The Chaperone
Well-Known Member
You really think not wonging out of the bad counts increases your win rate???Jack_Black said:
Why play all?
- Thread starter MH1
- Start date
Jack_Black
Well-Known Member
no, it's the fact that you get more hands/hr. granted most of those hands are -EV hands, but you will get a few more +EV hands by getting more hands in. Look at this sim, but look only at custom bets under this first sim since I want to compare exact same bet ramps.The Chaperone said:
Now here's 2x hands/hr.
I am not skilled at reading sims. You are not playing all hands. So you are sitting out at the table? How practical is this? I do it sparingly but to do it routinely will cost longevity. Maybe people play crap games they don't mind burning but I do not have that approach. Back to what your sim says.
I think a better comparison is to look at the optimal bet or the custom ramps that resemble them. If you are really arguing to play all use a sim that does that. Of the 2 you have posted the optimal ramp is the only one that does that. Play all almost doubles your N0. If it can almost double your hands per hour it may keep up. The hourly win rate seems to indicate it does but I don't see rounds per hour in the results. It looks close enough that how crowded your table is (rounds/hr) might be the deciding factor on whether to stay or leave. How do the comparisons go if your custom ramp for play all really plays all? Can you modify the custom ramp as you actually would with your formula you use to customize the optimal ramp to fit your RoR tolerance level and any other considerations that you use when you customize a ramp. That is the true comparison.
I think a better comparison is to look at the optimal bet or the custom ramps that resemble them. If you are really arguing to play all use a sim that does that. Of the 2 you have posted the optimal ramp is the only one that does that. Play all almost doubles your N0. If it can almost double your hands per hour it may keep up. The hourly win rate seems to indicate it does but I don't see rounds per hour in the results. It looks close enough that how crowded your table is (rounds/hr) might be the deciding factor on whether to stay or leave. How do the comparisons go if your custom ramp for play all really plays all? Can you modify the custom ramp as you actually would with your formula you use to customize the optimal ramp to fit your RoR tolerance level and any other considerations that you use when you customize a ramp. That is the true comparison.
Jack Black,
So on the first Sim where back counting is turned on, is the 100 rounds per hour 100 observed rounds per hour or 100 played rounds per hour? I thought I read in the CVCX manual that when back counting is turned on, you enter the number of observed rounds per hour. But the hourly win rate on top is 100 times the win rate per round. Does this mean that on average, you expect to win $1.87 per observed round or for every round played? On my sim, I have always entered the approximate number of rounds that I actually play per hour (coming in at +1 leaving at -1). Or should I be using the number of rounds I observe per hour?
So on the first Sim where back counting is turned on, is the 100 rounds per hour 100 observed rounds per hour or 100 played rounds per hour? I thought I read in the CVCX manual that when back counting is turned on, you enter the number of observed rounds per hour. But the hourly win rate on top is 100 times the win rate per round. Does this mean that on average, you expect to win $1.87 per observed round or for every round played? On my sim, I have always entered the approximate number of rounds that I actually play per hour (coming in at +1 leaving at -1). Or should I be using the number of rounds I observe per hour?
blackjack avenger
Well-Known Member
the sims
Are showing play all heads up where you would see & play 200 hands an hour
Vs
Wonging a table with 4 others where you would see 100 hands and play 25 of those hands.
So it seems
Are showing play all heads up where you would see & play 200 hands an hour
Vs
Wonging a table with 4 others where you would see 100 hands and play 25 of those hands.
So it seems
moo321
Well-Known Member
WHOA!
Winrate is based on hands seen per hour when wonging, and hands played with play all. Play all does not increase hands seen significantly vs. wonging, in fact it can decrease it.
Wonging helps winrate, lower variance, lowers n0 and should always be done if possible. It lets you bet more safely. And if you wong in and then play all, you get rated higher because you have a larger bet out when checking in, and may lessen heat because you appear to spread less.
Let me illustrate: I plan on spreading 10-150 on a shoe game. I can check in, buy in for like $500 and start betting $10. I look like a $10 bettor, and will get treated as such. Also, when I jump to $150 it looks weird.
On the other hand, if I wait for +2 or +3 and jump in with a $50 bet, I get rated as a $50 player, and if I jump to $150 it looks like nothing. If I drop back down to $10, it doesn't look like much.
So it aids cover, winrate, comps, etc. Wonging is fantastic, and should be used by everyone UNLESS there's a good reason not to.
Winrate is based on hands seen per hour when wonging, and hands played with play all. Play all does not increase hands seen significantly vs. wonging, in fact it can decrease it.
Wonging helps winrate, lower variance, lowers n0 and should always be done if possible. It lets you bet more safely. And if you wong in and then play all, you get rated higher because you have a larger bet out when checking in, and may lessen heat because you appear to spread less.
Let me illustrate: I plan on spreading 10-150 on a shoe game. I can check in, buy in for like $500 and start betting $10. I look like a $10 bettor, and will get treated as such. Also, when I jump to $150 it looks weird.
On the other hand, if I wait for +2 or +3 and jump in with a $50 bet, I get rated as a $50 player, and if I jump to $150 it looks like nothing. If I drop back down to $10, it doesn't look like much.
So it aids cover, winrate, comps, etc. Wonging is fantastic, and should be used by everyone UNLESS there's a good reason not to.
blackjack avenger
Well-Known Member
mooooooooooooooo
I agree with ur post
Jackblack showed the effectiveness of the speed of heads up play. This idea is not new.
One could decide to play less aggressive and let the speed of play bring an acceptable win rate. Though I like consistency of bet ramps to keep N0 low
I agree with ur post
Jackblack showed the effectiveness of the speed of heads up play. This idea is not new.
One could decide to play less aggressive and let the speed of play bring an acceptable win rate. Though I like consistency of bet ramps to keep N0 low
Nynefingers
Well-Known Member
He didn't show a heads up sim. Both were 4 players.blackjack avenger said:
blackjack avenger
Well-Known Member
your right nye
Now I am not sure what Jackblack is stating.
However, if u look at the play all sim as heads up with 200 hands per hr being played, it's
interesting compared to wonging a table with 4.
Now I am not sure what Jackblack is stating.
However, if u look at the play all sim as heads up with 200 hands per hr being played, it's
interesting compared to wonging a table with 4.
Jack_Black
Well-Known Member
??????? this is just a sim of 400,000,000 rounds played whether that be play all or wonging. it doesn't sim the heat of sitting at a table doing nothing, waiting for the count to turn +. you gotta figure it out yourself to make it look natural.tthree said:
CVCX is an optimal bet ramp calculator. the bet ramp generated is based on parameters you input into it. game rules, pen, desired ROR, etc. The custom bet is the only bet you can control, and then the program will tell you how that affects your SCORE, winrate, etc.
you're confused on what you're looking at. the first sim I posted was for wonging and playing ONLY +TC counts. the hands/hr is 100 since you require there to be other players at the table. thus, the calculator spit out an extremely high top bet since ROR has dropped significantly. but perhaps the OP didn't want to use such a high top bet for one reason or another. I decided to skip ahead on the calc, use the program's optimal bet ramp for play all, then went back and used it as a custom bet, minus the bets used during negative counts and now you have a wonging bet ramp that matches a play all bet ramp to compare apples to apples.
The second sim is of only play all, and there is no need to look at custom bet(which is the wonging bet ramp) since it is highly unlikely you will be able to play a wonging strategy at 200hands/hr.
