unJon
unJon
Joined: Jul 1, 2018
  • Threads: 10
  • Posts: 1257
November 11th, 2019 at 6:48:28 PM permalink
Quote: charliepatrick

Sounds like it, here are the figures for the same 10m shoes...

Penetration
Hands -ve
Hands 0
Hands +ve
16%
42.449 386%
19.739 665%
37.810 949%
66%
46.594 948%
9.182 004%
44.223 048%
83%
46.746 182%
8.544 526%
44.709 293%



Intuitively, I would think the above results are not drivin solely by the cut card effect but also by the effect mentioned by Gordon above, which is partially independent of the cut card (but exacerbated by the cut card). Would be interested in seeing the above where the shoe is cut off after a set number of rounds that approximate the penetrations above.
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
DogHand
DogHand 
Joined: Sep 24, 2011
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 268
Thanks for this post from:
charliepatrick
November 12th, 2019 at 10:47:23 AM permalink
Folks,

How can I post an image from my computer?

I have an example that demonstrates the Cut Card Effect, but I cannot seem to get it posted here.

I tried uploading it to this URL:

https://ibb.co/SwWmSv9

but I'm still unable to get the picture to appear here.

Thanks!

Dog Hand
gordonm888
gordonm888
Joined: Feb 18, 2015
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 2067
November 12th, 2019 at 12:26:36 PM permalink
Here is your image, although its easier to read by going to the link site.



It looks like you only studied penetrations up to one deck in a 6-deck shoe, is that right?
So many better men, a few of them friends, were dead. And a thousand thousand slimy things lived on, and so did I.
DogHand
DogHand 
Joined: Sep 24, 2011
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 268
November 12th, 2019 at 6:36:54 PM permalink
Quote: gordonm888

Here is your image, although its easier to read by going to the link site.



It looks like you only studied penetrations up to one deck in a 6-deck shoe, is that right?



gordonm888,

Thanks for posting the image!

Yes, this is to compare with the 16% pen 6D UK-rules data from earlier in the thread.

The left side is using a Cut Card; the right side is for a fixed number of rounds. As you can see, for the fixed rounds data the average RC and TC are both zero (no Cut Card Effect), while the CC data show a marked drop in the RC and TC as the CC is approached.

Hope this helps!

Dog Hand
UKMark
UKMark
Joined: Jan 6, 2017
  • Threads: 6
  • Posts: 69
November 20th, 2019 at 10:12:23 AM permalink
Thanks all for your time and effort in discussing this question. I am wondering if your data comes from a purely mathematical model or does it come from simulated game play, and if so do you use a dealer strategy or a basic BJ strategy?

I have a game simulator that can use either strategy plus I can enable/disable the new game feature and the data I get back regarding the HE can vary from -2.95% in favour of the house to 1.47% in favour of the player when running as std BJ with a virtual CC 49 cards deep which basically emulates the effect of a CSM as the used cards are reshuffled into the available cards once 49 (16%) cards are exposed. I can mimic a shoe by upping the CC to 259 (83%).

Obviously I am questioning myself as to whether I have a bug in the game sim due to the results!

1 player, basic strategy, 100,000 games(101,754 hands dealt includes splits) results in HE of 1.52% Player advantage

1 player, basic strategy, 500,000 games(508,901 hands dealt includes splits) results in HE of 1.50% Player advantage

5 players, basic strategy, 100,000 games(511,305 hands dealt includes splits) results in HE of -1.08% House advantage

5 players, basic strategy, 20,000 games(102,303 hands dealt includes splits) results in HE of 1.34% Player advantage

CC in all cases at 49 so emulating a CSM deal with 6 decks

Dealer Strategy results are;

1 player, 100,000 (100,930) -3.51% House
1 player 500,000 (504,504) -2.82% House
5 players, 100,000 (505,736) -2.87% House
5 players, 20,000 (101,166) -3.13% House

One other thing to note is that this is European style BJ paying insurance at 1-1 on dealer Ace showing (one card dealt)

Any thoughts? other than, go check my code :-) or should that be :-(
Success comes in cans, not cant's
charliepatrick
charliepatrick
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 1781
Thanks for this post from:
UKMark
November 21st, 2019 at 3:57:46 PM permalink
I can't remember how wide the results were for such small numbers, but you can try it out by seeing how wide your range of results begin to converge as you ramp up the number of shoes/hands. I ssupect 100k hands is too variable and you need over 10 million hands before you get some consistency.

If you've still got a problem you need to check the code using other methods, such as using the random numbers to play roulette or craps (where you know the expected EV). Also you need to check the cards are being shuffled correctly when you come to the end of a shoe - I forget how I found a bug in my code but it was some simple game I had devised.

  • Jump to: