Grasshopper
Member
First, I am new at Blackjack. I have played Blackjack on and off in the past 20 years, but not with BS, not for long and not for more than $5.
There actually is a question at the end of this which reads "How similar are the simulated games to actual play and can I expect pretty much the same results at table play?". But, first a bit of background to the question.
About 5 months ago I was playing around with the Blackjack Hustler game on my phone and was consistently winning and making good money. Thought I was the first Human since the times of King Tut to develop a new and wildly effective Blackjack system. So, in preparation for taking a trip to Vegas and cleaning out the Casinos, I started doing my homework, learned BS, read this very helpful site, Wizard of Odds and others.
I have since abandoned the phone game as useless and mostly accepted the fact that my Miracle System was a fluke statistical bump played on a bad simulation, although the dream died hard. However, I am still enjoying Blackjack and refining my game. I have not done much with counting but am starting to work on that a bit.
I have played about 30,000 simulated hands on BJI, Wizard of Odds, Bodog and, recently CV. I have kept track of wins, losses, # hands, bankrolls and bet size. I have recorded and analyzed these on Excel using the graphing function until I have played long enough to get consistent trend lines on my win/loss units per 60 hands which means my sample population is large enough to declare my results as representative of a much larger sample. I do have a fair, but rusty, background in statistics, but decided Excel was good enough for my purposes since I am constantly rearranging and comparing different elements of my samples.
I have analyzed my money return per hand and per hour, W&L Strings, bank growth and shrinkage. The most meaningful analysis seems to be my betting units of return per 60 hands which has remained perpendicular for some time now.
I have found differences between the various simulations. BJI and CV ( I have not altered the original CV settings) seem to perform almost identically, although I had a very very painfully long bad string on BJI and it took a while for the trendlines to recover. Wizard of Odds seems to similar to BJI and CV, although with less drama and a slightly higher return. I figure this is because Wizard of Odds reshuffles after every hand. The other simulation games (mostly Casino come-ons) seemed either too easy or I didn't play long enough to get a large enough sample population to develop anything meaningful.
I have also played about 300 hands at a local Indian casino with unfavorable table rules (HS17, NDAS, 6:5,etc.) and kept track of my BJ's, wins and losses. This is my only "actual" game experience in recent years, and while I do not have enough hands or data to compare to my simulated playing, the rhythm does "feel" very similar to simulated games.
My question, after this long introduction, is this.......How similar are the simulated games to actual play and can I expect pretty much the same results at table play?
There actually is a question at the end of this which reads "How similar are the simulated games to actual play and can I expect pretty much the same results at table play?". But, first a bit of background to the question.
About 5 months ago I was playing around with the Blackjack Hustler game on my phone and was consistently winning and making good money. Thought I was the first Human since the times of King Tut to develop a new and wildly effective Blackjack system. So, in preparation for taking a trip to Vegas and cleaning out the Casinos, I started doing my homework, learned BS, read this very helpful site, Wizard of Odds and others.
I have since abandoned the phone game as useless and mostly accepted the fact that my Miracle System was a fluke statistical bump played on a bad simulation, although the dream died hard. However, I am still enjoying Blackjack and refining my game. I have not done much with counting but am starting to work on that a bit.
I have played about 30,000 simulated hands on BJI, Wizard of Odds, Bodog and, recently CV. I have kept track of wins, losses, # hands, bankrolls and bet size. I have recorded and analyzed these on Excel using the graphing function until I have played long enough to get consistent trend lines on my win/loss units per 60 hands which means my sample population is large enough to declare my results as representative of a much larger sample. I do have a fair, but rusty, background in statistics, but decided Excel was good enough for my purposes since I am constantly rearranging and comparing different elements of my samples.
I have analyzed my money return per hand and per hour, W&L Strings, bank growth and shrinkage. The most meaningful analysis seems to be my betting units of return per 60 hands which has remained perpendicular for some time now.
I have found differences between the various simulations. BJI and CV ( I have not altered the original CV settings) seem to perform almost identically, although I had a very very painfully long bad string on BJI and it took a while for the trendlines to recover. Wizard of Odds seems to similar to BJI and CV, although with less drama and a slightly higher return. I figure this is because Wizard of Odds reshuffles after every hand. The other simulation games (mostly Casino come-ons) seemed either too easy or I didn't play long enough to get a large enough sample population to develop anything meaningful.
I have also played about 300 hands at a local Indian casino with unfavorable table rules (HS17, NDAS, 6:5,etc.) and kept track of my BJ's, wins and losses. This is my only "actual" game experience in recent years, and while I do not have enough hands or data to compare to my simulated playing, the rhythm does "feel" very similar to simulated games.
My question, after this long introduction, is this.......How similar are the simulated games to actual play and can I expect pretty much the same results at table play?