I decided to bring this to the top, so my apologies to everyone.
Norm wrote:
If you define the exact circumstances you can say which is better, BS, OPP, KO whatever. You can simulate and determine the risks and results. It is not true that we know the BS player will lose. Someone that visits LV once a year and plays for four hours each visit can very will win several years in a row playing BS. We must know the goal of the player. What are we talkingabout? As has been suggested, about a spouse that justs wants to pass the time, or wants a shot at winning, or wants a shot at doubling, or doesn't want to bust - I don't know. You have to define the circumstances. You want a statement that one way of playing is better than another for every single person. Can't do that. Shed your card-counter's mentality for a bit and realize people have different goals. Suppose expert counting, or hole-carding, or shuffle-tracking skills could be injected with a needle. That still doesn't mean some players would chose to use these skills. It may bore them to death. Counting a shoe can be very tedious when the count just doesn't seem to budge. If you're in LV for your once a year four hours, tedium is not your objective.
A player, any player, who goes to LV and wins for years, is either playing with an advantage, or lucky, or both. Regarding a basic strategy player, I don't think you're saying that this player is playing with an edge. :-) That said, I don't think goals have anything to do with whether or not a BS player wins. Maybe I'm taking your words out of context, but I have a hard time attributing a BS player as one who has skills. Learning BS, although an obvious requirement to successfully attempting - attempting to win at the game of blackjack, merely reduces the amount that someone will theoretically lose over time. And make no mistake about it, the math says they will lose. Maybe not even in this lifetime, but that's my point. It still appears that you want to use different standards.
You seem to want to define the circumstances by which one system can be compared to another. Why? What difference is there between the housewife (sorry ladies) who plays HiLo twice a year on her husband's business trips to Vegas, and the recreational card counter who plays 100 hours/yr using the same HiLo? They both need to understand RoR, bankroll, index play, and have counting skills, along with the other skills that come into play. Their goal is to win. They may understand that they might have negative flux, but over time, they'll win.
As to tedium, isn't that why people don't learn counting skills? The effort required to apply them? How much harder is the OPP? Is it easier than HiLo? A little more difficult than just BS?
I understand that you seem to think that you have answered my questions. Hmmmm. I'm not a lawyer, but I think there is a term known as "non-responsive."
Maybe we have a differing of opinion based on perceptions. You asked me to shed my "card-counting" mindset. The truth is, I wouldn't have been involved in this thread and topic if I was "operating under a card-counting mindset." It's precisely because I'm NOT that has caused my inquiries. It may actually be you Norm, who has been operating under that mindset.
I am coming from a point of view where this, i.e., OPP, is an intermediate step between BS and full blown card counting. The question is, is a player better off adding OPP to BS, then just playing BS?
I now phrased this a different way. Instead of getting a yes or no, I'll predict the same type answer will be given. But that's precisely why many people will stop trying to learn about blackjack.
This is not complicated. Maybe I'm asking the wrong question(s).
A different question for you then: Will I be playing with A. a greater disadvantage B. less of a disadvantage C. an equal disadvantage D. a positive advantage, if I play perfect BS and spread my bets, when the urge hits me, from 1-16 units on a 6 deck game and LV Strip rules in force?
At what point in time will I theoretically break even, that is, when can I expect to hit the long run?
I'm not trying to be sarcastic, although it may appear that way, so please accept my apology. I greatly respect your work, as you know. I just don't understand. So please patronize me and answer the above questions. Maybe we need a different starting point.
And all this for something I'll never use - so I must be nuts today. :-)
cheers
bfb
