Using MathProf's #'s, a Pen, Napkin, and a $19.99 Calculator.....
In about Feb. of this year, MathProf. posted some extrapolated #'s as regarding this version of our beloved game.
Surprisingly (at least to me), was that a 6:5 player actually gains the Advantage at TC of +2! Albeit 0.02%, by my recollection. Put quite simply, playing at +2, you would win 2 CENTS for every $100. bet. Compare this to the approx. 80 CENTS profit per $100. bet in regular SD (at TC's of +2).
Anyhow, using above-noted source for the base #'s, then pen, napkin, and calculator, AND applying same to MY normal playing style, i.e., medium bets at neutral counts, little bets in neg., and Biggins in pos. counts, I derived the following conclusions:
(1) Break-even at 8:1 spread, using AOII + Ace-side ct. + 8-side ct.
(2) Profitable at 10:1, using AOII + Ace and 8-side cts.
(3) AND ONLY IF I RE-DEFINED NEUTRAL to be "0 to +4"....AND made my
Max. bet at 2+% advantage, instead of my usual 3+%.
Further calculations on the Back-side of same Napkin revealed that unlike a decent SD game, wherein one can expect to be making Max. Bet up to 24% of all hands played....this dropped to 10% in 6:5.
Separately, using same pen and calculator, but the back of a big Envelope (instead of a Napkin), and using Bryce Carlson's derivation method, I reasoned that:
(A) Insurance decisions must be nearly PERFECT for 6:5, the Ace- AND
8-side cts., while OPTIONAL to play with Advantage in Regular SD,
are now MANDATORY! Relative Weight = 3/20.
(B) Betting must be OPTIMIZED, due to the spread required...in Reg.
SD, Bet changes take "2nd fiddle" to Play...NOT the case with
6:5....with so few chances to make your Biggin', you must know
when they are there! Added importance to the ACE-side ct.
Relative weight = 10/20.
(C) Play changes will still be important in any SD game...relative
weight 8/20.
Therefore, I added, weighted, divided, rounded, etc., and thus determined that the best system for 6:5 SD is AOII WITH side cts. of both Aces and 8's. Surplus of either and/or both, whether played and/or unplayed, must factor in to Insurance decisions, and Aces into Betting decisions.
TO THE TEST, I must admit that I played this 6:5 game within above parameters, during recent LV trip. Starting with 2 hands of $10. at a $5 table, dropping to one hand of $5. at any TC of +4 AND LESS, and going WITHOUT RAMP to 2 hands of $50. each when justified, the following occured, and as demarcated in columns "A" and "B" below:
"A" "B"
(S) (D)ealer got very nervous with my Max. Bets...PC did not care.
(U) (I)n-spite of side cts., lost MOST big bets.
(C) (C)omps aplenty from my 6:5 adventure.
(K) (K), i.e, I lost $1k in 30 min. playing this system.
(S) (S)lots would have gave better odds, PLUS an entry into the free
weekly drawing.
Therefore, starting with column "A":
S-U-C-K-S,
then applying linear correlation coefficient to column "B":
D-I-C-K-S,
then de-hyphenating same as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act, can lead us to only ONE Conclusion:
6:5 BJ "SUCKS DICKS".
Certainly, I state that many of you Math and Computer Folks can FAULT my math, BUT I CHALLENGE YOU TO FAULT MY CONCLUSION!
P.S.: All of above soon to be published in the "Journal of Irreproducible (sp?) Results". The NAPKIN is long gone...the ENVELOPE, well, I hope it was the one I sent my Tax Return in....I really doubt the IRS will question my DEDUCTIONS if THEY see the math on the back of THAT ENVELOPE!
phantom007.