Count threshold for positive EV
July 13th, 2013 at 4:31:30 AM
permalink
I am early stages of learning BJ strategy using Hi-Lo, Ill 18, Fab 4 (described here
I understand that 1) playing basic strategy with a count <= 0 has negative EV; 2) The higher the true count the higher you want to bet, based loosely on a spread technique; and 3) you don't want to be too obvious in the ways you vary your bets.
My question is: at what point (at what count) using the Ill 18, Fab 4, do you actually end up with positive EV for the hand, before any cards come out? That is, if it weren't for there eyes being on you, and if you had an infinite bank to manage variability, at what count would you bet the minimum (because the EV for the hand based on the count was negative), and at what count would you bet the maximum (because the EV for the hand based on the count was positive).
Thanks!
I understand that 1) playing basic strategy with a count <= 0 has negative EV; 2) The higher the true count the higher you want to bet, based loosely on a spread technique; and 3) you don't want to be too obvious in the ways you vary your bets.
My question is: at what point (at what count) using the Ill 18, Fab 4, do you actually end up with positive EV for the hand, before any cards come out? That is, if it weren't for there eyes being on you, and if you had an infinite bank to manage variability, at what count would you bet the minimum (because the EV for the hand based on the count was negative), and at what count would you bet the maximum (because the EV for the hand based on the count was positive).
Thanks!
July 13th, 2013 at 7:19:42 AM
permalink
https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/7/
This appendix gives you an idea. A good estimate is that as the true count goes up by 1, the EV goes up by half of a percent.
So if your expected return at count zero is 99.6%, You are making slightly positive EV at TC1. At TC3, you have a 1% edge, and that's where many people ramp up their bets.
This appendix gives you an idea. A good estimate is that as the true count goes up by 1, the EV goes up by half of a percent.
So if your expected return at count zero is 99.6%, You are making slightly positive EV at TC1. At TC3, you have a 1% edge, and that's where many people ramp up their bets.
"Rule No.1: Never lose money. Rule No.2: Never forget rule No.1." -Warren Buffett on risk/return
July 14th, 2013 at 9:05:22 AM
permalink
There's a story that's gone around where apparently one of the MIT team guys (maybe JohnnyC, I'm not sure) once ran an experiment with Gorilla Big Players being called-in to shoes, by back-counting Spotters, where they played strictly basic strategy (no indexes) and flat bet table max (no bet ramp), backed up by a massive team bankroll... in order to greatly simplify team play, management, reduce error costs, etc.
At +1 you're basically playing a breakeven game assuming game rules giving about .5 house edge, off the top. At +2 TC you have a very slight edge (but possibly not enough to overcome possible errors that may accumulate over time). At +3 true count you're at about 1% player edge, which in theory should be enough to beat the game, long term.
The MIT team experiment noted above was allegedly successful... so, take that for what it's worth (if true... I've heard this story from other AP's but never actually seen it documented anywhere. Does anyone know for sure if it's ever been published or acknowledged by JohnnyC or someone else?)
-DBJT
At +1 you're basically playing a breakeven game assuming game rules giving about .5 house edge, off the top. At +2 TC you have a very slight edge (but possibly not enough to overcome possible errors that may accumulate over time). At +3 true count you're at about 1% player edge, which in theory should be enough to beat the game, long term.
The MIT team experiment noted above was allegedly successful... so, take that for what it's worth (if true... I've heard this story from other AP's but never actually seen it documented anywhere. Does anyone know for sure if it's ever been published or acknowledged by JohnnyC or someone else?)
-DBJT
--
http://www.detroitblackjackteam.com/
