A Few Questions

[Rapt0rzzz]

This is my first post on the forums even though I have been lurking around and reading for the past few weeks. I have learned a lot from everyone on this board and I'm hoping you all can help me out with a few questions.

I was reading the article on beating an 8deck game at gamemasteronline.com and needed to get a few things cleared up. A simulation was run with the following conditions: 8eck, AC rules, 80%pen, B.S. along with a number of TC variations, $5,000 BR, and a $50 flat bet at a TC of +2 or higher and a $0 bet (leaving) at any TC lower than 2.

The results posted was an edge of 1.46%, an average return of 14,647 units, and a Std Dev of +/- 3,617 units. (This was done with 100,000 hands) This results in an estimated return of $732,350; +/- $180,850. I don't know how many hands people average when counting down tables (certainly not the normal estimated 100/hr) but at 100 hands an hour, the expected winnings is about $732.00 an hour.

So my first question is what is the ROR for the above simulation. I know that the sooner you get your max bet out, the higher your ROR. (IE if your max bet is $60; your ROR is higher if you bet your max at +4 than it is if you bet it at +5.) In a simulation before this the max bet for the $5,000 BR was $60. It seems that flat betting only $10 less than your max bet starting at a TC of +2 (which is only around a .5% advantage over the house) would have a high ROR.

I would also like to know what the outcome would be if a normal spread (1-12? more?) was used instead of flat betting the $50; still backcounting and only playing at TCs of 2 or higher. What is this simulations ROR?

If the flat betting of $50 for a $5,000 BR is in fact a good way to go, would it then be a good idea to flat bet $10 on a $1,000 BR; coming in at the same TC? I would like to know the edge, return, Std Dev, ROR, etc for a $1,000 BR betting a flat $10 because a $5,000 BR is not an option for me.

Also, I wouldn't mind doing these simulations myself if anyone can point me in the direction of some programs that can help me out.

So basically, what is the first simulations ROR using the $50 flat bet, what is the second simulations edge, return, std. dev, and ROR using the $10 flat bet, would you recommend either of these strategies with backcounting and entering at TC 2 or higher, and finally, what would be the advantage/disadvantage of using a normal bet spread instead of flat betting as in the above situations. Also, if anyone knows, I'd like to know how to calculate ROR without a computer program.

Sorry for the long post... Hope you all can help.

 

[EasyRhino]

The results posted was an edge of 1.46%, an average return of 14,647 units, and a Std Dev of +/- 3,617 units. (This was done with 100,000 hands) This results in an estimated return of $732,350; +/- $180,850. I don't know how many hands people average when counting down tables (certainly not the normal estimated 100/hr) but at 100 hands an hour, the expected winnings is about $732.00 an hour.

There's no way this win rate is right. Just spitballing but I'd say a win rate of $10 per 100 hands is more reasonable.

Doing a play-all with a $50 max bet would be much worse.

If the flat betting of $50 for a $5,000 BR is in fact a good way to go, would it then be a good idea to flat bet $10 on a $1,000 BR; coming in at the same TC?

Yes, everything would be identical, as long as you can find a $10 table.

 

[rukus]

as the easy-going rhino above me pointed out, that win rate per hour is very high. maybe you meant win rate/100 hands PLAYED? if you did mean win rate/100 hands PLAYED, your win rate/hour will be significantly less because TCs of +2 or higher only occur about 25 times an hour as opposed to 100 times an hour (at least with Zen count, and assuming 100 hands per hour). i dont think the sim you quoted "penalized" the computer counter for leaving a table and having to find another shoe with TC >= 2.

as for your first question, i have not run the sim you quote, but you seem to compare a flat betting approach of $50 at TC>=2 vs a play all approach, with bets ramped up to $60 (from some starting $ amount you dont specify) at some TC that is greater than 2. if that is the case, the play-all will have a higher ROR even if the max bet is placed at a higher TC, because you end up playing a majority of the time at negative or nuetral EV.

Question 2, again i have not run the sim so i cannot comment on this ROR. i can tell you it depends on how fast you ramp from 1-12 units.

question 3 - again, without the sim, i cannot give you answers to those numbers.

there is a free sim program called powersim, which you should get your hands on and play with. others can point you in the right direction to downloading and using it (i dont personally use it).


if you have a small bankroll, "wonging" in at TCs greater than 0 or 1 definitely help reduce your variance/ROR, so i would suggest that. whether you ramp your bets or not is a decision you need to make, though obviously it is much easier to spot a novice counter ramping his bets than one just simply flat betting.

as for calculating ROR without a simulator, i believe Sonny has in the past quoted (not sure if he got this from Schlesinger or elsewhere) the following equation you can use to estimate ROR:

RoR = ((1-EV/SD)/(1+EV/SD))^(Bankroll/SD)

BUT you still need to either make an assumption for SD and EV or run a sim to get those.

