He is a troll!! Why? He continues to disbelieve the ACCURATE works of already in print works of Don and others, I'm willing to wager he never even purchased Don's newest Blackjack Attack and Plus/Minus publications.
I've spent decades relying on his information/others on this subject, and the annoying/non productive posts should end. Webmaster do you agree?
Barry, you know we've always gotten along swimmingly, and I appreciate your ongoing support. But, this is why I've asked aceside for more information, which, as everyone can clearly see, he is hesitant to supply. He systematically ignores all of my questions when I broach any personal topics, and while that is clearly his right, I'm asking because it might help to understand him better. I have reasons to suspect why he writes as he does.
In any event, it is simple for me to get him barred from this board, as was the case on Norm's forum. I can do it in a heartbeat. But again, personally, I would really like to understand him better. As that is unlikely to happen, and it is even more unlikely that he is capable of changing his ways, either we all just agree to cut off all exchanges with him, or we bar him.
Don
Let me get back to Phil. I’ve carefully studied this part and come up with a few more revisions on this simulator.
First, to be more accurate, 1-SD corresponds to 84.1%; 2-SD to 97.7%.
Second, it’s possible to simulate the 1-SD to 84.1% correspondence. All you need to do is break the total hands in a sim run into equal segments each N0 long and then record the probability of winning segments.
Third, I find it’s redundant to use these things, N0 and SCORE. I have invented two new terminologies for Blackjack, defined as follows:
1. Root_0 == SD / EV;
2. Root_s == 1000 EV / SD,
where both EV and SD are positive.
I don’t know that N0 and Score are redundant, one is a number of hands, the other is related to risk reward, perhaps they have some correlation given some constants. Just curious why the names Root, something to do with square root?
1000 x EV/SD (EV per hand/SD per hand) is the Desirability Index from Blackjack Attack and from Arnold Snyder’s Blackjack Forum Quarterly issues.
Root means Square Root. I use this to connect to well-known terminologies, N0 and SCORE. Specifically
Root_0 = SD / EV = Sqrt(N0);
Root_s = 1000 EV / SD = Sqrt(SCORE).
The first expression is run over rise. The second is 1000 times of rise over run, so we can also call it Pitch, as in roof construction.
I’m still thinking about this, but when betting with a spread, two adjacent hands are not completely independent; therefore, Gaussian distribution is not strictly applicable here. However, we should be able to use 100 hands as a base unit to describe probabilities in card counting. It’s a gambling mostly, maybe a risky investment.
We need a better way to report spam on this forum.
We need a better way to report spam on this forum.
I write to Al the minute I see anything. And I read this group several times a day. No spam should live for more than a day, or less. Al just got rid of the stupid Aviator garbage after I wrote to him this morning.
Don
We need a better way to report spam on this forum.
I write to Al the minute I see anything. And I read this group several times a day. No spam should live for more than a day, or less. Al just got rid of the stupid Aviator garbage after I wrote to him this morning.
Don
And I look at the forums several times a day, too. Once in a while I even manage to delete spam before Don sees it. :)
It’s equally important to encourage newcomers to post in this forum. I have a few more revisions to post about this simulator, but I will Hold’em for a while.
Hi Phil, I’ve tried this simulator to answer the question I raised here earlier, that is, how much EV can a player gain from using Don’s Ilustrious-18 indices? However, I found it a little hard to do with your current input interface.
If you could add a “Defined Basic Strategy” button on your simulator to set up and save a set of basic strategy decisions, that will be greatly helpful for me to accomplish this task.
Thank you in advance!
If you simply want the answer to this question, for hundreds of different playing scenarios, then why don't you consider getting:
https://www.amazon.com/Hi-Lo-Card-Counting-System-Complete/dp/1944877622
Don
I will definitely buy one. In the mean time, I would like to figure out this number using Phil’s Blackjack simulator for you to verify. Without doubt, I am a long-term tester for this simulator.
