players @ table

[matt21]

Hi Southpaw,
If the win rate per hand is only a function of total hands played, how does all this fit into penetration? In looking for deeper pen are you simply trying to get more hands played? Or is the goal the calculation of TC that yields more opportunities for betting up?
How do win rate per hand and pen interact?

Deeper pen increases the likelihood of more extreme true counts. More higher true counts means you wager more money, and at good advantages, thus leading to higher win rates.

The win rate is not ONLY a function of hands played - it is also influenced by the pen, your bet ramp, and the HE.

 

[Southpaw]

Hi Southpaw,
If the win rate per hand is only a function of total hands played, how does all this fit into penetration? In looking for deeper pen are you simply trying to get more hands played? Or is the goal the calculation of TC that yields more opportunities for betting up?
How do win rate per hand and pen interact?

First off, I wouldn't say that win rate is only a function of the number of hands played. There will be a different average expectation for every hand, depending on how deep that hand is in the shoe. Your average expectation for a hand that is right off the top will always be negative, unless you have been up to some funny business :joker:

The win rate increases dramatically as penetration increases. Just look for some of those charts of W.R. v. Pen that IC&T has occasionally posted.

To the best of my knowledge, increased penetration benefits counters for 2 reasons:

(1) Increased frequency of TC's of higher magnitude. The greater the range of TC's that you see, the better. Even though you will see just as many TC's that are large and negative, we have a way of minimizing these by betting the table minimum or leaving the table all together, whereas we bet the farm when we see TC's that are large and positive.
(2) Less significantly, there is the benefit of floating advantage. For example in a 5/6 game, the shoe will have more SD character (on average), than a 4.5/6 game.

Hope this helps,

SP

 

[rrwoods]

There was NO appreciable difference in SCORE across the games (i.e, $22.13, $22.30, and $22.17)

AAAAHHHH score is unitless (or, at best, 1/hands is the unit)

 

[Southpaw]

AAAAHHHH score is unitless (or, at best, 1/hands is the unit)

rrwoods,

I do believe that the unit for SCORE is dollars. SCORE is the per 100 wage that one could make using a 10k BR and a unit size such that RoR is 13.5%. If you read Ch. 11 of D.S.'s BJA, he consistently refers to SCORE in dollar amounts within the text. Although his entries in the charts contained within the chapter appear unitless, if one looks at you will see an indication above each chart that all entries have the unit $ Won / 100. I guess you could technically argue then that the unit is actually $/100, but he refers to SCORE in $ within the text, since it is understood that it is the hourly win.

Moreover, on p. 274, D.S. specifically says, "What makes this measure [SCORE] so appealing is ... it puts an absolute dollar value on an hour's worth of play."

SP