i would estimate the `Player' bet at -1.23508 + (-2.79-4.96+1.04-.74)/412
= -1.25316% and the `he' as -14.3596 + (-$.88-12.13+17.68+21.28)/412
= -14.3160% The actual figures for these bets with
the 412 card subset are -1.04006, - 1.25326, and -14.3163
respectively and demonstrate the accuracy of the `ultimate'
counts for large subsets.
Before you start wondering why i'm offering these
marvelous gambling aids to you at such a ridiculously
low price (along with the ginzu knife and the wok)
instead of trying to peddle them to some ill healed
sucker, i'll show you again how their accuracy diminishes
with smaller subsets, precisely the ones i need to
exploit if i're going to make any money at baccarat.
In another experiment, i had the computer select a
single subset of various sizes and record the cards
in these subsets as ill as the associated player expectations.
Here are the results, all expectations again in %.
(To test understanding of the use of these point counts,
the reader should try to reproduce the figures labeled
`estimates.' Remember, the number of removed cards
of each denomination is 32 minus the number remaining
for nontens and 128 minus the number remaining for
5 ] |
Before the flop
difficulty in really accepting randomness seems to
be a normal human trait. Another typical human trait
that contributes to this is what psychologists call
attribution error. You see this one in poker players
all the time: if you win, it's because you're good
at it, if you lose, it's bad luck. You attribute success
to internal causes (your personal skills) and attribute
failure to external causes (bad luck).
Phil Helmuth, a well-known tournament player and author
of a popular book on poker, is one of the worst in
frequent demonstrations of the attribution error at
work. An example is a hand that busted him out of
a recent tournament. In a no-limit hold'em game, he
had a pair of Queens against his opponent's pocket
pair of jacks before the flop. All the money went
in the pot before the flop. A Jack came on the river,
beating Phil's pair of Queens with three jacks. Phil
threw his usual fit, moaning about what bad luck he'd
had. Of course it was bad luck to have the pair of
Queens beat by a pair of jacks-before the flop Phil
was better than a four to one favorite. But while
bemoaning that particular bad luck, Phil forgot how
lucky he had been in the first place to have been
dealt Queens at the same time an opponent had jacks.
For him to have been in the situation where he was
a big favorite, he first had to get lucky.a