GAMBLING THEORY CONTEST #1
- Thread starter Korn
- Start date
off topic-- until somebody convinces me i'm totally wrong, i will NEVER split 8's vs. the dealer 10. every time i do i wind up with 2 losing hands (or more if i catch a 3) instead of one losing hand.
i just hit the damn 16 and move on. that's against the dealer 10 only.
i just hit the damn 16 and move on. that's against the dealer 10 only.
Split 6's with dealer showing a 10
Get an another 6, split again
get another 6, split again
get a 10 on top of 1st 6, double down
get a 10 on top of 2nd 6, double down
get a 10 on top of 3rd 6, double down
get a 10 on top of 4th 6, double down
order your 6th double whiskey in an hour
Think cocktail waitress is giving you the eye, tip her a $100.
If you can get worse then that, bring it on
Get an another 6, split again
get another 6, split again
get a 10 on top of 1st 6, double down
get a 10 on top of 2nd 6, double down
get a 10 on top of 3rd 6, double down
get a 10 on top of 4th 6, double down
order your 6th double whiskey in an hour
Think cocktail waitress is giving you the eye, tip her a $100.
If you can get worse then that, bring it on
If the dealer has an ace showing, and you've got 16, taking insurance would probably be the worst thing you could do.
I'm one of the idiots that don't know how to play by all the rules so this is a total guess.
splitting tens vs the dealers 6
splitting tens vs the dealers 6
Everyone is talking baout the dealer showing a 6. The worst card is the 5 since the dealer can have an ace in the hole....
We have a winner!
BahamaMama was the first to come up with what is closest to the correct answer. Consolation prize goes to Oversteer who was quick to also come up with the answer. See explanation below:
EXPLANATION: The worst decision you can possibly make at the blackjack table is to STAND on two 8s as opposed to SPLITTING them versus a dealer' 7. In other words, you have "16" an elect to STAND against what is presumed to be a dealer's "17." One of the basics of blackjack is to ALWAYS split 8s (sorry, Jack). Also, to ALWAYS split Aces. Yet, you'd be surprised how many gamblers STAND on the two 8s as opposed to splitting them.
Assuming you can double-down after a split (house rules vary), each 8 played individually is worth a 13 percent edge versus the dealer's 7. That's 26 percent in total equity given the situation.
However, if you elect to STAND on 16 against the dealer's 7, you are about a 3-2 dog. Standing (16 versus dealer's 7) loses about 50 percent based on head up percentages. Obviously, a 50 percent disadvantage play is a very poor decision.
If you add the percentages, that is -- an advantage of 26 percent versus a disadvantage of 50 percent, that's a 76 percent swing. You go from 26 percent winner to 50 percent loser. Percentage-wise, this is the worst blackjack play possible.
Conclusion -- ALWAYS split 8s (yes, even against a dealer's 10 or Ace (Note: there is some debate about this point versus the dealer's Ace upcard -- depending on number of decks, the count, house rules such as Northern Nevada rules, etc.).
Congratulations to BahamaMama who gets another t-shirt for her collection.
Next time, we'll do a craps contest.
Thanks to all who participated.
-- Nolan Dalla
BahamaMama was the first to come up with what is closest to the correct answer. Consolation prize goes to Oversteer who was quick to also come up with the answer. See explanation below:
EXPLANATION: The worst decision you can possibly make at the blackjack table is to STAND on two 8s as opposed to SPLITTING them versus a dealer' 7. In other words, you have "16" an elect to STAND against what is presumed to be a dealer's "17." One of the basics of blackjack is to ALWAYS split 8s (sorry, Jack). Also, to ALWAYS split Aces. Yet, you'd be surprised how many gamblers STAND on the two 8s as opposed to splitting them.
Assuming you can double-down after a split (house rules vary), each 8 played individually is worth a 13 percent edge versus the dealer's 7. That's 26 percent in total equity given the situation.
However, if you elect to STAND on 16 against the dealer's 7, you are about a 3-2 dog. Standing (16 versus dealer's 7) loses about 50 percent based on head up percentages. Obviously, a 50 percent disadvantage play is a very poor decision.
If you add the percentages, that is -- an advantage of 26 percent versus a disadvantage of 50 percent, that's a 76 percent swing. You go from 26 percent winner to 50 percent loser. Percentage-wise, this is the worst blackjack play possible.
Conclusion -- ALWAYS split 8s (yes, even against a dealer's 10 or Ace (Note: there is some debate about this point versus the dealer's Ace upcard -- depending on number of decks, the count, house rules such as Northern Nevada rules, etc.).
Congratulations to BahamaMama who gets another t-shirt for her collection.
Next time, we'll do a craps contest.
Thanks to all who participated.
-- Nolan Dalla
why "sorry Jack"? of course i'd split against a "7". i'm not splitting against a 10. that's what i said anyway.
and, it was once proven to me that splitting aces vs. a 10 is bad strategy as well. i do not remember the explanation but it played out correctly.
With all due respect Jack and knowing you play more blackjack than I do, I want to point out the mathmatics of ALWAYS splitting Aces. If you are using a point-count and are playing at a strong disadvantage (many tens and aces are gone from the deck), you are correct that it would be unwise to split the Aces versus a dealer's 10 or Ace.
However, under neutral conditions (no count), splitting aces gives you anywhere from a 47 percent advantage (both bets combined) versus a dealer upcard of 2.....to a 24 percent advantage versus the dealer's ten. If dealer has an Ace, that advantage is a bit higher at 25 percent.
Also, it should be noted that out of 100,000 hands, you will get two Aces less than one-half of one percent of the time. However, the times that you do get the aces, you will be against a dealer's upcard of 10 -- 145 times. That's .145 percent. You will see a dealer's upcard of 2-9 .312 percent. You will get two aces against a dealer's upcard of an Ace only .018 percent (slightly higher for multiple deck games).
The points is -- since you will be at a COUNT-DISADVANTAGE about a third of the time (one third neutral, one third positive, one third negative), your strategy to HIT the aces is technically correct about a third of the time.
There, did I spin that right -- so as not to piss off the King?
-- Nolan Dalla
[This message has been edited by Nolan Dalla (edited 10-17-2001).]
However, under neutral conditions (no count), splitting aces gives you anywhere from a 47 percent advantage (both bets combined) versus a dealer upcard of 2.....to a 24 percent advantage versus the dealer's ten. If dealer has an Ace, that advantage is a bit higher at 25 percent.
Also, it should be noted that out of 100,000 hands, you will get two Aces less than one-half of one percent of the time. However, the times that you do get the aces, you will be against a dealer's upcard of 10 -- 145 times. That's .145 percent. You will see a dealer's upcard of 2-9 .312 percent. You will get two aces against a dealer's upcard of an Ace only .018 percent (slightly higher for multiple deck games).
The points is -- since you will be at a COUNT-DISADVANTAGE about a third of the time (one third neutral, one third positive, one third negative), your strategy to HIT the aces is technically correct about a third of the time.
There, did I spin that right -- so as not to piss off the King?
-- Nolan Dalla
[This message has been edited by Nolan Dalla (edited 10-17-2001).]
The worst play, and I've seen it a number of times and "prevented it" far more is when some old woman decides to play BJ instead of slots. They "forget" that A can be 11 and hit a SOFT 21. It is disgusting that someone who can't add up their cards or remember the basic rules would play a face down game. At least vs the shoe the dealer would just pass them by. I once saw the same old bat try to hit soft 20/21 10 times while both the dealer and I were begging her to just show her cards every hand. I would have left after the first time, but I liked the dealer and I was winning despite this boneheaded old bat.
So hitting SOFT 21 or 20 is the worst I've seen. The one that pisses me off second most is splitting tens. Unless it is a counter, which is incredibly rare to play with a skilled counter anyway, it is a loser play. I did see a guy split 6's vs 10 the other day, that is just as bad but rarer than splitting 10's.
Any deviations from basic strategy are not smart, unless you count. It doesn't take that much effort to learn basic strat and it decreases the house vig from 6% down to <1%. Why not spend a little time learning something that cuts your theoretical losses to < 1/6 what they are playing "seat of the pants"/hunch/guess BJ? The real killer is what I termed "negative money management" which is chasing losses and not setting realistic win goals and loss limits for a session. Just as parlays and MNF used to break even are killers to fb bettors, this is far more disastrous to the wallet than the vig alone.
GL2All
So hitting SOFT 21 or 20 is the worst I've seen. The one that pisses me off second most is splitting tens. Unless it is a counter, which is incredibly rare to play with a skilled counter anyway, it is a loser play. I did see a guy split 6's vs 10 the other day, that is just as bad but rarer than splitting 10's.
Any deviations from basic strategy are not smart, unless you count. It doesn't take that much effort to learn basic strat and it decreases the house vig from 6% down to <1%. Why not spend a little time learning something that cuts your theoretical losses to < 1/6 what they are playing "seat of the pants"/hunch/guess BJ? The real killer is what I termed "negative money management" which is chasing losses and not setting realistic win goals and loss limits for a session. Just as parlays and MNF used to break even are killers to fb bettors, this is far more disastrous to the wallet than the vig alone.
GL2All
Splitting Aces against a ten is a bad move.
I don't think that Nolan used the correct percentages math to take into account that you are only allowed one card after the split of the aces.
Although some people think that you're an idiot if a 10 comes out next, but those are the same people who take even money on blackjack against the ace.
Jones'in for a table just reading this thread
I don't think that Nolan used the correct percentages math to take into account that you are only allowed one card after the split of the aces.
Although some people think that you're an idiot if a 10 comes out next, but those are the same people who take even money on blackjack against the ace.
Jones'in for a table just reading this thread
Going down with Nolan on this one. The 8'S are automatic, split. The aces same thing. What am I to do with 2 or 12 when the dealer may be sitting on 20. I have to hit. Now I hit a ten. So im back to 12. So I have to hit again. I'll split the aces and hit the ten. At least I can get out of the hand with a push. Maybe 2 wins. nothing says that dealers got 20. It's the way I play it.
The top 3 moves that are right (mathematically), but make people at the table think that you don't know what you're doing.
Hitting soft 18 against a 10.
Hitting 12 against a 2.
And as mentioned above, Hitting Aces against a 10.
Hitting soft 18 against a 10.
Hitting 12 against a 2.
And as mentioned above, Hitting Aces against a 10.
Always splitting 8's and A's is the correct play according to basic strat. Many pair splits are defensive, rather than offensive, like 8's vs 10 for example. The basic strat charts are based on computer simulations on millions of hands in every situation and deck condition possible. Specific iterations will lose, but overall the numbers dictate you will win more, or lose less OVERALL splitting these. Just like never taking insurance means more profit over time ( do the math as 4/13 pushes offset by 9/13 getting 3/2 ) is 13.5 vs 13 even $. It is actually slightly more than that as your 10 takes out of the 4/13 pool but the two aces are out of the 9/13 pool.
Second to money management, I think what makes the difference between winning sessions and losing ones is double down hand win %. Unlike splits where some are negative expectancy, all double downs are only recommended when they are at > 50% expectation even with only 1 more card. So losing > 50% of your double downs will kill any session, whereas hitting the vast majority with double the bet is likely to keep you in the black. Many "hunch" players don't DD nearly as much as they SHOULD, particularly on soft hands vs bust cards.
GL
Second to money management, I think what makes the difference between winning sessions and losing ones is double down hand win %. Unlike splits where some are negative expectancy, all double downs are only recommended when they are at > 50% expectation even with only 1 more card. So losing > 50% of your double downs will kill any session, whereas hitting the vast majority with double the bet is likely to keep you in the black. Many "hunch" players don't DD nearly as much as they SHOULD, particularly on soft hands vs bust cards.
GL
about 20 years ago and old-timer showed me why you don't split aces against a 10 and until somebody shows me something really convincing, i'm sticking to it. same thing with splitting the 8's against a 10. sure, a 16 sucks drawing against 10 but losing one bust hand is better than losing 2 hands of 18 to a 20.
i always hit the 12 vs. a dealer 2 and always get a 10 too
i always hit the 12 vs. a dealer 2 and always get a 10 too
BobbyBlueChip made an excellent point. My math is predicated on being able to: (1) Re-split, and (2) Continue to take more cards after the split on both hands. Most casinos no longer allow this, although there are still a few that do -- according to one of the Blackjack newsletters I've seen.
In reply to Jack's notion NOT to split the Aces against a dealer's 10, let's break this down step-by-step.
1. You split the aces.
2. You receive ONE card only on top of each Ace. Each hand will now have a bet of X amount.
3. Theorhetically (given a neutral point count) you have a slight advantage when you draw one card against a dealer's 10 upcard. Here's why: Each of you has one card to turn up. Your must STAND no matter what the card -- which puts you at a disadvantage, it would seem at first glance. This is because the dealer will draw until he reaches 17, or busts. So, he has the ability to take additional cards, while you do not. However, that disadvantage is overcome by the fact that when you catch strong card -- 8, 9, or 10 (constituting 24 cards remaining out of 49 -- or about one-half the cards left in the deck), the dealer MUST STAND on 17 or any lower count that loses to your hand (so far, this means you are both at EVEN odds head-up getting one card). But what happens when you both catch a brick? If you both catch a brick....to your Ace and to his 10 -- let's say you both catch a four, you have to stay on 15 with no cards to come, while the dealer has to continue to draw until he reaches 17+. So, the dealer might catch a 5 or 6 (which it seems is a better card, but it's not really since he must continue to draw -- even though it seems you are "beat"). The times you catch a brick lower than his card is actually an advantage to you, since you may catch a 13, while if the dealer catches a 2, 3, 4, 5, he MUST keep drawing until he has 17+.
Finally, I'll cite two sources which state spitting Aces is ALWAYS recommended (except with certain point count counts.). The first count I learned was the Revere Count by Lawrence Revere, who wrote the book "Playing Blackjack as a Business." I am not sure Revere has the best system, but his charts are irrefuatable (see page 60). A secondary source is the excellent book written by a good freind of mine, CUNY Professor Arthur Reber. "The New Gambler's Bible" has a lengthy section on blackjack. See page 130 which clearly states splitting Aces is always recommended versus any dealer's upcard, including a 10.
-- Nolan Dalla
In reply to Jack's notion NOT to split the Aces against a dealer's 10, let's break this down step-by-step.
1. You split the aces.
2. You receive ONE card only on top of each Ace. Each hand will now have a bet of X amount.
3. Theorhetically (given a neutral point count) you have a slight advantage when you draw one card against a dealer's 10 upcard. Here's why: Each of you has one card to turn up. Your must STAND no matter what the card -- which puts you at a disadvantage, it would seem at first glance. This is because the dealer will draw until he reaches 17, or busts. So, he has the ability to take additional cards, while you do not. However, that disadvantage is overcome by the fact that when you catch strong card -- 8, 9, or 10 (constituting 24 cards remaining out of 49 -- or about one-half the cards left in the deck), the dealer MUST STAND on 17 or any lower count that loses to your hand (so far, this means you are both at EVEN odds head-up getting one card). But what happens when you both catch a brick? If you both catch a brick....to your Ace and to his 10 -- let's say you both catch a four, you have to stay on 15 with no cards to come, while the dealer has to continue to draw until he reaches 17+. So, the dealer might catch a 5 or 6 (which it seems is a better card, but it's not really since he must continue to draw -- even though it seems you are "beat"). The times you catch a brick lower than his card is actually an advantage to you, since you may catch a 13, while if the dealer catches a 2, 3, 4, 5, he MUST keep drawing until he has 17+.
Finally, I'll cite two sources which state spitting Aces is ALWAYS recommended (except with certain point count counts.). The first count I learned was the Revere Count by Lawrence Revere, who wrote the book "Playing Blackjack as a Business." I am not sure Revere has the best system, but his charts are irrefuatable (see page 60). A secondary source is the excellent book written by a good freind of mine, CUNY Professor Arthur Reber. "The New Gambler's Bible" has a lengthy section on blackjack. See page 130 which clearly states splitting Aces is always recommended versus any dealer's upcard, including a 10.
-- Nolan Dalla
