RA insurance indices?

[coupon.clipper]

I remember discussing insurance decisions for risk-averse (RA) players. I think the whole concept was still being studied. (I found a very involved academic paper about it that didn't really have anything easily implemented.)

So what's the latest thinking on....

1. Is there a single RA index we can use for insurance?
2. Or do we have to use something composition dependent, like insure 20 vs A for +x and above, insure 21 vs A for +y and above..?

I also recall reading that such a system would be very counter-intuitive; apparently you should be *less* likely to insure good hands. I never understood why.

What's the current thinking about this?

 

[FLASH1296]

The redoubtable James Grosjean penned the most intelligent writings on this question.

Insurance is not composition-dependent.

You may think of it as bankroll-dependent.

If you have a ginormous bankroll Risk Aversion is not appropriate.

Most players have bankrolls that are associated with an uncomfortable R.O.R.

As a risk-averse player I am always looking to reduce the volatility of the game.

One way is by taking Insurance on your BJ's and 20's without being quite near the correct

index for taking insurance; and taking insurance anytime the play is a close call.

That is what I do.

 

[Gamblor]

Would guess its not counter intuitive. Nothing takes a big chunk out of your bankroll like insuring a hard 13 and 15, and busting out on both with a big bet (i.e., high count).

And having the ploppies wagging their fingers at you to boot to add insult to injury

 

[coupon.clipper]

Would guess its not counter intuitive. Nothing takes a big chunk out of your bankroll like insuring a hard 13 and 15, and busting out on both with a big bet (i.e., high count).

Right, that makes sense to me. But does anyone have something definitive (based on sims or the underlying math) that spells out how to handle RA insurance? I really haven't been able to find anything.

 

[MangoJ]

The definite tool of RA play is kelly criterion.

On marginal insurance decisions insurance always lowers your variance, since your bet and insurance bet are anti-correlated (also for even money).

For negative insurance decisions, you must figure out CEV. If CEV is positive, take insurance. But this will depend on TC, your hand, your bankroll and your betsize - don't expect simple answers for that question.

 

[Gamblor]

Right, that makes sense to me. But does anyone have something definitive (based on sims or the underlying math) that spells out how to handle RA insurance? I really haven't been able to find anything.

Ah ok, I don't have those, or ever paid particular close attention to it. Only ones I personally might consider deviating from BS or indexes in favor of lower variance is 8,8 vs 10 or 9 (maybe).

Luck favors the bold.

 

[bigplayer]

Right, that makes sense to me. But does anyone have something definitive (based on sims or the underlying math) that spells out how to handle RA insurance? I really haven't been able to find anything.

Mathprof has something on this in the archives on BJ21 I believe. It involves insuring for less on 20 and BJ when the count is just below the insurance threshold.

 

[coupon.clipper]

Mathprof has something on this in the archives on BJ21 I believe. It involves insuring for less on 20 and BJ when the count is just below the insurance threshold.

Aha, I'm not a member though. Do I have to be in order to access the archives?

 

[Severity8]

http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=21524