 

[Rapt0rzzz]

Thanks for your replies, they are greatly appreciated. Although I was almost sure such a win rate with only $50 bets was impossible, it is what the author claimed the simulation gave him. You can find the article here:

http://www.gamemasteronline.com/Archive/Blackjack/BeatingThe8-DeckGame.shtml (Archive copy)

It is at the very bottom under the section "one more trick" in which he describes back counting and gives the simulation info I posted above. If he is flat betting $50, is his unit not $50? So it would be $50 multiplied by the expected return units (14647) which gives a total of $732,350. The amount per hour I mentioned is obviously way off even if this were the true expected return because there is no way a backcounter can play 100 hands in an hour. So where did he (or I) go wrong in computing this? I think it may be an error on my part because there is another article on the above site explaining how to make $100 an hour playing blackjack... and the above situation obviously would crush that.

So I think you all are saying that the flat betting strategy has a hire ROR than, say, a x-y bet spread, correct? I'm just curious what the advantages of flat betting a little less than my max bet vrs. a traditional bet spread. What are the advantages of the spread? I'm assuming the flat bet has a higher expected return per hour but a higher ROR?

As for my second question, I'm not really sure about the ramp on the spread. I was kind of hoping someone could let me know what the most common ramp used in this kind of game was. I really just want to see the advantages/disadvantages of simply flat betting a large amount while only playing at TC's of +2 or more vs. using an effective bet spread and only playing at a TC of +2 or more. I know a common way to be busted as a counter is by the betting so I am wondering if flat betting is worth while instead of spreading. I've never read of anyone flat betting like this article described so I am assuming it is not a practical approach and would like to know why this is so. (The article doesn't talk about it nor does it tell me that sim's ROR)

Can anyone sum up the flat bet vs. bet spread and explain the pros/cons of each? It seems that if you flat bet you will always have a higher ROR than that of a spread because even though you are only playing with an edge, you aren't taking into account the size of your edge. Betting $50 when you only have a .5% edge (with a low bankroll) can cost you a lot more money when a negative fluctuation hits and this fluctuation will be greater due to the higher bet, thus increasing your chances or ruin. I just want to know the exact mathematical % differences between the 2 approaches and their ROR as well as their expected return.

Thanks for the ROR formula, I will work with that later. Thanks again for taking the time to respond - I learn so much from this site every day.

 

[Kasi]

. If he is flat betting $50, is his unit not $50? .. The amount per hour I mentioned is obviously way off even if this were the true expected return because there is no way a backcounter can play 100 hands in an hour. So where did he (or I) go wrong in computing this?

You'll win .0146 of a unit every time you bet one. Entering at TC +2 you'll play about 15 hands of every hundred seen. You'll make .0146*15 or .219 units. .219*$50 =$10.95. (Or $50*15*.0146=10.95)

In dollars you make EV .0146*50=73 cents per hand played. For a hundred hands physically played that's $73/hr, not $732 = someones off by a decimal.

Also 100000 times .0146 is only 1460 not 14600.

Almost certainly betting this way has an ROR less than full-Kelly, probably 10-11%. Personally, I think it's a great way to go for the reasons you mentioned.

Playing-all with a spread would be ill-advised even assuming you could devise a spread with the same ROR and still support the table min. If you did, your win rate would go down as a percent, go up when expressed as min-units won/hr but go down expressed as dollars won per 100 hands with an ROR identical to the flat-bet scenario.

 

[zachs]

You'll win .0146 of a unit every time you bet one. Entering at TC +2 you'll play about 15 hands of every hundred seen. You'll make .0146*15 or .219 units. .219*$50 =$10.95. (Or $50*15*.0146=10.95)

In dollars you make EV .0146*50=73 cents per hand played. For a hundred hands physically played that's $73/hr, not $732 = someones off by a decimal.

Also 100000 times .0146 is only 1460 not 14600.

Almost certainly betting this way has an ROR less than full-Kelly, probably 10-11%. Personally, I think it's a great way to go for the reasons you mentioned.

Playing-all with a spread would be ill-advised even assuming you could devise a spread with the same ROR and still support the table min. If you did, your win rate would go down as a percent, go up when expressed as min-units won/hr but go down expressed as dollars won per 100 hands with an ROR identical to the flat-bet scenario.

Irrelevant to the post but:
-Kasi, do you have msn or aim? I have a few questions that lead into one another, or can i message you?

 

[Kasi]

-Kasi, do you have msn or aim? I have a few questions that lead into one another, or can i message you?

Sure you can PM me - no msn or aim currently installed lol.

But ask me easy questions lol.

 

[EasyRhino]

thanks for providing the link, I didn't see it when I scanned the site.

If he was counting hands played (not hands seen), and maybe using $5 units, then maybe the numbers add up. Maybe.

 

[Rapt0rzzz]

Yeah, I figured I had to have been off by a decimal or so because that was insane. It's odd... Out of the few Black Jack books I have read and the vast amount I have read on the internet, everyone talks about betting spreads and never mentions flat betting. Yet it seems to offer better camouflage and a good return. Why don't I hear anyone talking about anything but betting spreads?

 

[Kasi]

... everyone talks about betting spreads and never mentions flat betting.

It's always about maximizing EV, never longevity, I guess.

Anyway, what he was doing was assuming the guy played 20 hands per hour not 15 like I guessed. And the 14,647 units after 100,000 hands played/seen (1000 hours) are actually dollars.

The ROR is very low. Between 1 and 2 %. I think.