour as far as hands played (errh assuming no splits)?

 

[SleightOfHand]

for the image below it says 67 hands/hour under betting.

but ok i've also got play two hands checked.

so the question is, am i correct in thinking that would be a total of 134 hands/hour as far as hands played (errh assuming no splits)?

I believe a more proper name for that setting would be rounds per hour. Because the $/hr doubles after hitting "play 2 hands," it is obviously talking about rounds.

However I am unsure about the N0. I believe that it is also rounds. I'll be home in 45 minutes and I'll double check the figures

 

[sagefr0g]

I believe a more proper name for that setting would be hands per hour. Because the $/hr doubles after hitting "play 2 hands," it is obviously talking about rounds.

However I am unsure about the N0. I believe that it is also rounds. I'll be home in 45 minutes and I'll double check the figures

lmao, good! i was hoping you'd see this.

errhh, it's flat betting bs, so cvcx doesn't give a N0.

but anyway ok rounds is fine. so really it would be 134 hands played (assuming no splits), right? essentially one hand and another hand played for 67 rounds played a round at a time.

now another image below and another question.

am i interpreting the trip risk of ruin properly if i believe the trip risk of ruin to reach a goal of $265 is ror = 0.00% if i try to reach the goal for 4 hours but if i try to reach the goal for an infinite amount of time the r0r = 49.03%?

edit: like i know these questions seem kind of dumb, but i just want to make sure i'm interpreting stuff correctly

 

[SleightOfHand]

lmao, good! i was hoping you'd see this.

errhh, it's flat betting bs, so cvcx doesn't give a N0.

but anyway ok rounds is fine. so really it would be 134 hands played (assuming no splits), right? essentially one hand and another hand played for 67 rounds played a round at a time.

now another image below and another question.

am i interpreting the trip risk of ruin properly if i believe the trip risk of ruin to reach a goal of $265 is ror = 0.00% if i try to reach the goal for 4 hours but if i try to reach the goal for an infinite amount of time the r0r = 49.03%?

edit: like i know these questions seem kind of dumb, but i just want to make sure i'm interpreting stuff correctly

Oops I said "a more proper name should be hands per hour" when I meant rounds per hour lol. Let me break down the Trip RoR chart:

The top row means that you are playing for 4 hours with no stop win and a stop loss of your inputted trip BR. In this scenario to simply put it, you will have practically no chance (0.000%) of losing your trip bankroll in 4 hours of play.

The second row means you never intend to stop unless you lose your trip bankroll. If you look carefully, the image shows a RoR of somewhere above 1000%, which is expected since you are playing a -EV game.

The third row is your RoR with a stop win of $265, stop loss of your trip bankroll, or a limit of 4 hours of play time, which ever one comes first. This number will always be smaller than the first row because of the stop win.

The last row is with a stop win of 265 or a stop loss of your trip bankroll, which ever one comes first.

PS: And yes, N0 is in rounds as well.

 

[assume_R]

So does that mean your "long term" results on CVBJ is never suppose to track your EV?

Thanks,

FD

If you always use the same conditions, and don't turn on bias, then your long term CVBJ results will be close to your EV. An idea would be to create 2 "Users" at the first screen - 1 to practice the real casino conditions to see what your EV is, and another one to mess around with and practice different biases, different counting systems, etc.

Also remember that when CVBJ tracks your money per count, and if you used several different counts, they will mean different things! For example, if you use an unbalanced count, and then switch to a balanced count, CVBJ will just keep track of how much you win at a given RC regardless of what system you were using.

 

[Finn Dog]

If you always use the same conditions, and don't turn on bias, then your long term CVBJ results will be close to your EV...

Norm--do you concur?

 

[QFIT]

Norm--do you concur?

If you play a huge number of hands. That's really not the point of CV. Better to turn on the biases and get a real workout.