Blackjack statistics

[Random#rs]

It depends on the particular set of rules used in the game and the corresponding expected loss rate. With an expected 49% loss rate, there is a ~1% of losing 526+. With an expected 48% loss rate, there is a ~0.2% chance of losing 526+.

Aka, ... what is the deviation on expected loss? It could never be exactly 49% or 48%. There must be a standard deviation on the expected loss. This is an interesting approach to the problem of a 526 hand loss, given. Tnx.......

 

[aka23]

Aka, ... what is the deviation on expected loss? It could never be exactly 49% or 48%. There must be a standard deviation on the expected loss. This is an interesting approach to the problem of a 526 hand loss, given. Tnx.......

I believe the standard deviation of the number of hands lost would be sqrt[n*p*(1-p)] ~= 15.8 in the 1000 trial example.

 

[Random#rs]

OK figuring the expected loss rate would be 480 or 490 hands +or- 15.8 hands this would still not specifically effect the end result in terms of total units won or loss due to the variance of total BJ/splits/doubles and wins in 510 or 520 +or- 15.8 hands <not lost> . This would only indicate hands lost beyond aprox. 505.8 hands would be of diminishing probability. Or less than 474.2, this depending on the rules of the game.

Am I correct in this thinking?

 

[aka23]

OK figuring the expected loss rate would be 480 or 490 hands +or- 15.8 hands this would still not specifically effect the end result in terms of total units won or loss due to the variance of total BJ/splits/doubles and wins in 510 or 520 +or- 15.8 hands <not lost> . This would only indicate hands lost beyond aprox. 505.8 hands would be of diminishing probability.

Am I correct in this thinking?

The number of hands lost is a binomial variable with two outcomes -- either the hand is lost or the hand is not lost. This makes stat calcs like mean and standard deviation simple, so long as you know the expected odds of the event occurring and the number of trials.

If you want to determine net win/loss and rate of net win/loss, then things become more complex because like you said, you need to include win vs push, doubles & splits, and BJs. One way to estimate this is to use the calc I linked to on my site earlier and the conversion ratio I listed earlier, if estimating based on hands vs total amount wagered.

 

[Random#rs]

OK that makes complete sense to me. But what if you had an anomaly such as a loss of 526 hands and a much richer than normal gain in doubles/splits/ and BJ's/wins in the 474 hands not lost resulting in a normal expected lost, or maybe even a gain. Could they be mathematically linked by any variables? Could the probability of this be calculated?

 

[aka23]

OK that makes complete sense to me. But what if you had an anomaly such as a loss of 526 hands and a much richer than normal gain in doubles/splits/ and BJ's/wins in the 474 hands not lost resulting in a normal expected lost, or maybe even a gain. Could they be mathematically linked by any variables? Could the probability of this be calculated?

Yes, it is possible to have a net gain while losing 526/1000 hands. However, this would be quite unlikely. It is possible to calculate the probability of this outcome or similar, so long as you define the conditions specifically.

 

[Random#rs]

Yes, I think it might be to track the statistical occurrence of BJ's/splits/doubles/and wins that are actually won in a reasonable frame (say 1000 hands) and if this figure has not reached its mean within the expected lost hands then one might expect a correction to the mean or there abouts in the remaining hands of the total frame. At least the probability would be high. Nothing is ever a sure thing of course. And the reverse would be true also.

Thanks for your input. I'll be back later, going to rest a while............_______

 

[lucky21]

thanks guys

Thanks for your input guys, just on your talk of a net gain while having a 526 loss, in my particular example i lost far more boubles splits then i won, thats part of the problem, when these online sites give this kind of play, it really leaves me scratching my head, and these sorts of losses have continued for four days on this particular site and has happened like that before.

I started playing roulete because the bj was going so bad and it took off, I took $150 to $2700 in a couple days just playing red and blacks and occasional 12number bet i pulled half of it out.

then a day after the withdrawal its like it worked out my progressive bet, and turned the switch off, i was betting black and had 16 reds turn up in a row continued by lots of red runs in a row 8 11 5 etc, enough to wreck any progressive betting lol, I looked at wizard of odds site and went through his 10,000 random spins of roulete and the most one colour ran in a row was 12, so once again i seem to experience the rarest of events.

I really would like to know how these casinos work, i have talked to resting authorities about RNG,s and they have said that while there RNGs technically may be true, they have no control of what the software does after the Random number is generated i.e card shuffling or burning a bad card.

I cant help but thinking that they have protection for themselves against good players, while being fair in randomly giving out winnings, anyone who shows they can make a dollar in other than one hi bet hand,is dealt with so as not to subject the casino to an unplanned loss.

perhaps a conspiracy theory Lol, I will have a break for a while, my head hurts lol.

Lucky

 

[MPB]

perhaps a conspiracy theory Lol, I will have a break for a while, my head hurts lol.

I thinks it's more a typical misunderstanding of what "probability" and all this stuff really means.
You won a large sum on roulette and cashed it out, so obv. you have been VERY lucky. If your luck doesn't continue forever it's not a sign the casino is rigged.