teliot
teliot
  • Threads: 43
  • Posts: 2871
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
March 5th, 2014 at 9:55:32 PM permalink
Quote: DSchles


4. Just one man's opinion: Eliot's article is next-to-useless. It illustrates and "proves" absolutely nothing. And, if it was an attempt to discredit the I18, it fails miserably, as did Grosjean in the abject nonsense he wrote in Exhibit CAA. If you want to know their motives for writing such drivel, you'll have to ask them. I might speculate that petty jealousy and a fierce desire to discredit another man's work are the main driving forces, but I'm not going to waste any more of my time or yours on the topic.

Regards,

Don

Point #4 above added, without comment or rebuttal, as a note at the bottom of the referenced blog post on APHeat.
Climate Casino: https://climatecasino.net/climate-casino/
teliot
teliot
  • Threads: 43
  • Posts: 2871
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
March 6th, 2014 at 8:06:28 AM permalink
Quote: DSchles

3. Many of you own Norm's genial software, CVCX. In the canned sims portion, one may choose Hi-Lo, Sweet 16 (not even the full I18, because ten-splits are eliminated) + Fab 4 (meaningful, of course, only if you stipulate a late surrender game), or one may choose Full Indices. I urge you to play with the two to your heart's content, comparing SCOREs for first one, then the second set of indices.

Typically, for my shoe studies, I would choose something along the lines of: 4.5/6, S17, DAS, four players, play-all, 1-12 spread. When one does that for the two scenarios above, the truncated indices win 89.4% of the full indices. This is altogether typical. You may change the pen, the rules, the number of players, and/or the spread, but you will virtually always find the truncated indices winning 85%-92% of the full indices.


Result 1 -- $0/$100 betting, starting at a TC of +1, all indices, perfect RC/TC conversion, max bet $100, results provided by Norm Wattenberger. $33.58 per 100 hands.

Result 2 -- ramp betting (1-to-12), 22 indices, 1/4-deck RC/TC conversion, max bet $100, results quoted from BJA, 2nd edition, by Donald Schlesinger. $19.42 per 100 hands.

Result 2 returns 57.8% of Result 1 for 6D, DAS, DOA, H17, with cut card at 52.
Climate Casino: https://climatecasino.net/climate-casino/
jopke
jopke
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 132
Joined: Aug 14, 2012
March 6th, 2014 at 9:05:55 AM permalink
Eliot posted about BJ card counting and came to the conclusion it isn't lucrative and casinos shouldn't worry so much about it.

It seems that result is favorable for any AP that counts cards at BJ. Why would you want to correct any flaws in the argument? Seems akin to returning an incorrect payout at the tables.
AcesAndEights
AcesAndEights
  • Threads: 67
  • Posts: 4300
Joined: Jan 5, 2012
March 6th, 2014 at 9:07:25 AM permalink
Quote: jopke

Eliot posted about BJ card counting and came to the conclusion it isn't lucrative and casinos shouldn't worry so much about it.

It seems that result is favorable for any AP that counts cards at BJ. Why would you want to correct any flaws in the argument? Seems akin to returning an incorrect payout at the tables.


This. I don't really care about picking nits, I just hope Eliot is successful in his endeavors to get casinos to not care about card counting.
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
Buzzard
Buzzard
  • Threads: 90
  • Posts: 6814
Joined: Oct 28, 2012
March 6th, 2014 at 9:26:09 AM permalink
Don, just want to let you know that if you need tutoring, I am available.
Shed not for her the bitter tear Nor give the heart to vain regret Tis but the casket that lies here, The gem that filled it Sparkles yet
anonimuss
anonimuss
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 446
Joined: Aug 26, 2013
March 6th, 2014 at 9:29:09 AM permalink
Quote:

Correct. Thanks for taking the time to carefully read and understand what I wrote. I also did the work for a 1-to-8 spread. A perfect card counter with a $100 max bet earns $33.58 per 100. Other card counters with a max bet of $100 win less. In particular, I quantified sub-optimal play of the type described in BJA, by normalizing to a $100 max bet.

With regard to side bets, I agree (for the most part) with the sentiment that side bets are not a threat at the $25 level (Slingo, and UR Way Egalite aside). I make no claims otherwise. Worldwide, side bets pose a very serious threat to game integrity and are a major target of high-level advantage play.

