Spanish Basic Strategy

There are two different basic strategies for Spanish. One by Frank Scoblete the other by the Wizard of Odds. Which one is better?

Thanx for your help

Goldfinger

Frank Scoblete's betting advice .VS. The Wizard of Odds' advice.

I've never played Spanish, and have no idea what either of these people's advice on playing the game is.

Would anyone care to accept a wager on who's advice is better?
My money is on The Wizard.

The strategy was calculated by Lenny Frome, who is dead, and did the pioneering work on this issue, so give the guy a break. Couldn't you spend thirty seconds at the Wiz's site finding that out?
Very few theorists are willing to perform accurate game analysis and give away the data, so the fact that he may have used sub-optimal methodology to calculate the DDS option is a very minor issue.
For the record, the Wiz's advice is correct, though the differences are irrelevant for all practical purposes.

So I guess the terms of the bet would be:

Frank Scoblete's advice .VS. The Wizard of Odds (Lenny Frome)advice.

My money would still be on The Wizard.

GBV's opinion on differences being irrelevant or practical, do not count due to poor track record.

I have the basic strategy by frank scobelete. its working ok. where can i find the Wizard basic strategy? appreciate the reply . any thing to improve the game.

thanks

"Frank Scoblete's advice .VS. The Wizard of Odds (Lenny Frome)advice."

No, you have it backwards. Lenny Frome did the math for Scoblete's book. Lenny is now dead, and, of course, Scoblete doesn't have a clue.

The Wizard of Odds is Mike Shackleford, who, every day of his life, forgets more math than Scoblete could ever dream to know.

So, go with the Wizard. You can take his advice to the bank -- which is more, usually, than one can say about Scoblete.

Don

GBV's opinion on differences being irrelevant or practical, do not count due to poor track record.

My track record does not include anything as poor as alluding to a reference I have not read and would take a moment to check.

I might take that criticism from Mike Shackleford, Stanley KO, or Don Catlin, who are all highly-respect game analysts, after all, they do it for a living. But in your case you've never contributed an analysis of even the most elementary gambling games, so your programming skills are clearly beneath my own limited ability, and you have no business pontificating on the subject.

The controversy over Scoblete vs. the Wizard has two dimensions. The Wizard's strategy is the better, no doubt about it. It realizes aproximately a two-tenths of one percent gain over Scoblete's strategy. However, Scoblete's book is a must for Spanish 21 fans as his total Armada Stategy, which includes other elements for getting mucho comps, can make this game a positive "monetary" expectation. So update the Armada basic that Scoblete gives with the few changes that the Wizard has, use the other aspects of Scoblete's book and you have the best possible way to play this new game IMHO. The name-calling by Schlesinger and SOTSOG is irrelevant if the purpose is to get the most from your gambling dollar. They have axes to grind. That's my two cents.

You can find the Wizard basic strategy

http://www.thewizardofodds.com/game/spanish21.html

Goldfinger

"Shackleford forgets, daily, more math than Scoblete will ever know."

Sounds like a fair assesment of their respective math abilities to me.

M.

Obviously, the comment you quote is snide. If it were phrased this way, it would not be: "Shakelford is a math expert, Scoblete is not. Therefore I would go along with Shakelford's assessment." A true, gentlemanly, but not snide or nasty assessment. No reason for the other stuff. These pages could be a lot more enjoyable to me and others who think as I do if the snideness levels were reduced.

.. is that Don's statement may quite well be literally true!

M.

I make over $240,000 USD a year on my programming skills.
Thanks for playing, please try again.

You've never contributed any of this supposedly profitable computing knowledge here. Why is that, I wonder?

In any case, you could be Bill Gates for all I care, you never ran any analysis yourself on Spanish 21 on your own admission so stop criticizing those who contribute something other than incessant negativity.

is that Don's statement may quite well be literally true!

I agree-don't think that would be any disgrace-its probably true of me and for that matter, considering his comparative lack of interest in other games, Schlesinger also.
What depresses me about the Wiz site is not the very impressive amount of useful gambling data, without comparison online, but the very conservative nature of the site. Can you imagine how much of a threat this guy would be to the casinos if he used his talents a little more creatively to devise methods of his own? Instead, he is doing bloody consulting work. What a waste.

For example, the Wiz offers a challenge to the public to devise a progressive betting system which can beat the odds, then gets sore because someone designs a progression which exploits the repitition of the RNG in his simulator. I think thats precisely the point about advantage play-looking for weaknesses in procedures and exploiting them to the full.