Nynefingers said:
That's where you're not quite right, sage. If your average EV per shoe is $Y, then that means that some shoes will be worth more than $Y and some will be worth less than $Y. If you play-all for the shoes that it turns out end up being worth less than $Y, but then you leave the other shoes at $Y profit rather than playing them out till the end, it will end up dropping your personal average EV to less than $Y. If the predicted average EV is $Y, you'll only see that in practice if you take full advantage of the good shoes. Imagine if you did a sim for playing the last half of a shoe (rather than a full shoe) with a true count starting at +2. Certainly, you would see that playing those half shoes would have a great +EV. Who cares that you've already made $Y in the first half of the shoe? That doesn't matter. What does matter is you have another great +EV opportunity to play the rest of the shoe. In addition, that remaining +EV is a part of what makes up the $Y EV for each shoe. That's why your personal EV is less than the calculated EV if you leave in these +EV situations. It's also why your personal EV will go up if you wong out in -EV situations, since your play-all calculations assume you will do just that: play all.
This is what I was trying to explain when I said "Results don't matter." It doesn't matter if you won or lost in the previous hands. You still have to view the remaining portion of the shoe as an independent event, given certain starting conditions. Those starting conditions include the game conditions (rules, penetration, current position in the shoe, current count, etc.), but your previous results have no impact on what will happen going forward. If you are not comfortable putting out the big bets after you've won a certain amount in a shoe, then try playing with a smaller max bet and recalculating your bet ramp, etc. But please don't walk away from a shoe when the count is good
If your goal is recreation rather than optimizing risk vs. profit, then of course you may play thing differently than me, but I feel that if you aren't comfortable with the bigger bets, then you can probably get a better balance of risk and reward by recalculating a betting ramp that you are comfortable with rather than walking away from your best opportunities. (Run-on sentence? :laugh
run on sentence? i'm the king of that lol.
again most everything your saying seems orthodox, so no argument on the theory side, especially for a pro or an AP that wants to follow an established game plan that 'works', sort of thing.
just i'd say me personally i'm not gonna get in that box, lmao.
but that box is full of knowledge, information and advantage, i'll take some of that, lol. so i can see where you'd think i'm not quite right, cause well yeah what i'm saying doesn't follow the orthodox methodology.
a quick story if i may. my wife and i just wrapped up two days of trying the AP stuff. sort of in a nutshell, just me maybe, my bankroll is small as it is maybe is circa 76% money that once belonged to the casino's and is now mine. and small as it may be, i'm pretty sure i could take that roll and at my normal rate of play, just play basic strategy for the rest of my time on earth for which i'd still have the capability to play basic strategy that i'd never lose it all. so really as terrible as it is to say, as hair raising as it must sound to an AP pro, i'll just say it wouldn't break my heart if by the end of my playing career i lost my entire bankroll, cause truth be known if that were to happen it would only be about $300 of my original money. i think you mentioned utility in this thread some where, well see utility has some bearing on this stuff from my perspective, cause well, i'm young and easily confused, erhh 60. like for investments, 5% in stocks, the rest in bonds sort of thing is cool, but if i was younger it might could be different sort of thing.
so anyway, the wife and i racked up some nice coin playing blackjack these couple of days. let me just say so much coin, that strictly orthodox counting to bring in that kind of money, well it would have taken quite a few more days of play than it actually took us. so i know, that's just standard deviation money to an AP, sort of thing of the big long game sort of thing.
well, i'm not in that box, lol, not really sure what box i'm in, what i try and do is to be one of those 'thinking AP's' that the Stealthy Won refers to. like ok, to my mind i look back on that play and that money won over those two days and over the previous four years and i say to myself, you know what, far as i'm concerned that didn't even happen, that's water under the bridge, that has about as much statistical significance as the next roll of the dice, lol. all that far as i'm concerned is an independent event and the long run, what ever that is starts tomorrow when i play again but really all i'm gonna care about is that tomorrow when it happens, that long run is something that if need be i can deal with when ever. but i do care about the bottom line as dumb as that may sound.
so on with the story, lmao, so we won that money, with rfb and entertainment on the side, and i play some video poker and lose forty bucks.
ok so i want it back. so the wife goes and plays some more blackjack and does in fact win that forty back. it took a couple of hours and there was only one opportunity to raise our bets and hope for the advantage to play out and guess what? we lost those bets, thing is just basic strategy and time and standard deviation brought us back from being $50 down to the final getting the forty bucks back. so but during that time, i just wanted that forty bucks back, i'm biting my nails, i'm knowing the odds, knowing we could easy lose everything we had previously won, and that's what i was caring about. but my wife, she is just merrily playing along, having fun as she put it, lmao. and i'm the guy that when i play, i stiffle my emotions to the point where i might as well be a rock. so what ever, that long run stuff is ok far as i'm concerned but i hardly give it a second thought, it's the now, it's the today that i care about and goals for the day, sort of thing.
that said, when i play the game, i could care less about winning a hand or losing a hand or tying a hand, cause i know i'm gonna win X hands and lose Y hands and push Z hands over time, sort of thing. i just care really about having the opportunity to take a shot at those hands that have an advantage, hoping for the snapper or double down that plays out, lol, but i do have goals for a given days play and if i reach them, well thats good enough for me.
so much for the story.
ok now about this EV stuff. here is how i look at that.
too me it's just simply knowledge. it's if we allow for complete ignorance other than AP orthodox counting methodology, it's the limit of the knowledge we have for some event (say a shoe) we are observing.
like ok again, take one individual shoe, and say we are gonna consider that shoe. that shoe is gonna represent some likely number of rounds and that number of rounds is gonna represent some expectation should we happen to look at it from the perspective of a card counter. and yes EV isn't the extent of our knowledge, like we can know standard deviation as well and risk stuff.
the thing though is, far as i'm concerned when i look at a shoe, i look at it as an independent event from all other shoes, an independent event that falls with in a range of true counts that can present for billions and billions of shoes where said range of true counts will fall into some normal range as far as how they will present in the long run.
the point that interests me is looking at one shoe at a time, or really just one shoe, is that in our ignorance as say a card counter, there is some EV some expectation that we can say ok, i know what that number is.
then as far as i'm concerned i can decide from there what i want to do or not do when it comes to results and goals, no big deal really, lol.
