Sorry..I think I should clarify...it isn't about "missing" a card.
Let's take a step backward...
The 40%, 15% 10% probabilities are to do with the card displacement due to a certain shuffle......
The 15% and 10% now have to add to 65%, once you've missed the first card. So the first number is 50% more than the second and they add to 65. Hence 39% and 26%, with a little algebra.
Don
Thanks Don...it is a sequencing issue, not shuffling tracking, but you have the right approach.
Could you please spell out exactly how you arrive at those figures...Bayesian consideration or just...
Cheating is something you should be aware of generally and isn't much to do with session loss. The cheat has to be really dumb to be so obvious that it will show up in a session.
Conversely...
Please remind that dealer draw/hit cards(completed her hand) before dealt first two cards to the player ! Will dealer hit/draw cards affect player's first two composition probability ?
No.
No. You can't have a cut-card effect for a single round. More cards will be used your way for a round than would normally be the case (for American BJ), but since you're not continuing the...
At the risk of disagreeing with all of the above, I'll defend my point of view. Suppose this is a shuffle-tracking play consisting of a single round. Nothing beyond the one round matters. And suppose...
1) Dealer dealt two cards to herself, 1 upcard and 1 hole card, then dealer peek the hole card and draw cards according to standard house rules. The dealer knows the final total(17 to 26). Please...
Great Canadian somewhere in Toronto. How bad was the crap in the main area? I chose hi limit min $100 H17 NSR NRSA 6 deck 4.5,4.75/6 and that was the best game in the house that I saw.
That is great data. I am using the KO system (mostly playing 6D, H17, DAS); IRC = -20.
With that said, would it be too much to ask for you to provide similar data as above, but for the KO system...
Yep, I believe this is the correct approach. Therefore, if the Ace didn't land in the first spot, the probabilities increase for the following spots:
25% (instead of 15%) for the second spot, 16.7%...
Here's how I would look at it.
Successes of card landing on spot 1, spot 2, spot 3, eventually somewhere
success(1) = .4
success(2) = .15
success(3) = .1
success(>3) = .35
if trial 1 fails...
Three boxes, A=40%, B=15%, C=10%.
"The 40% event did not happen", remaining 60%.
In this 60%, 15% is in B, 10% is in C.
Therefore, 15/60 will be in B, 10/60 will be in C, and 35/60 went somewhere...
But he wasn't asking for EVs. He was asking for the probability of a card landing in one of the first three boxes and then the probability after one sees that box 1 isn't successful that it will land...
Here's example to show relationship:
Single deck, S17, SPL1, SPLA1, NDAS
Overall EV best strategy: +.0248%
EV given up card A: -36.03%
EV given up card 2: +9.995%
EV given up card 3: +13.59%...
So, a total of 65%.
Did you mean this? Doesn't make sense. Did you mean to say "of the second and third box when the 40% event did not happen?"? If you did, then you have 65% left for those...
In a normally cutted game, the probability of receiving a single given card will never be as high as 40%.
The probability of receiving a 10,J,Q,K may reach 40% and will go up if the next card is a...
