Error in table of the book: The Theory Of Blackjack?

I just purchased Peter Griffin's famous book. I'm not sure, but I think there is an error in the table (and resulting calculation) in the section called "As An Example", in the 3rd Chapter. The 3 "expectation" numbers for the first player hand listed (5,6), should be 1, .5, .5, in that order, if my math is correct. I thought this might be an insignificant typo, but the error is carried down to the "Total Expectation" equal to 6.67 %. I get 0% for "Total Expectation". This bothers me because this book was written so long ago, and there have been 5 more editions since then. It's hard to believe that this wasn't corrected by the last edition. The only reason I can think of for this apparent oversight is maybe this "...Example" was inserted in the last edition, and therefore never had a chance to be corrected? Any thoughts? Thanks.

Quote: spassky962000

Any thoughts? Thanks.

Double Down

Quote: spassky962000

I just purchased Peter Griffin's famous book. I'm not sure, but I think there is an error in the table (and resulting calculation) in the section called "As An Example", in the 3rd Chapter. The 3 "expectation" numbers for the first player hand listed (5,6), should be 1, .5, .5, in that order, if my math is correct. I thought this might be an insignificant typo, but the error is carried down to the "Total Expectation" equal to 6.67 %. I get 0% for "Total Expectation". This bothers me because this book was written so long ago, and there have been 5 more editions since then. It's hard to believe that this wasn't corrected by the last edition. The only reason I can think of for this apparent oversight is maybe this "...Example" was inserted in the last edition, and therefore never had a chance to be corrected? Any thoughts? Thanks.

There are many known errors in the book. The baccarat chapter is particulary noteworthy in this respect.

Thanks GBV. Now that I've read further in the book, I see what you mean, Mr. Griffin seemed to breeze by some of his conclusions without much rigor and/or justification. I've passed a few actuary exams, so am hoping to still be able to follow his thinking! I wish he was still with us.