My intention with my articles is not to call out mediocre card counters for their obsession. It is quite the opposite. I want to get casinos off of their obsession with low-level card counters. I want to help casinos quantify the risks they face by giving scalable metrics. Win per 100 hands with a $100 max bet is a scalable metric. Perfect card counting is $33.58. Card counting of the type described by DonS is $15 to $20.

For example, card counting the UR Way Egalite baccarat side bet yields about $1950 per 100 hands. It would take an average skill-level blackjack card counter wagering a max bet of about $10000 per hand to be equal in risk to a UR Egalite card counter wagering $100. This is what I mean by scalable metrics.




Perfect card counting isn't "33.58". I wouldn't get out bed unless the game I simmed was $125/hr or better and I wasn't at the top of the heap. The intention of your article is to try and gain a reputation by denigrating another author's work. BJA doesn't describe "sub-optimal play". You fail to grasp the simplest concepts of blackjack. If you can play 25% more hours with a 10% reduction in your win rate by using 22 indices instead of 140 you make more money from a casino. Need me to do the math for you? You should stop pigeonholing card counters based on your real life experiences.
geoff
geoff
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 368
Joined: Feb 19, 2014
March 6th, 2014 at 9:34:30 AM permalink
Quote: AcesAndEights

This. I don't really care about picking nits, I just hope Eliot is successful in his endeavors to get casinos to not care about card counting.



As a counter I'm happy to have him out there telling the casinos it just isn't profitable to do all that much to stop us. As an educated person using sims without proper controls in the way he did just irks me something bad. A college freshman would fail a class miserably if he designed such a comparison let alone someone who is supposed to be a professional.
anonimuss
anonimuss
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 446
Joined: Aug 26, 2013
March 6th, 2014 at 9:40:46 AM permalink
It's actually a double parroting by teliot with some Zender thrown in.
CrystalMath
CrystalMath
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 1909
Joined: May 10, 2011
March 6th, 2014 at 11:02:39 AM permalink
Quote: anonimuss

Perfect card counting isn't "33.58". I wouldn't get out bed unless the game I simmed was $125/hr or better and I wasn't at the top of the heap.
...
Need me to do the math for you?



I want to see your math. Are you claiming that you can earn $125 per hour with a max bet of $100?
I heart Crystal Math.
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22272
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
March 6th, 2014 at 12:19:54 PM permalink
Quote: jopke

Eliot posted about BJ card counting and came to the conclusion it isn't lucrative and casinos shouldn't worry so much about it.

It seems that result is favorable for any AP that counts cards at BJ. Why would you want to correct any flaws in the argument? Seems akin to returning an incorrect payout at the tables.

Discrediting and proving they have no need for dark sider's might be more valuable, that way the casinos can spend less money on useless consulting fees and use it to promote how people can beat Vegas. Then rake in the rewards, as it brings in tons of failing counters and AP's. Some of them became life long losing customer's some even turn to the dark side after failing miserably. What a vicious cycle. Just pray I don't turn to the dark side.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
CRMousseau
CRMousseau
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 117
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
March 6th, 2014 at 12:59:08 PM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

Discrediting and proving they have no need for dark sider's might be more valuable, that way the casinos can spend less money on useless consulting fees and use it to promote how people can beat Vegas. Then rake in the rewards, as it brings in tons of failing counters and AP's. Some of them became life long losing customer's some even turn to the dark side after failing miserably. What a vicious cycle. Just pray I don't turn to the dark side.



Yes, because an industry revolving entirely around math, still dominated by people poorly versed in math, is spending "useless consulting fees" to become better educated in math.
Tanko
Tanko
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 1195
Joined: Apr 22, 2013
March 6th, 2014 at 1:31:13 PM permalink
Quote: anonimuss

You fail to grasp the simplest concepts of blackjack. If you can play 25% more hours with a 10% reduction in your win rate by using 22 indices instead of 140 you make more money from a casino. Need me to do the math for you? You should stop pigeonholing card counters based on your real life experiences.


I'd like to see the math too.

Incidently, your tone and attitude throughout this thread is suspiciously the same as the tone and attitude exhibited by this member in another thread:

Quote: RicardoEsteban


eliot jacobson continues his quest to be world's most loathsome man, now pulling ahead of Mullah Omar into the #6 spot

stockholm syndrome ploppies call for APs in handcuffs


Hard not to notice.
AxiomOfChoice
AxiomOfChoice
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 5761
Joined: Sep 12, 2012
March 6th, 2014 at 1:36:18 PM permalink
Quote: Tanko

I'd like to see the math too.



0.9 * 1.25 = 1.125 > 1
beachbumbabs
beachbumbabs
  • Threads: 100
  • Posts: 14260
Joined: May 21, 2013
March 6th, 2014 at 1:38:43 PM permalink
Quote: Tanko

I'd like to see the math too.

Incidently, your tone and attitude throughout this thread is suspiciously the same as the tone and attitude exhibited by this member in another thread:


Hard not to notice.



Yeah, I'm looking at the tone of all this, too. Been riding the razor's edge of the rules with contempt and meanness.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
anonimuss
anonimuss
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 446
Joined: Aug 26, 2013
March 6th, 2014 at 4:05:33 PM permalink
Quote: anonimuss

If you can play 25% more hours with a 10% reduction in your win rate by using 22 indices instead of 140 you make more money from a casino.



Quote: Tanko

I'd like to see the math too.

Incidently, your tone and attitude throughout this thread is suspiciously the same as the tone and attitude exhibited by this member in another thread:


Hard not to notice.



LOL.. Okay Sherlock. Here's the math. You win 90% as much with the I18 as you do with a full spread of indices. A counter with a full spread would win $100 for every $90 a counter using the I18 wins. If the counter wins $100 an hour for 8 hours with a full spread of indices and the counter using I18 wins $90 an hour for 10 hours, I'll leave it to you to do the math from here.
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
March 6th, 2014 at 4:14:56 PM permalink
Quote: anonimuss

LOL.. Okay Sherlock. Here's the math. You win 90% as much with the I18 as you do with a full spread of indices. A counter with a full spread would win $100 for every $90 a counter using the I18 wins. If the counter wins $100 an hour for 8 hours with a full spread of indices and the counter using I18 wins $90 an hour for 10 hours, I'll leave it to you to do the math from here.


Next you're going to tell us that 15 minutes could save you 15% or more on car insurance.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
anonimuss
anonimuss
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 446
Joined: Aug 26, 2013
March 6th, 2014 at 4:16:54 PM permalink
He didn't understand the math and asked me to explain it to him. I did. And Geico charges more than anybody I ever received a quote from.
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
March 6th, 2014 at 4:18:30 PM permalink
Quote: anonimuss

He didn't understand the math and asked me to explain it to him. I did. And Geico charges more than anybody I ever received a quote from.

"Math": you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
anonimuss
anonimuss
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 446
Joined: Aug 26, 2013
March 6th, 2014 at 4:26:55 PM permalink
Looking for someone to talk to?
teliot
teliot
  • Threads: 43
  • Posts: 2871
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
March 8th, 2014 at 10:49:40 AM permalink
In this post on bj21.com, DS states:

Quote:

CVCX: 4.5/6, S17, DAS, four players, $25-$300 optimal spread. Sweet 16 hourly win: $48.88.

Scaling this to a $100 maximum bet, as in my articles, this game gives a win rate of $16.29 per hour. This win-rate is consistent with the results presented in my article on the "average blackjack card counter". The numbers in my article were based on results presented in BJA#2. I don't know what all the fighting is about.

I am not clear where the phrase "$25-$300 optimal spread" comes from. In the context of the simulation DS performed, the optimal spread is "$0 or $300." Suboptimal spreads arise, for example, from using the Kelly criterion because of being underfunded with respect to the table limit.
Climate Casino: https://climatecasino.net/climate-casino/
treetopbuddy
treetopbuddy
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 1739
Joined: Jan 12, 2013
March 8th, 2014 at 1:08:38 PM permalink
I feel somewhat silly and over my head when weighing in on this subject but that hasn't stopped me before....... according to Scarne, he welcomed card counters. He claimed the rake, take or whatever it's called didn't change......5% on blackjack.
Each day is better than the next
rdw4potus
rdw4potus
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 7237
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
March 8th, 2014 at 2:28:38 PM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

"Math": you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.



Please, please. go for small words next time. totally worth the brief hiatus...:-)
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
rdw4potus
rdw4potus
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 7237
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
March 8th, 2014 at 2:30:12 PM permalink
Quote: anonimuss

He didn't understand the math and asked me to explain it to him. I did. And Geico charges more than anybody I ever received a quote from.



