Strategy charts do not really work

Discussion in 'General' started by sgduke, Dec 12, 2007.

  1. sgduke

    sgduke New Member

    The strategy charts widely available online that supposedly help you to win at blackjack do not really work. They only reduce your odds of losing.
    Check out this simulation that proves it:
  2. Royals

    Royals Member

    "Well, so does following the strategy chart in the long run work? It might have lowered the odds of losing, but definitely does not ensure a profit."

    They never claimed to "ensure a profit".
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2007
  3. Canceler

    Canceler Well-Known Member

    This is not news

    Can't really argue with that!
  4. toastblows

    toastblows Well-Known Member

    i think some people forget the casino has ZERO games you are suppose to win at. Reducing house edge doesnt guarentee a win either, but it helps reduce your risk of loss. :fish:
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2007
  5. sgduke

    sgduke New Member

    The ubiquitousness of such strategy charts might have caused some people, like myself, to be mistaken about their effectivess.
    Well, I guess this is only useful for newbies, like me. Thanks for the feedback.
  6. Sonny

    Sonny Well-Known Member

    I think it is fairly common knowledge that a Basic Strategy player is still at a disadvantage to the house. The purpose of BS is not to get an advantage but to play every hand properly using the given information. Even if you play perfect BS the house still has the advantage. That’s how they make their money. As you've seen, blaying BS only limits your losses.

    Although it doesn’t make much of a difference, your simulation used the wrong basic strategy chart. It looks like the chart you used was for six decks, which is slightly different than the strategy for the single-deck game you coded. You can get the proper strategy and house edge for any set of rules from the Basic Strategy Engine on this website:

    Also, looking at 400,000 hands is probably not enough to give you very accurate results. I would guess that the standard deviation and standard error of those 400 samples was moderately high. Most people will simulate at least 250 million hands, and often more than a billion, to get more precise results. To be accurate to 2 decimal places takes a lot of samples.

    Anyway, good work on coding your own simulator. I’ve written a few and I know how tricky it can be. What RNG did you use?

  7. bj bob

    bj bob Well-Known Member

    Wanna bet?

    Try the single deck, S-17, DAS, DOA, ES on this forum. Go ahead and run a sim and then let us know what you come up with.
  8. tribute

    tribute Well-Known Member

    Cardcounting and other "AP" techniques don't always work either. In fact, a card counter only expects a small advantage overall. The swings can be huge.
  9. Unshake

    Unshake Well-Known Member

    Forgot blackjack pays 2-1 :grin:
  10. aslan

    aslan Well-Known Member


    How much do the, say, top 18 preferred indices and insurance change the advantage toward the player (assuming otherwise perfect basic strategy). Do they get it close to even? I noticed my last several sessions that I gained more ground in neutral and negative territory than I did in positive counts when I was betting the recommended higher amounts. I know this will pay off in the long run, provided I survive, but I was surpised how well I did in the flatbetting areas of my sessions.
  11. Sonny

    Sonny Well-Known Member

    Not really, although it will depend on the game. They might decrease the house edge by about .10% or so in most cases. A standard shoe game with a house edge of .58% might be trimmed down to about .48% (depending on the penetration). A better game will come closer to even but I doubt it would ever get there under real-world conditions.

  12. aslan

    aslan Well-Known Member

    Interesting. I'm getting positive variance in negative counts and negative variance in positive counts. Of course, the positive counts are sharply magnified due to the higher bets. I must be getting huge positive variance in negative counts along with at least some positive variance in positive counts to explain winning. I can't wait for this to reverse! Too bad the cards don't remember my last few sessions! LOL

Share This Page