Which game is better?

[SleightOfHand]

It would seem obvious that game B is the better game because of the similar WR but better SCORE (which implies less variance). Now the question is, how much of an improvement in the hands/hr would game A have to have in order to be preferable over the current game B?

If using CE as the determining factor, game A would have to improve to $100.80/hr, which is only 2% greater than game B. Although I am a huge supporter of using CE for game selection, I would disagree in this case.

What do you guys think?

 

[blackjack avenger]

Not Even Close to Speed of Light

The SCORE, DI or NO is all you need to know regarding which game is better. However, if you can play the weaker game twice as fast then it becomes stronger in comparison because the NO is reached in less time. So if the stronger game has a full table and you can get heads up with the weaker game then the weaker game is probably better due to speed of play.

SCORE or score (actual way you would play) is a very good way to compare games because it shows magnitude of difference in a clear way.

I also think things would be easier to see if the ror was the same, third kelly comes to mind .24%.

:joker::whip:
good cards

 

[SleightOfHand]

The SCORE, DI or NO is all you need to know regarding which game is better. However, if you can play the weaker game twice as fast then it becomes stronger in comparison because the NO is reached in less time. So if the stronger game has a full table and you can get heads up with the weaker game then the weaker game is probably better due to speed of play.

SCORE or score (actual way you would play) is a very good way to compare games because it shows magnitude of difference in a clear way.

I also think things would be easier to see if the ror was the same, third kelly comes to mind .24%.

:joker::whip:
good cards

So the question is, how much does the game with an inferior SCORE have to improve in order to be preferable over the game with the better SCORE?

 

[Jack_Black]

So the question is, how much does the game with an inferior SCORE have to improve in order to be preferable over the game with the better SCORE?

95.24-57.55=37.69 SCORE
:laugh::joker::whip:

 

[Jack_Black]

However, if you can play the weaker game twice as fast then it becomes stronger in comparison because the NO is reached in less time. So if the stronger game has a full table and you can get heads up with the weaker game then the weaker game is probably better due to speed of play.

It has to be huge difference though. like playing the bad game heads up with a fast dealer vs a full table at the good game with extra slow players. I recently posted about my experience playing an 8D heads up vs a 3 player DD game. the TC still jumps up more frequently in the DD game than the 8decker. so although you are playing the 8D faster, you're still waiting for the high TC shoe vs sharing the multiple high TC DD.

 

[SleightOfHand]

95.24-57.55=37.69 SCORE
:laugh::joker::whip:

Lol let me rephrase. How much faster does game A have to be to be superior to game B?

It has to be huge difference though. like playing the bad game heads up with a fast dealer vs a full table at the good game with extra slow players. I recently posted about my experience playing an 8D heads up vs a 3 player DD game. the TC still jumps up more frequently in the DD game than the 8decker. so although you are playing the 8D faster, you're still waiting for the high TC shoe vs sharing the multiple high TC DD.

But how much better? There should be an objective way to determine the better game. I always thought it was CE, but a 2% improvement seems too small.

 

[zengrifter]

If using CE as the determining factor, game A would have to improve to $100.80/hr, which is only 2% greater than game B. Although I am a huge supporter of using CE for game selection, I would disagree in this case.

What do you guys think?

Playing faster will improve HOURLY EV, but the underlying analysis - SCORE NO DI STD will NOT change.

This is remotely similar to the teaming concept - smoothing the flux with multiple players - the team flux is smoother, but the end result and RoR is not altered, you just get to the end result faster. zg

 

[SleightOfHand]

Thinking about it, the 2% may be all that needs to be added. The hourly SDs and WR are the same, implying that we will be experiencing the same size swings (per hour played) for the same amount of money. So, in the practical sense, these games are the same. However, the higher advantage/lower avg bet still makes game B superior. However, practically, how much $ you make for a day's work is what's important, assuming acceptable risk (at least in this situation/stakes).

Therefore, only a slight increase in speed would game A need to be superior to game B. Anyone?

 

[mjbballar23]

you gotta think that if you have the option of playing game 1 heads up or game 2 at a full table, you have to take game 1. It sucks that your NO is higher but your hourly will also be higher. game 1 is going to take 68000 hands to overcome 2 SDs of variance .

 

[blackjack avenger]

CE Not For Me

Forget the CE, these games are not even close! There is no way to improve the weaker game, it is weaker. Look at the NO of the weaker game; if played twice as fast, the NO is cut in half in relation to time.

