Johnboy85
Joined: Jan 18, 2017
• Posts: 40
January 1st, 2019 at 4:21:25 AM permalink
Hi all,

Happy new year to all.
I've been playing a BJ game with a house ege of just over 0.25%. Not bad by most online standards.
Anyway, I've been meticulously collecting my results for the past 6 months or so and according to this calculator (https://www.card-counting.com/calcrisk.htm ), my results are about 7.7 standard deviations from normal. Now I understand that calculator may be somehow flawed and that 2 sessions in particular skew the sum of the amount lost, but the overall results still seem to me to be pretty unbelievable.

Please have a look and let me know if you think it warrants a formal complaint.

Rules
6 Decks
3:2 BJ
S17
DAS
Split and Resplit Aces
Late Surrender
OnceDear
Joined: Jun 1, 2014
• Posts: 4330
January 1st, 2019 at 5:45:58 AM permalink
Quote: Johnboy85

Hi all,

Happy new year to all.
I've been playing a BJ game with a house ege of just over 0.25%. Not bad by most online standards.
Anyway, I've been meticulously collecting my results for the past 6 months or so and according to this calculator (https://www.card-counting.com/calcrisk.htm ), my results are about 7.7 standard deviations from normal. Now I understand that calculator may be somehow flawed and that 2 sessions in particular skew the sum of the amount lost, but the overall results still seem to me to be pretty unbelievable.

Please have a look and let me know if you think it warrants a formal complaint.

Rules
6 Decks
3:2 BJ
S17
DAS
Split and Resplit Aces
Late Surrender

Your calc on line 60 assumes that all wagers were equal to the average wager, but that is not so, so your total SD calculation is incorrect. It can only be calculated up from the individual wagers if they were of significantly different values.

Your wagering sessions of rows 26 - 27 MASSIVELY dominate. It may well be (I rather suspect) that even within those sessions, that there were some even larger wagers that dominated those sessions.
I did insert an average wager column and rows 24-27 were much higher than average.

Without trying to redo your maths, I'm afraid the results look pretty ordinary.
Take care out there. Spare a thought for the newly poor who were happy in their world just a few days ago, but whose whole way of life just collapsed..
standbymyman
Joined: Feb 13, 2015