Keep this one quiet.

[sagefr0g]

Dear Sage, The FG thing failed to print readable here. On his public site, you can download his intriguing easily-read-and-compared table.

hey, thanks for trying and the time and effort. sorry really i didn't mean to put you to the trouble.
i've seen Parpluck's site. i've never been able to understand the voluminous stuff he's got on there. just thought maybe you could explain that Fundamental Theorem of Gambling.
thanks again.

 

[standard toaster]

I also tested Katweezel's system. I ran 100 shoes on a 6 deck table; 75% pen; DA2; DAS; Split 4; NS; 3 players each playing basic strategy and flat-betting.

I've been in contact with Kat and he already knows my results.

Approximately 6600 initial bets were made (not counting splits and doubles).

The results I got were if ALL hands were played regardless of dealer busts at the end of 100 shoes there was a net LOSS of .58% (38 units). (Note this is the approximate expected loss playing basic strategy)

When the players quit the shoe following NO dealer busts in the first 3 rounds there was a net LOSS of .82% (54 units) at the end of 100 shoes. An increase in house edge of .24%.

Therefore it appears that this system actually increases the players expected losses.

I found that dealer busts in the first 3 hands are actually quite common... occurring in nearly 65% of shoes. Dealer busts for all shoes was about 27%.

The original claim that the player would show a positive result in 70% of shoes where the dealer busts in the first 3 rounds was not evaluated since the results didn't show an increase in the players expected win rate it wasn't relevant.

Now I would have never predicted this next finding (I haven't even told Katweezel yet)...

Virtually all net losing shoes had fewer than 27% dealer busts and virtually all net winning shoes had greater than 27% dealer busts. Shoes with exactly the average dealer busts were a net EVEN. The 3 players would have had a net WIN of 475 units (+7.2%) if they could have played ONLY shoes where the dealer busted 27% or more.

Dealer busts of 27% or more occurred in 55% of shoes.

In summary: if you could eliminate the shoes where the dealer busts less than 27% of the time your win rate, flat-betting would go up almost 8%. Someone please find a way to predict this.

Kat please do not ignore this post... to date this is your most valuable and eye opening post in all of your threads. Someone went our of their way and wasted their time to show you what your system has to offer. Please look at it... understand it and follow it. Come up with a new system if you like but please dont promote losing ones. to someone who is brand new and has no understanding for gambling you will be wasting their time and make them believe something completely false... as well as look like a fool.

 

[Sonny]

I agree. This silliness has gone on long enough. There’s no point in wasting any more time explaining the truth to someone who doesn’t want to hear it. This thread is closed, as is the other thread started by Ion, Imean parpaluck, I mean North Wind, I mean Moneyman, I mean Licentia, I mean Katweezel.

-Sonny-