Am I right in thinking that a computer-perfect game will give the player a good advantage, even with not so much penetration? If you could get over the top, say, 2%, then you wouldn't even need to risk such a large amount of money in terms of a trip roll on your hands in case the casino decides to ban you and confiscate your funds. Or am I overestimating the advantage of a computer perfect game? It seems to me that a computer should be able to calculate changes in advantage much more accurately based on deck composition through simulation than any crude counting system can hope to achieve, especially when you count on the ability to make much more accurate hit decisions / rack / double. Or is a weak penetration enough to stifle even the most agile mechanical mind?
