6:5 single only in +
December 5th, 2018 at 6:07:52 PM
permalink
I'm just curious...has anybody calculated/simmed what the house edge would be in a 6:5 single deck if you ONLY played positive counts? I guess I should lead to the next question I'm thinking...what spread would it take to beat it if you only played positive counts and then spread when the count is above +4? I know it's usually no mid entry but I would just wong out even if it's after the first hand to only stay in positives. It's something different just to mix it up when I get tired of shoes.
December 5th, 2018 at 6:28:09 PM
permalink
Quote: camz1969I'm just curious...has anybody calculated/simmed what the house edge would be in a 6:5 single deck if you ONLY played positive counts? I guess I should lead to the next question I'm thinking...what spread would it take to beat it if you only played positive counts and then spread when the count is above +4? I know it's usually no mid entry but I would just wong out even if it's after the first hand to only stay in positives. It's something different just to mix it up when I get tired of shoes.
If you are an 'advantage player', and are looking for an edge rather than just a 'seat' that is tolerable, it has been calculated, and a smarter math guy than me will chime in. But the answer is it will be very rare when you have an advantage on a 6:5 table; rare enough that you should not ever want to 'mix it up' by playing a 6:5 game. However, if you are so bored and must play something, 6:5 is better than roulette....
December 6th, 2018 at 12:32:05 AM
permalink
Pending the specific rules of the game you'll have an advantage around TC +4.
For 1D, H17, D9-11, NDAS, 6:5 you're looking at a house edge off the top of 1.84%. Each true count is "generically" worth about .5% to the player (I say generically because TC 1 is worth more about .75, but running a SIM on your game would show you the most accurate results).
I highly doubt you'd have any kind of longevity always sitting out every time the deck went negative... most places don't allow mid-shoe entry on short decks, and thus either you're screwed because the count will fluctuate a lot in SD, meaning you'll miss all of the following positive counts... or you're allowed to jump back in and you do so in positive counts again just begging for heat.
Another thing to consider is the increase in variance. Normal counters can progress through the true counts, where you will not. You basically will have a switch at TC +4 where you go from your bottom end bet to your top end bet. This will generate a lot more variance and probably need a larger bankroll than typical. Again, getting a SIM of this game (which you can go buy CVCX software for fairly cheap) would yield you more accurate results.
There is a very small advantage to be had here, but then begs the question... why put so much effort in to this game for such minimal return? If you're willing to learn to count, learn about bankroll management, RoR, indexes, etc, etc, why not just become a competent counter and crush other games where you not only have a better advantage but lower heat?
Answer: Technically beatable, and I can't tell you what your hourly EV would be because I don't know your spread... Worth it? For straight counting, no.
For 1D, H17, D9-11, NDAS, 6:5 you're looking at a house edge off the top of 1.84%. Each true count is "generically" worth about .5% to the player (I say generically because TC 1 is worth more about .75, but running a SIM on your game would show you the most accurate results).
I highly doubt you'd have any kind of longevity always sitting out every time the deck went negative... most places don't allow mid-shoe entry on short decks, and thus either you're screwed because the count will fluctuate a lot in SD, meaning you'll miss all of the following positive counts... or you're allowed to jump back in and you do so in positive counts again just begging for heat.
Another thing to consider is the increase in variance. Normal counters can progress through the true counts, where you will not. You basically will have a switch at TC +4 where you go from your bottom end bet to your top end bet. This will generate a lot more variance and probably need a larger bankroll than typical. Again, getting a SIM of this game (which you can go buy CVCX software for fairly cheap) would yield you more accurate results.
There is a very small advantage to be had here, but then begs the question... why put so much effort in to this game for such minimal return? If you're willing to learn to count, learn about bankroll management, RoR, indexes, etc, etc, why not just become a competent counter and crush other games where you not only have a better advantage but lower heat?
Answer: Technically beatable, and I can't tell you what your hourly EV would be because I don't know your spread... Worth it? For straight counting, no.
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
December 6th, 2018 at 2:40:01 AM
permalink
Romes,
Is each TC worth about 0.5% at 6:5? I know it’s the rule of thumb at 3:2, and at least some of the 0.5% per TC is for getting naturals. I would have thought TC would be worth less than 0.5% where naturals pay 6:5.
Is each TC worth about 0.5% at 6:5? I know it’s the rule of thumb at 3:2, and at least some of the 0.5% per TC is for getting naturals. I would have thought TC would be worth less than 0.5% where naturals pay 6:5.
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
December 6th, 2018 at 5:51:42 AM
permalink
On the GWAE podcast recently, a listener wrote in asking if 6:5 could be beaten. I was surprised at Munch's answer, which is that he knew several people who crushed 6:5 when it first became prevalent - and not with hole carding which is what I expected him to say. Apparently when 6:5 first rolled out, casinos essentially considered it uncountable, so you could bet whatever spread you wanted and not get any heat. With those parameters, I'm sure it would be beatable.
N.b. I was not around and did not try this strategy, so I'm only speaking 2nd or 3rd hand. But I was surprised at the answer. I think the casinos now sweat the 6:5 games a tiny bit, at least to the point where you can't just sit out negative counts and then Wong in with your max bet.
N.b. I was not around and did not try this strategy, so I'm only speaking 2nd or 3rd hand. But I was surprised at the answer. I think the casinos now sweat the 6:5 games a tiny bit, at least to the point where you can't just sit out negative counts and then Wong in with your max bet.
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
December 13th, 2018 at 1:38:17 AM
permalink
hard to believe u can't find a better game, even a very mediocre 3:2 shoe game would be vastly superior to any 6:5 nonsense