Actually, I’ve done this research using Phil’s simulator. For a 6-deck S-17 game with 75% penetration and using a bet spread of $10/$25/$50/$75/$100/$125 at TC=0/+1/+2/+3/+4/+5 respectively, these are my EV and SD per 100 hands numbers:
Using basic strategy and insurance at TC=+3,
EV=$18; SD=$365.
Using Don’s Sweet-16 and insurance at TC=+3,
EV=$20; SD=$375.
Hi Phil, I’ve tried this simulator to answer the question I raised here earlier, that is, how much EV can a player gain from using Don’s Ilustrious-18 indices? However, I found it a little hard to do with your current input interface.
If you could add a “Defined Basic Strategy” button on your simulator to set up and save a set of basic strategy decisions, that will be greatly helpful for me to accomplish this task.
Thank you in advance!
Just saw this, will take a look. It doesn’t save the strategy right now but keeps it active in that window. You can name a strategy and it accumulates results under the name. Can use multiple names in multiple windows with different strategies. Will look into what to do for this, might take a while I don’t currently have a good way for saving and preloading strategies. Thank you!
Phil
Actually everything is good. One minor thing though. The basic strategy for the hand, 11 vs. A, should be Hit for 6-deck Stand-17 games, but your default is Double. All the remaining ones are correct for Stand-17.
Actually everything is good. One minor thing though. The basic strategy for the hand, 11 vs. A, should be Hit for 6-deck Stand-17 games, but your default is Double. All the remaining ones are correct for Stand-17.
The simulator comes up with hit soft 17. Can of course change it to stand soft 17. The simulator doesn’t automatically update strategies when table rules or number of decks are changed. You have to go into the strategy tables and update it.
Highly entertaining and educational thread!
What do you thinking about the EV and Variance numbers I posted above? Are they in the ballpark? Your comments are always concise.
Actually, I’ve done this research using Phil’s simulator. For a 6-deck S-17 game with 75% penetration and using a bet spread of $10/$25/$50/$75/$100/$125 at TC=0/+1/+2/+3/+4/+5 respectively, these are my EV and SD per 100 hands numbers:
Using basic strategy and insurance at TC=+3,
EV=$18; SD=$365.
Using Don’s Sweet-16 and insurance at TC=+3,
EV=$20; SD=$375.
So, you're saying, in the second example, that you add 15 strategy deviations, and they net you $2??? Grossly wrong.
Don
This is the number I averaged over 21,000,000 hands of playing from this simulator. How does the S.D. number sound to you?
Actually, I’ve done this research using Phil’s simulator. For a 6-deck S-17 game with 75% penetration and using a bet spread of $10/$25/$50/$75/$100/$125 at TC=0/+1/+2/+3/+4/+5 respectively, these are my EV and SD per 100 hands numbers:
Using basic strategy and insurance at TC=+3,
EV=$18; SD=$365.
Using Don’s Sweet-16 and insurance at TC=+3,
EV=$20; SD=$375.
Is you EV number that you refer to the "Average per 100 hands" output in the Results table at the top right? The simulator doesn't output a field labeled EV.
For Average per 100 hands I am getting:
$12.46; SD of $366.87 with basic strategy and insurance at tc +3 floored. Win is 0.520% of total $ bet, 0.590% of initial avg $ per hand bet.
$15.60; SD of $377.51 with Sweet 16 which includes insurance at tc +3 floored. Win is 0.636% of total $ bet, 0.727% of initial avg $ per hand bet.
I ran 22 million hands with the table conditions and betting levels you used with hilo count. I put $10 in the minimum bet field and then $25 and up in the bet levels field at +1 and up that you specify.
I will run more hands but those are the results I got at a hand count similar to what you ran.
Did you use 0 or blank in the shuffle seed field for full random runs? A non zero number in this field will produce repetitive results for each run so the sum of runs may not be random enough.
Phil
