hi everyone, i have come across an issue in my play analysis.
in running simulations on CVD i have to date been checking 'Stanford Wong - Complete Hi-Lo' as the playing strategy. In practice, i actually dont use a complete set of indices. Realistically I use I18 plus a few others.
I have never really paid much attention to the fact that I dont actually use a full set of indices, as i thought that the small number of indices that i do use contribute a large proportion of the overall EV benefit resulting from index play (I read this in the FAQ section).
However in running the simulations again, I have realised that the EV plunges dramatically when i actually attach my own playing strategy - a playing strategy that reflects my basic strategy play plus the 20-30 index plays. Example:
A: 6d shoe game, 73% pen, S17, DAS, NS, 2 other players at the table, 4 shoes per hour, given bet ramp, Complete High-Low - win rate of 1.88 units (what i have been using thus far!)
B: 6d shoe game, 73% pen, S17, DAS, NS, 2 other players at the table, 4 shoes per hour, given bet ramp, BS + 20-30 index plays - win rate of 0.62 units
Hence the only difference between A and B is the checked playing strategy.
My actual playing results in my various playing conditions have been very close to the theoretical win rates - of course that doesnt prove anything as I have only played about 650 hours - but it had given my some comfort that i had done my modelling correctly.
Basically with results A, counting is a profitable venture. With results B - forget it
Is it likely that I have made a mistake somewhere?
Can anyone share some insight?
Any comments would be appreciated!
in running simulations on CVD i have to date been checking 'Stanford Wong - Complete Hi-Lo' as the playing strategy. In practice, i actually dont use a complete set of indices. Realistically I use I18 plus a few others.
I have never really paid much attention to the fact that I dont actually use a full set of indices, as i thought that the small number of indices that i do use contribute a large proportion of the overall EV benefit resulting from index play (I read this in the FAQ section).
However in running the simulations again, I have realised that the EV plunges dramatically when i actually attach my own playing strategy - a playing strategy that reflects my basic strategy play plus the 20-30 index plays. Example:
A: 6d shoe game, 73% pen, S17, DAS, NS, 2 other players at the table, 4 shoes per hour, given bet ramp, Complete High-Low - win rate of 1.88 units (what i have been using thus far!)
B: 6d shoe game, 73% pen, S17, DAS, NS, 2 other players at the table, 4 shoes per hour, given bet ramp, BS + 20-30 index plays - win rate of 0.62 units
Hence the only difference between A and B is the checked playing strategy.
My actual playing results in my various playing conditions have been very close to the theoretical win rates - of course that doesnt prove anything as I have only played about 650 hours - but it had given my some comfort that i had done my modelling correctly.
Basically with results A, counting is a profitable venture. With results B - forget it
Is it likely that I have made a mistake somewhere?
Can anyone share some insight?
Any comments would be appreciated!
