Classic systems tested with new software. Martingale VS Oscar's Grind
June 3rd, 2012 at 9:35:09 AM
permalink
Hello,
I’m testing classic betting systems in blackjack with a new tool (www.theblackjacksimulator.com) and seeing the results, there are differences and it seems that all systems are not equally worthless depending on parameters (bankroll, betting unit, hands per game, etc)
I tested Martingale and Oscar’s Grind, and the results demonstrate that for blackjack, Oscar is better than Martin.
TEST 1
Initial bankroll=100, betting unit=5, hands per game=40, 1.000.000 games played
MARTINGALE
OSCAR's GRIND
TEST 2
Initial bankroll=100, betting unit=5, hands per game=20, 1.000.000 games played
MARTINGALE
OSCAR's GRIND
TEST 3
Initial bankroll=100.000, betting unit=5, hands per game=40, 1.000.000 games played
MARTINGALE
OSCAR's GRIND
In all tests, the average of all final bankrolls is greater in Oscar’s Grind.
For low bankrolls, Oscar’s is much better.
The distribution of final bankrolls is different. With Oscar, most times the player wins, but no very big winnings. With Martin (in this case when playing 40 hands), most times the player loses, but when he wins, he duplicates his initial bankroll.
Sorry for my english, it's not my native language.
I’m testing classic betting systems in blackjack with a new tool (www.theblackjacksimulator.com) and seeing the results, there are differences and it seems that all systems are not equally worthless depending on parameters (bankroll, betting unit, hands per game, etc)
I tested Martingale and Oscar’s Grind, and the results demonstrate that for blackjack, Oscar is better than Martin.
TEST 1
Initial bankroll=100, betting unit=5, hands per game=40, 1.000.000 games played
MARTINGALE
OSCAR's GRIND
TEST 2
Initial bankroll=100, betting unit=5, hands per game=20, 1.000.000 games played
MARTINGALE
OSCAR's GRIND
TEST 3
Initial bankroll=100.000, betting unit=5, hands per game=40, 1.000.000 games played
MARTINGALE
OSCAR's GRIND
In all tests, the average of all final bankrolls is greater in Oscar’s Grind.
For low bankrolls, Oscar’s is much better.
The distribution of final bankrolls is different. With Oscar, most times the player wins, but no very big winnings. With Martin (in this case when playing 40 hands), most times the player loses, but when he wins, he duplicates his initial bankroll.
Sorry for my english, it's not my native language.
June 3rd, 2012 at 11:09:56 AM
permalink
Ah, Morpheus the god of dreams.
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth. - Mahatma Ghandi
June 3rd, 2012 at 11:49:07 AM
permalink
Oscar's grind has a lower average bet. The house edge on the action is the same, with Martingale you get more action. If you must use a betting system, Oscar's grind is better...
Wisdom is the quality that keeps you out of situations where you would otherwise need it
June 3rd, 2012 at 12:58:44 PM
permalink
I have discovered that hitting myself on the head with a hammer hurts more than with a hairbrush.
June 3rd, 2012 at 1:00:08 PM
permalink
Quote: buzzpaffI have discovered that hitting myself on the head with a hammer hurts more than with a hairbrush.
Good one :)
Of course, hammers don't sing a siren song of money...
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
June 3rd, 2012 at 1:08:02 PM
permalink
Quote: NareedGood one :)
Of course, hammers don't sing a siren song of money...
That's why I can stop before I knock myself out.
June 3rd, 2012 at 2:01:41 PM
permalink
Quote: dwheatleyOscar's grind has a lower average bet. The house edge on the action is the same, with Martingale you get more action. If you must use a betting system, Oscar's grind is better...
So the conclusions is... the lower your average bet, the less you will lose over time.
Oscar is/was a smart man....
June 3rd, 2012 at 2:33:33 PM
permalink
removed
silly
silly
I Heart Vi Hart
June 4th, 2012 at 4:11:02 AM
permalink
I'm testing now more systems (including counting cards), comparing results and average bet, when i get the charts, I'll post them here.