You do realize there's a difference between a $100 max bet and a $100 hourly take, right? Because it sure looks like you just whiffed there...
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
anonimuss
anonimuss
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 446
Joined: Aug 26, 2013
March 8th, 2014 at 4:43:27 PM permalink
Quote: teliot

In this post on bj21.com, DS states:

Scaling this to a $100 maximum bet, as in my articles, this game gives a win rate of $16.29 per hour. This win-rate is consistent with the results presented in my article on the "average blackjack card counter". The numbers in my article were based on results presented in BJA#2. I don't know what all the fighting is about.

I am not clear where the phrase "$25-$300 optimal spread" comes from. In the context of the simulation DS performed, the optimal spread is "$0 or $300." Suboptimal spreads arise, for example, from using the Kelly criterion because of being underfunded with respect to the table limit.



The point is your article mentioning I18 contributed nothing to your original article and is just an attempt to link your name with Don S and in your mind try to reword what James Grosjean said without even acknowledging that. Most cc authors in the last 10 - 15 years wrote books just to make money. Don S developed the I18 and optimal exit points for card counters. Both allowed ccs to earn more money than they did before. He wrote something that was actually original and made people more money.
anonimuss
anonimuss
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 446
Joined: Aug 26, 2013
March 8th, 2014 at 4:44:39 PM permalink
Quote: rdw4potus

You do realize there's a difference between a $100 max bet and a $100 hourly take, right? Because it sure looks like you just whiffed there...



What are you even talking about?
teliot
teliot
  • Threads: 43
  • Posts: 2871
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
March 8th, 2014 at 4:49:09 PM permalink
Quote: anonimuss

The point is your article mentioning I18 contributed nothing to your original article and is just an attempt to link your name with Don S and in your mind try to reword what James Grosjean said without even acknowledging that.


The "point" of my article about the "average blackjack card counter" is to knock some sense into the casino industry, who are obsessed with card counters, even at the $100 level. DS did some work on the average player when he analyzed the I-18 with a 12-to-1 spread and 8-to-1 spread (which is arguably not a professional system), so I quoted his results, with attribution, in the article.

Quote: anonimuss at bj21.com

I've seen a lot of other things he says that are wrong. I don't bother correcting him. But this is the most basic aspect of card counting that he fails to comprehend. I think it's quite funny.


What did I say that was wrong? DS posted some results on bj21.com earlier today that support everything I wrote. Is he wrong? And if our results agree, why would he say:

Quote: DS at bj21.com

If you're talking about Eliot ... you need to stop talking about him. He is pretty much a laughing stock among serious players.


All this shows is that DS does not know many serious players.
Climate Casino: https://climatecasino.net/climate-casino/
anonimuss
anonimuss
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 446
Joined: Aug 26, 2013
March 8th, 2014 at 4:55:54 PM permalink
Don S didn't do work on "average counters". He clearly says, "First, some generalities" then lays out a hypothetical bet spread. I know more card counters than you do and the average counter I know would work for a living before he'd work that hard for $16.
anonimuss
anonimuss
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 446
Joined: Aug 26, 2013
March 8th, 2014 at 5:10:47 PM permalink
Just 10 months ago Zender's still pounding the same drum he's pounded for decades:
http://www.casinoenterprisemanagement.com/articles/june-2013/confirming-suspected-player-counting-cards-fact-or-educated-guess

You think Zender is wrong?
Buzzard
Buzzard
  • Threads: 90
  • Posts: 6814
Joined: Oct 28, 2012
March 8th, 2014 at 5:16:12 PM permalink
Oh I don't know this one line seems a little distorted !

" If the charted observations of a suspected player indicate that he is using a large enough bet spread and increasing their wagers to the larger bet level when he has a mathematical advantage of 90 percent or greater. "
Shed not for her the bitter tear Nor give the heart to vain regret Tis but the casket that lies here, The gem that filled it Sparkles yet
Buzzard
Buzzard
  • Threads: 90
  • Posts: 6814
Joined: Oct 28, 2012
March 8th, 2014 at 5:26:35 PM permalink
The second card counting analytical tool is a much lower-tech, less expensive system that accomplishes the same goal just as accurately. This is known as “charting.” A number of surveillance departments already use some form of charting a customer’s plays as a means to better understand the person’s play characteristics. Charting is most effective as a card counter catch tool when the evaluator uses it to determine the breadth of the suspect’s betting spread, and the suspect’s betting correlation with the true count of the cards. In order to win money counting cards, the counter must wager significantly more money when he has the advantage and as little as possible when the casino has the advantage. If the charted observations of a suspected player indicate that he is using a large enough bet spread and increasing their wagers to the larger bet level when he has a mathematical advantage of 90 percent or greater, then the evaluator has enough information to safely rule that the suspected player is counting cards. As noted when using a software package to evaluate a suspected card counting play, it’s prudent to watch no less than four decks or shoe before making the final decision about the player. For more information on charting, please see my Casino Enterprise Management magazine article, in the March 2008 issue titled, “How to Catch the Elusive North American Card Counter.”

