Win rate:Was Thorpe mistaken?

[bj bob]

I am trying to determine (once and for all) exactly what I can reasonably expect to win (in the long run) from playing blackjack with card counting. To be as specific as possible, conventional "wisdom" seems to indicate that playing (and counting) with a typical edge i.e. .05-1.0% will produce the equivalent of one minimum unit/hour. Thus, at a $25 min. table, one would expect about a $25/hr. return(assuming a reasonable betting spread of 1-4 units at a SD table) This amount can be slightly increased by either a more effective count system, stretching the spread, or more favorable table rules.
All of this calculating seems to contradict the projections of the esteemed Prof. Thorpe who states in his book(p.71) that playing a 1-10 unit spread will result in a 8-10 unit yield/ hr which is closer to the max bet. Am I missing something in the translation or is it that, given the rules of the time, his calculations were correct then, but no longer valid? I would appreciate any clarity on this matter.

 

[zengrifter]

Thorp BTD was 45 years ago when the game conditions were better! The benchmark standard that we shoot for now (with JUST counting) is 2+ units per hour (per 100 hands). zg

 

[jetace]

In Thorpe's time, games existed where a player utilizing perfect basic strategy could expect a positive advantage without counting.

 

[zengrifter]

In Thorpe's time, games existed where a player utilizing perfect basic strategy could expect a positive advantage without counting.

Not typically - only the 1D s17 DAS and/or Sur games and there weren't many. More typical were the downtown h17 and Reno D10-11 versions... which, dealt down to the last card were incredible. zg

 

[bj bob]

So Thorpe was correct?

So you guys are saying that more penetration,Sl7 and SD will account for the difference in EV that Zg stated ,which is more than double the current expectation?

 

[Cass]

So you guys are saying that more penetration,Sl7 and SD will account for the difference in EV that Zg stated ,which is more than double the current expectation?

Yes! Penetration makes a HUGE difference in EV!!

 

[zengrifter]

Yes, circa '60: fewer decks, better rules, deeper pene. zg

 

[bj bob]

Just to Clarify

I see what you folks are saying about pen. but I'm having a hard time grasping that SD(-.10) DAS(+.14)SUR(+.15)Sl7(+.19)all ideal rules,hardly make up the whopping difference in EV. So therefore, you are then saying that max. pen. makes up almost another .5-1.0% in pos. EV?

 

[zengrifter]

For a card counter PENE is the single most important factor but is of negligible value for the non-counter. However, in the old 1D deep-pene games as the pene goes beyond 50% the housEdge does plummet and the edge swings to the player even in a neutral/0 count. zg

 

[bj bob]

So Therefore

Ye sage wizards! What it comes down to is that you would prefer to play 1D, NDAS ,H17, D10-11, NSur (i.e. typical Reno rules) with 45 card PEN over 6D ,DAS,S17,DD(any 2),Sur with 70% PEN and liberal spread?

 

[Cass]

Ye sage wizards! What it comes down to is that you would prefer to play 1D, NDAS ,H17, D10-11, NSur (i.e. typical Reno rules) with 45 card PEN over 6D ,DAS,S17,DD(any 2),Sur with 70% PEN and liberal spread?

The SD game would have about a 1.75% advantage using hilo with a 1-4 spread, and the 6decker would have about a .75% advantage using 1-10 spread.