The Big Betting-Cover Simulation

Southpaw

Southpaw

Well-Known Member
The following is a presentation of what I have been compiling since early Nov. 2010. It is 114 pages (pages 15-114 merely being graphs). If you need motivation to get through the first 14 pages, feel free to peak at some of the graphs, although you probably won't get far without referring to the list of acronyms I provide early in the presentation.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B0cCldUn36hMNDdiMDFlYWEtODM2MC00YjVlLTg3YTItMWIyYTg3ODQxYjNl&hl=fr

Good Cards,

Spaw

P.S.--I know someone is going to bring this up and ruin the conversation, so I'll address it now. The reason SCORE increases as the table gets more crowded relates to the fact that our player is playing multiple hands at high TC's; the effect is absent when he always plays one hand. The effect is inconsequential because of the fact that you'll get less rounds per hour at crowded tables, but if you wish to further discuss this, please start a new thread to do so, as to keep this one clean.
 
Last edited:
blackjack avenger

blackjack avenger

Well-Known Member
You Know, I Learned Something Today

For shoes:

What stands out is as the number of players increase the cost of cover goes up. It makes sense, with a lot of cards on the table the count can change a lot and any hindrance on bet jumping will be magnified.

The spread was aggressive 1 to delayed double 8. I wonder how the cover would affect a lesser spread. The baseline game would have a lower SCORE but cover would probably cost less by comparison.

Wonging would cut the cost of cover because one does not have to worry so much about jumping bets because their first bet is medium sized.

An easy way to jump bets up is on double/split wins or bj payoffs. One just let's those wins ride.

An easy way to go to 2 hands would be with civilian logic. If you are playing 1 hand and the dealer pulls a 21 or gets a bj, then go to 2 spots if it's advantageous and change the flow. This is camo that raises SCORE.

With a large and conservative bank:rolleyes:; especially if bumping quickly into table max bets, one is not as concerned with SCORE because risk is largely removed. They are just working on getting big bets in play and keeping them in play.

Trying to remember the fixed rules of the study adds to complexity of play. These 2 simple rules may be helpful:
Rarely jump bets up or down.
Rarely change the bet of a pushed hand.

very excellent job
:joker::whip:

A subtitle of the study could be "if you are not going to jump bets, then what are the techniques and costs?"
 
Southpaw

Southpaw

Well-Known Member
blackjack avenger said:
For shoes:

What stands out is as the number of players increase the cost of cover goes up. It makes sense, with a lot of cards on the table the count can change a lot and any hindrance on bet jumping will be magnified.
Click to expand...
While I am certainly not the first to produce a study that indicates this, this most certainly is the case.

Another thing that has been mentioned in the primary literature that I think is well demonstrated in the study involves the cost of NIAL (no increase after loss). Choosing not to increase after a loss is extremely expensive; go look at some of the graphs for (NDAW + SBAP + TC PL) and then (NDAW + SBAP + TC PL + NIAL). You'll see that you're getting to use almost full-cover in the first case for a price much cheaper than if you were to add NIAL as well.

Spaw
 
O

ohbehave

Well-Known Member
Yes this fact did stand out. I think its possible to increase after a loss a high percentage of the time without being too suspicious. A double-up can look like an attempt to recover the loss or can look like a negative progression, whereas a large increase can appear to be a frustration bet.

Play an increase after a loss judiciously though because it is slightly atypical of the average non-counter. You may want to also double-up after a loss in a negative count a small percentage of the time to help throw off heat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top