Jack_Black
Well-Known Member
Interesting. that's a question best left for QFIT. however, I would think that during a wonging sim that the hands/hr is actual hands played. I base this off of the bottom left column "count frequency." the sum of all frequencies equals 100% so that could only mean ACTUAL hands played during a wonging sim.MH1 said:
And so I set up the sim wrong folks. during a wonging strategy, you will probably play 25 hands/hr, decreasing your winrate even more. I'm not gonna post another picture cuz I'm too lazy and it's tedious work. but the sim shows $67.25/hr using the optimal wonging ramp, and $46.80 using the matching play all/wonging ramp. and you're just gonna have to trust me on that or DO THE DAMN SIM YOURSELF!
Jack_Black
Well-Known Member
Nynefingers said:
Jesus H. Christ. it's a minor detail for pete's sake. if I changed the sim to run with 1 player only, the difference is about 3 SCORE and about 300 N0 hands. and heads up speed is more like 300-360 hands/hr. I was just proving a point that even just doubling your hands/hr and playing all is better for your winrate than wonging. now that I and MH1 noticed that when inputting parameters for wonging that one should use ACTUAL hands played, wonging now further decreases your winrate. but all in all, if your concern is BR and ROR then by all means wong until the cows come home.blackjack avenger said:
blackjack avenger
Well-Known Member
something seems off
Heads up 200 hands an hr
4 players 100 hands an hr
Full table 50 hands hr
All approximates
As per a study by Wong and written by Sch.
A wonger plays approximately 25% of hands he sees.
A play all plays approx. 25% positive expectation hands.
A wonger does not play fewer positive expectation hands. This is obvious if one thinks of a 1 table casino.
A play all player can out earn a wonger watching a near full table.
Heads up 200 hands an hr
4 players 100 hands an hr
Full table 50 hands hr
All approximates
As per a study by Wong and written by Sch.
A wonger plays approximately 25% of hands he sees.
A play all plays approx. 25% positive expectation hands.
A wonger does not play fewer positive expectation hands. This is obvious if one thinks of a 1 table casino.
A play all player can out earn a wonger watching a near full table.
Jack_Black
Well-Known Member
Go time a heads up game and tell me if the fastest speed you get is 200hands/hr.
blackjack avenger
Well-Known Member
variables
The study was for shoes, as per your sims. The time also included shuffle times. I did say approx. Of course dealer and player speed would effect overall speed. I agree with you that heads up can overcome Wonging if conditions are right.
The study was for shoes, as per your sims. The time also included shuffle times. I did say approx. Of course dealer and player speed would effect overall speed. I agree with you that heads up can overcome Wonging if conditions are right.
chessplayer
Well-Known Member
The head up may include playing four bets.
junior_counter
Active Member
To the OP, MH1:
Will usually backcount first table. After jumping in and leaving at negative counts, I may decide to play all next table. Depends on the situation.
I'm probably being a bit paranoid, but if the place is empty, I feel like I'm standing out hoovering over tables w/ pit boss eyes looking my way wondering why I'm hesitant to jump in. The table isn't full and playing the part of newbie curious observer has been worn out after that first table wong in. They see I can play and am not foreign to the game.
After that I feel more comfortable playing all until there's a nice excuse to leave on negative count. ie., whole table or several players leave in disgust due to "hot dealer" and/or lousy hands. Dealer gets blackjack or turns several good hands off stiffs(consectively preferred); table moans, good time to leave. So, I guess it's really not playing all. Sort of an extended version of wonging.
Will usually backcount first table. After jumping in and leaving at negative counts, I may decide to play all next table. Depends on the situation.
I'm probably being a bit paranoid, but if the place is empty, I feel like I'm standing out hoovering over tables w/ pit boss eyes looking my way wondering why I'm hesitant to jump in. The table isn't full and playing the part of newbie curious observer has been worn out after that first table wong in. They see I can play and am not foreign to the game.
After that I feel more comfortable playing all until there's a nice excuse to leave on negative count. ie., whole table or several players leave in disgust due to "hot dealer" and/or lousy hands. Dealer gets blackjack or turns several good hands off stiffs(consectively preferred); table moans, good time to leave. So, I guess it's really not playing all. Sort of an extended version of wonging.