When you go into the casino look at both games, if the weaker one is being played twice as fast then pick it. If it's hard to judge then it does not matter because they are close! If played at the same speed then play the better game.

heads up 200 hands hr
full table 40 to 50 hands an hr
extrapolate others as you will

:joker::whip:
good cards

 

[SleightOfHand]

Forget the CE, these games are not even close! There is no way to improve the weaker game, it is weaker. Look at the NO of the weaker game; if played twice as fast, the NO is cut in half in relation to time.

When you go into the casino look at both games, if the weaker one is being played twice as fast then pick it. If it's hard to judge then it does not matter because they are close! If played at the same speed then play the better game.

heads up 200 hands hr
full table 40 to 50 hands an hr
extrapolate others as you will

:joker::whip:
good cards

It looks to me that people are getting too stuck on SCORE/N0. I'm not saying it's a bad measure, I use it on occasion, but a strong SCORE does not imply a playable game. A game spreading $1-$50 will have a stronger c-SCORE/N0 than a game spreading $50-$500, but the amount of money you will win is drastically smaller, making the game with a smaller c-SCORE preferable (once again, assuming acceptable risk).

Same thought process goes for this game. I am not looking at how strong the game is, I know that 95 > 58. But just look at the games. Game As hands/hr was intentionally inflated to give the same wr as game B. Now, let's say that game As speed was doubled to give 2x the wr (and sqrt(2)x the SD) of game B. I would think game A is the preferable game. Now what if it was 1.5x the wr? 1.25x? When do these games equal?

 

[zengrifter]

Same thought process goes for this game. I am not looking at how strong the game is, I know that 95 > 58. But just look at the games. Game As hands/hr was intentionally inflated to give the same wr as game B. Now, let's say that game As speed was doubled to give 2x the wr (and sqrt(2)x the SD) of game B. I would think game A is the preferable game. Now what if it was 1.5x the wr? 1.25x? When do these games equal?

They never 'equal' except as a real-time-motion effect.
The end result is just achieved faster? What am I missing? zg

 

[blackjack avenger]

RA vs EV Maximizing Games

Given your constraints of the better game having a low table max and the lesser game having a higher table max and you are not overbetting.
The better game is RA.
The lesser game is EV.
Take your choice, CE does have a subjective parameter? If the better game does not make enough money for you then don't play it.

Nothing on the 2 line table you provide gives any indication to me of different table max's or hands played?

Given a 10g bank (SCORE) the only way the lesser game becomes comparable is with faster play. SCORE does quantify risk.

:joker::whip:
good cards

 

[SleightOfHand]

Given your constraints of the better game having a low table max and the lesser game having a higher table max and you are not overbetting.
The better game is RA.
The lesser game is EV.
Take your choice, CE does have a subjective parameter? If the better game does not make enough money for you then don't play it.

CE has a somewhat subjective parameter, that being the risk you are willing to take determined by a kelly fraction. In the extreme example I gave, the $1-$50 game would have a CE that is approximately equal to the WR, while the $50-$500 game would have a CE that is approximately 1/2 the WR, which implies the heavier risk. However, the "weaker" game would still have a higher CE than the "stronger" game, making it the preferred game.

Nothing on the 2 line table you provide gives any indication to me of different table max's or hands played?

The relevant information was provided. It was a premise in comparing 2 games with equal hourly WRs and risk (it doesn't have to be blackjack) but different SCOREs (well, c-SCOREs). The real question was regarding if and how much of an increase in speed would game A require to be preferable to game B.

Given a 10g bank (SCORE) the only way the lesser game becomes comparable is with faster play. SCORE does quantify risk.

:joker::whip:
good cards

SCORE quantifies risk, but not preferability. Given a 50k BR, would you really play a $1-50 game over a $50-500 game (with the same conditions)?

 

[blackjack avenger]

Apples to Oranges

In your table the ror is about equal. Yet, you discuss vastly different table max's, this would drastically change ror?

Let's look at the table for what variables can be influenced. The game rules and bets cannot be changed and keep the same ror.

I think that only leaves us speed of play? I think you see that?
example.
The better game you play at 50 hands hr NO is 210 hrs
The lesser game you play at 100 hands hr NO is 173.77 hrs
NO being a way to rate games; lower NO being better, with speed of play the lesser game can become more.