Effect of a Back-Counter (Wonging) on your Play
Awhile back, I commented that I’d leave a table if I thought it was
being stalked by a back-counter. (Someone Wonging in at my table.) Thought
I’d sim the effect. Ran two sims. First sim had three players. Basic Strategy
players in seats one and two and a Hi-Lo card counter in seat three. We
are interested in seat three. Second sim was the same, but a fourth player
Wonged in at a TC of +4 and left at the end of the shoe. Again, we are
interested in seat three. Six decks, five deck penetration. Each player
played 150 million Blackjack hands except the back-counter who played
13 million. The attached ribbon chart (link below) graphs the winnings
by TC for the Hi-Lo player in each sim plus the back-counter. You will
note that the red ribbon (seat 3 in the second sim) and the green ribbon
(seat 3 in the first sim) run evenly through the negative TC’s. At about
+3, the green player pulls ahead. That is, the Hi-Lo player at the table
with the back-counter won less money on positive counts. Overall, he lost
about 0.15% advantage.
FIRST CHART - Winnings
by TC.
OK, where is the lost advantage? The second chart has two series.
The green series is the percentage of hands played by seat three at the
back-counter’s table of the hands played by seat three at the back-counter-free
table. The chart shows that both seat three players played the same number
of hands at negative TC’s, but at positive TC’s, the player disturbed
by the back-counter played only 80% as many hands. This is due to the
back-counter eating cards in positive TC conditions. So far, no surprise.
However, there is another effect. The red series on this chart shows dollars
bet instead of hands played. Again, the players at both tables bet the
same per TC at negative TC’s. But, at positive TC’s the drop-off in units
bet is more severe than the drop off in hands played. Only 75% as many
units are bet at high TC’s. That is, the average bet was lower at high
TC’s. Why is this? Well, the Hi-Lo player was using camouflage play. The
spread was 1-8 on both tables, but the player would never make large hand-to-hand
bet increases. Since the back-counter’s interference tended to reduce
the length of high TC consecutive hands, and reduced the number of hands
dealt per shoe in favorable situations, the Hi-Lo player had fewer opportunities
to win enough hands in a row to pump his bet up to the optimum level.
CHART TWO - Hands played
and Units bet by TC
This shows an important point about running a sim exactly as you would
play. It is not enough to show a simple 1-8 spread since realistic cover
play may interact negatively with other characteristics of the sim.
Note: When just looking at the overall advantage, 150 million hands
is OK. But, when you break this down into smaller groups of hands (e.g.
by TC), then you have fewer hands per situation and need more total hands
to give good results. However, there is a short-cut that was used here.
All lines were smoothed with a 12 facet cubic B-spline formula. This takes
information about neighboring data points (nearer points count more than
farther points) and adjusts all points to produce a smoother graph. This
requires several hundred million calculations, but that’s only seconds
on a Pentium. If you are looking for exact data, this is not valid. But,
if you are looking at trends, it is quite accurate and fast. To perform
this on a CVSIM chart, double-click on a series (e.g. group of bars, a
line, an area). The Format Series dialog box will appear. Click on the
Options tab. Then, select a Smoothing formula at the bottom left. Click
on Help to get information on the options.
Return to Blackjack Card Counting
Studies Page
|