Strategy Discrepancies

[Jack_Black]

I have found discrepancies in play many a times. This is the latest example. I normally play 2deck H17 DAS no surrender games. The basic strategy engine on this website has determined that 6,6 v 7 is a split. However, using Casino Verite with the same variables, shows that the correct play is hit. Which is it? Both reputable sources, i thought these charts were mathematically correct plays? How can two people not agree that 2+2=4? I'm not using indexes, just Ill. 18 for both. Maybe there are other variables that can be set in CV that would change the BS chart?

 

[QFIT]

I have found discrepancies in play many a times. This is the latest example. I normally play 2deck H17 DAS no surrender games. The basic strategy engine on this website has determined that 6,6 v 7 is a split. However, using Casino Verite with the same variables, shows that the correct play is hit. Which is it? Both reputable sources, i thought these charts were mathematically correct plays? How can two people not agree that 2+2=4? I'm not using indexes, just Ill. 18 for both. Maybe there are other variables that can be set in CV that would change the BS chart?

The tables in CV don't bother to differentiate double-deck as the difference is insignificant. If you wish, you can add your own DD tables. But, the total game EV difference in the decision you mention is .00000328.

 

[blackjackstudent]

Close call Jack Black but if you look at the following website:

http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/ev/2dh17.htm (Archive copy)

The difference between hitting and splitting in expected value is very close but if the game allows DAS then splitting probably is the better option by a whisker of a margin.

If you look at http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/ev/8dh17.htm (Archive copy)

The difference is expected value is more bigger compared to the previous examples. So in multi-deck games, better to hit rather than split. But for single and double deck BJ games if DAS allowed, then split.

 

[Jack_Black]

Well gee, that was a short thread. Thanks for all the help. I'll look for those other discrepancies and post them on here.

 

[FLASH1296]

"discrepancies"


When you are dealing with "discrepancies" and the difference in expectation

is close make the play that does not require you to split or double.

Risking double the money for what is essentially the same outcome is foolhardy.

In BJ there are some VERY close plays.

e.g. A2 vs 5, A4 vs. 4 and 10-2 vs 4

Factoid: The correct basic Strategy play for the latter differs between a 6 deck and an 8 deck shoe !

I suggest that you consult the charts included in the appendix of Blackjack Attack, 3rd ed. by Don Schlesinger

 

[k_c]

6-6 v 7 DAS, depending on # of decks

My tdca program correctly computes the total dependent EVs for 6-6 vs 7 for DAS but incorrectly marks the basic strategy as split for more than 2 decks when it should be hit.

The error was fixed. If you have an unlock code you can download from my site and reinstall using the same number.

I also recently fixed an error in cdca where rules failed to properly reset when 5 and 6 card auto winner was chosen as a rule causing a computation with the previous rules set rather than the current set. It was necessary to change another rule other than the 5 or 6 card auto winner rule to get back in sync. This was fixed. Download and reinstall using same code.