http://www.casinoenterprisemanagement.com/articles/june-2013/confirming-suspected-player-counting-cards-fact-or-educated-guess
Shed not for her the bitter tear Nor give the heart to vain regret Tis but the casket that lies here, The gem that filled it Sparkles yet
anonimuss
anonimuss
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 446
Joined: Aug 26, 2013
March 8th, 2014 at 5:30:17 PM permalink
Quote: Buzzard

Oh I don't know this one line seems a little distorted !

" If the charted observations of a suspected player indicate that he is using a large enough bet spread and increasing their wagers to the larger bet level when he has a mathematical advantage of 90 percent or greater. "




I would guess he means 90% of the time the larger bets correspond with a plus count. And, btw, I played numerous times in the Alladin under Zender's nose and my hourly EV was over $16.
Buzzard
Buzzard
  • Threads: 90
  • Posts: 6814
Joined: Oct 28, 2012
March 8th, 2014 at 5:35:10 PM permalink
Well, that's not exactly how he worded it. But you are probably right. But people who saw the movie Rainman or 21, probably think a counter does have a 90% edge. LOL
Shed not for her the bitter tear Nor give the heart to vain regret Tis but the casket that lies here, The gem that filled it Sparkles yet
Buzzard
Buzzard
  • Threads: 90
  • Posts: 6814
Joined: Oct 28, 2012
March 8th, 2014 at 5:42:41 PM permalink
Here's the 21 trailer. Based on a true story. Yeah, there was a MIT team and they played Blackjack. Most everything else is bullshit !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRzZX2aN3I0
Shed not for her the bitter tear Nor give the heart to vain regret Tis but the casket that lies here, The gem that filled it Sparkles yet
anonimuss
anonimuss
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 446
Joined: Aug 26, 2013
March 8th, 2014 at 5:46:50 PM permalink
Quote: Buzzard

Well, that's not exactly how he worded it. But you are probably right. But people who saw the movie Rainman or 21, probably think a counter does have a 90% edge. LOL



I read an interview with one of the main MIT players. He said they won 10 mil over 20 years. That's not very much when you figure in how many players they had and there were investors. If I get time I'll see if I can find a link to the interview.

Getting back to the topic of this thread...MIT team, nonthreatening bunch of know nothing hacks killing their win rate:

JC: We modified basic strategy just a little bit because they are going to play only positive shoes. They had a +2 basic strategy. People make mistakes when they start dealing with index numbers, and they play slower. It can confuse their count. The guys who won the money weren’t playing the numbers. They were just out there betting it playing basic strategy.
http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/interviewJC.htm

JC: One thing I think I’d like to add is what kind of threat the MIT blackjack team really is to the casinos. Despite our vaunted reputation, we really haven’t taken that much money out. A little more than $10 million is my guess. That might sound like a lot but considering the amount of time [over 20 years] and number of people it’s not particularly impressive.
anonimuss
anonimuss
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 446
Joined: Aug 26, 2013
March 8th, 2014 at 7:37:29 PM permalink
-----
anonimuss
anonimuss
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 446
Joined: Aug 26, 2013
March 8th, 2014 at 7:38:15 PM permalink
Quote: DS at bj21.com
If you're talking about Eliot ... you need to stop talking about him. He is pretty much a laughing stock among serious players.

Quote: teliot

All this shows is that DS does not know many serious players.



I do. Actually, he is right.
Tanko
Tanko
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 1195
Joined: Apr 22, 2013
March 9th, 2014 at 4:37:20 AM permalink
Quote: Buzzard

Here's the 21 trailer. Based on a true story. Yeah, there was a MIT team and they played Blackjack. Most everything else is bullshit !



"I took literary license to make it readable. The idea that the story is true is more important than being able to prove that it's true." -The Boston Globe

Ben Mezrich
"Bringing down the House"
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1491
  • Posts: 26435
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
March 9th, 2014 at 7:39:35 AM permalink
Quote: anonimuss

I do. Actually, he is right.



Personal insult. Three-day suspension.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
  • Jump to: