? 4 the Mayor, 6D - 18TC - 1 hand vs. multi hands - 1 on 1

[Stealth Bomber]

Mayor:

I think you are the only one I know of that may be able to properly analyze and provide a correct an comprehensible answer for all of us, to the following question scenario:

6D - 16TC - mid pack - 80% pen - 1 on 1 with the D (heat not a consideration)

Should the player bet max 1 on 1 until just before the cut card, then spread to as many hands as is allowed? - Or - Should the player play as many hands as is allowed from mid pack to the end, thereby substantially restricting the amount of hands that the D receives while providing the most possible hands to the player during such a high C situation? (assuming the TC stays at approx. 16TC until the shoe is tapped out; in addition, the player bets X% less per circle than he/she would otherwise bet 1 on 1).

I tried this issue in an earlier post, but I am still not yet convinced as to what is really the mathematically perfect way to handle the situation whenever it presents itself.

Would appreciate your response.

Stealth Bomber

 

[The Mayor]

I am not going to answer your question ... but I do thank you for thinking that I would be able to give you a precise answer to this. The general theme is that nothing is ever gained by spreading to more than 3 hands, but there are many times that 2 or 3 hands are better than 1 in shoe games.

I wrote to an expert and asked him to comment, I hope he does.

With best regards,

--Mayor

 

[Automatic Monkey]

So this is a true count of +18? (I'm assuming High-Low)

I would play a maximum number of hands per round. The reason is that with High-Low you are playing for blackjacks (one of the strongest points of the system) and you want to get a maximum number of hands in on the shoe, the shoe will be in your favor until the shuffle. And the fewer cards the dealer plays, the more you will play. Of course I would only do this if I had a huge bankroll, and at the very least make sure I had enough to insure every hand which you sure will want to do if the opportunity arises. Then there is always the dealer's face BJ to worry about. Also plan on having enough to double, split, and split 10's against dealer 3 to 6. The downside of all this is that I doubt anyone memorizes the correct playing indices for TC=+18, so you are going to be making some playing errors I think.

 

[Stealth Bomber]

Re: 6D - high C - 1 hand vs. multi hands - 1 on 1

Actually I was thinking in terms of the C system I use which is AOII. I think on the average it would convert to about 1.5 times more TC points than Hi/Lo. Therefore, a C of 16 - 18TC is much more likely with AOII.

I had a discrepancy in my original post at the top of this thread. The heading said 18 and in another area I said 16TC. Regardless, the point is that the C is very high in the scenario to set the stage for this issue. Which is an issue that puzzles me.

You are the first person that I have found that apparently sees this situation as I think it should be. I like what you said:

And the fewer cards the dealer plays, the more you will play.

It has become my contention that it is mathematically best in this situation to get as many of the big cards into my own hands while restricting the D to getting the least as possible. Therefore, the only way to do this is to play as many hands as is allowed or that I can realistically slip through and get away with.

Everyone accept you have told me that my way of thinking on this issue is incorrect. They always think that it is somehow best to play only 1 hand until just before the cut card, and then spread to as many hands as is possible. I say to spread to as many as is possible whenever the C is high regardless of how many players are at the table.

Automatic Monkey, are you the *expert* that The Mayor made reference to?

Does anyone else have any comments to add?

Thank you; to The Mayor and Automatic Monkey.

Stealth

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Re: 6D - high C - 1 hand vs. multi hands - 1 on 1

"Automatic Monkey, are you the *expert* that The Mayor made reference to?"

Actually no, I've only been counting for a couple of months. But I think I'm getting a pretty good grasp on the principles of this game, having a physics degree and all that, the math seems pretty straightforward and intuitive.

Stanford Wong is a proponent of playing multiple hands and an undeniable expert if there ever was one, he'd be a great person to weigh in on this. Aside from gobbling up good cards when the count is good, playing multiple hands reduces your standard deviation and allows you to experience "long term" results more quickly. It is also a less noticeable way to increase your bet because so many average players bet two hands.

 

[The Mayor]

I am not an expert -- but here is a little bit of analysis.

If there is half a shoe left, that's 156 cards. If 60 cards are cut off (generous!), then you have 96 cards left to play. At 2.7 cards per hand, that's about 36 total hands (including the dealer's hands). These 36 hands can be played as follows:

One spot == 18 hands to you, 18 to the dealer (18 rounds)
Two spots == 24 hands to you, 12 to the dealer (12 rounds)
Three spots == 27 hands to you, 9 to the dealer (9 rounds)
Five spots == 30 hands to you, 6 to the dealer (6 rounds)
Eight spots == 32 hands to you, 4 to the dealer (4 rounds)

Now, on each hand, you don't want to overbet your bankroll for your advantage (to exceed your kelley bet). If max bet is $100, then you will wager $1800 on this edge on One spot. If that is the correct Kelley bet, then it is correct in all of these situations.

Thus you should bet 1800/24 = $75 per hand playing 2 spots, and you should bet $67 if you are playing 3 hands, you should bet $60 per spot playing 5 spots, and $56 per spot playing 8 hands. Thus the same total money goes down on the table at the end of the shoe.

If you exceed these amounts then you are overbetting your edge, and just like any situation where you overbet, you are increasing your risk of ruin.

So, what is the actual effect of spreading to multiple hands? The key here is not that you increase your EV, but that you lower your Variance -- by playing multiple hands the swings you encounter will not be as large and this raises the DI (desirability index) of the game you are playing.

In your scheme, if you bet the $100 on each spot (your max bet), then spreading to 5 spots will have you put down $500 (for each of 6 rounds). Just imagine the nightmare when the dealer flips over his blackjack, or draws a 21 while all your hands are pat 20's! Clearly you are overbetting your edge, and this should not be considered.

The expert I contacted about this has not yet replied, I still hope he will say something.

--Mayor

 

[Stealth Bomber]

Happy New Year - & thanks, Mayor

I'll be gone playing BJ and having some other fun 'til eve of 2nd.

 

[wong out]

Re: Happy New Year - & thanks, Mayor

Don S addresses this question in BJ Attack. Basically when head up you are better off playing 1 hand to maximize the number of roundds you can get in before the shuffle. Of course if its the last round go ahead and spread (making sure to lower your individual bets sizes) to reduct the variance and get abit more info for making playing decisions.

With more than 1 player the card eating effect of multiple jand play is less sigificant so the optimal strategy is to sperad to two hands.

Hope this helps!

wong out