Does Bad Pen Negate Good Rules?

I'm used to playing downtown Vegas SD & DD rules - H17, DOA, no DAS, no RSA, for me the usual. I'm a red chipper, so I can't zoom up the strip to TI or wherever for better rules on the $25 or $50 DD game. Most downtown DD games offer 60-65% pen, with some exceptions. I always felt it was conservative, but I dealt with it.

Here's my deal - I took a couple day trips to a Louisiana casino that offers DD with excellent rules: S17, DOA, DAS, RSA, but no surrender. They also don't offer surrender on their shoe games. The DD are $10 min, but the shoes are $5 min.

FYI I use K-O Preferred with only a few indices.

At this Louisiana casino, the DD game AT BEST is dealt with 50% pen. I saw some relief dealers that cut off the playable cards at 40%. The DD tables are nearly always crowded, and three rounds to 6 or 7 places is normal.

As a possible alternative, the shoes cut off around 2 decks.

I played during two trips, mostly at the DD tables. Due to the limited availability of DD tables, I was stuck once there, or I would lose my spot. However, one trip I did take time to hit the shoes, and never once hit the key count over two shoes.

I guess my question is this: at what point does the bad penetration overcome the advantage of better rules? I won a small bit of money on both trips, but it seemed like everytime the count went plus on the DD game the yellow cut card came out. I loved doubling after splits - I made a bunch that way. I wish I could get that option in downtown Vegas.

Jay

Good pen is more important than good rules.

If you compared an H17 double decker with S17, DAS, playing to a 5% ROR with a fixed $10K bankroll using a traditional 1-8 spread, ramping up to 8 by +5, you would use a unit of $11.57 for an hourly profit (100 hands) of $17.70 in a 60% penetrated H17 game. A 50% penetrated S17, DAS game would require a unit of $13.44 and would generate an hourly profit of $19.22. Less than that would no doubt result in a drastic reduction of hourly profit and unit size to a fixed bankroll. Take the H17 game up to 67% and your unit can rise to $13.76, along with a profit increase to $28.76 an hour.

By contrast, a six-decker with the same rules of S17, DAS and penetration of 4/6 would require a unit of $5.94 with a traditional 1-12 spread topping out at +5 giving you a profit of $3.27 per 100 hands in the play-all style.

Obviously, you would use whole units, but by way of comparison, you can see the difference penetration makes, along with the number of decks in play.

Is it true, that a six deck game with 4/6 penetration is such a bad
game, with a winrate of only $3.27 per 100 hands? Is the DD game really 6 times better than the 6 deck game?

regards, steve

The way I arrived at that figure was by calculating, with the help of BJRM 2000, what size of bet I would need for a 5% ROR using a 10K bankroll and then the hourly EV using that unit. My book will have a complete list of charts using these figures for commonly found games. The differences are startling, even when comparing similar games. The bet ramp makes a big difference as well. Games that are exactly the same but played with a different betting ramp also produce a significant difference in profit and risk.

I think, the six deck game is not very attractive, when you need a $10K bankroll, to make 3.27 $/hour. And this happens only, when you play 100 hands/hour. What a mess, if you had to play at a crowded
table. you can be happy to make 1 dollar/hour. :-(

A 4/6 game is pretty lousy by any standard and difficult to beat with straight card counting. There are ways to attack the shoes that are better than play-all, but even using those ways, the 4/6 games leave a lot to be desired. One could increase his per 100 hand earnings to $18.14 in the same game using a unit of $14.75 and a 1-8 spread simply by wonging out whenever the count falls below zero. In a 5/6 game with the same rules, the unit could go up to $16.05 and the hourly win rate increases to $29.85 using the same bankroll and 5% ROR criteria.

In the wonging out mode, the per 100 hands is per 100 hands observed, not necessarily played. However, if one is playing in a large casino with many tables, using this method doesn't necessarily have to result in a large reduction of hands played per hour.

I got the message. Do you offer any book?

Ok, limiting the discussion to the DD games (I hate shoes anyways, and your analysis doesn't change my preferences), and your assumptions of 10K BR, 5% ROR, etc...

From your post it would seem that the better rules DD game with the worse pen would give a better return per hour with a slightly larger bet unit, assuming the same spread (1-8).

Am I wrong?

Jay

... who plays a 4/6 game should be SHOT, and any casino that offers a 4/6 game should be BURNED to the GROUND!

How'd the discussion turn to 4/6 anyhow? For 4/6 I have two words for you: TRACK IT. If you can't track it, scrap it.

ETF

In the specific case mentioned, a DD game with S17, DAS and 50% penetration can beat a DD game with H17 and 60% penetration. However, jack the H17 game penetration up to 67% and the difference starts to show, with penetration being the most important factor, hands down.

Other rules and levels of penetration may show other results.

...the player mentioned that, besides the double deck game, a six decker with 4/6 penetration was also available. I thought I'd throw in the figures for that game, since it was mentioned. I agree that a 4/6 game is horrendous and shouldn't be approached using straight counting methods and I took the opportunity to show just how horrible it is.

...to a bookstore near you. I have completed the first draft and sent it to the publisher. I don't know how long it will take for the book to hit the market, but when it does, rest assured I will announce it. :-)

If locale limits a player to the six-deck game with bad pen, what size spread is necesary to bring the 4/6 game up to par with a two-deck game?

Thanks.

With larger spreads comes larger variance. Variance creates risk. A poor penetration 6 deck game has about twice the risk of ruin when compared to a poor penetration (half dealt) double decker. You immediately need to have twice the bank.

Even with this larger bank and the mental strain of the larger swings with a huge spread, you are still earning about half the dollar amount per hour. You still need even more bank, because you need about twice the unit size, to get hourly earnings equal.

You are still faced with a game with larger standard deviation vs double deck, which is probably mentally easier to count among other advantages. You are forced to use large spreads which are going to be much easier for the casino to detect.

On the other hand, it would be nice if your locale had a nice hand shuffle and maybe some alternative methods could make the shoe game attractive. Also, you might have a wider selection of the shoe games, making wonging and finding good situations much better than typical double deck, where lots of no mid-shoe entry signs can be found.

All in all, I think I would seriously examine why you are 'stuck' with a particular locale. Are you under house arrest or something? It might be better to consider traveling 3 or 4 times a year for a long weekend where there are good games. With the bankroll you are willing to commit to a bad game, you could plan, take advantage of cheap airfares, play the comp games, and bet big and clean up. I don't like playing bad games, it only encourages the casino to offer them.

I was surprised to see you post earlier about 4/6 being considered good pen in your own humble opinion,huh?

You must have me mistaken for someone else. 4/6 a good game? I wouldn't play until I saw 1 deck or less cutoff, unless their was some other good reason for playing.

If I ever put the words 'good game' and 'two deck cut-off' together, I was mistaken.

Your answer was 4/6 to 5.5/6. Do you remember now or have you been eating too much of my homemade ice cream? I was going to answer your post by considering 4/6 to be a terrible game, but I just got a little lazy.