non-self-weighter
Well-Known Member
Hi BJI,
My first thread. If you can't tell from my few other posts, I'm a beginning player with very limited casino experience. The part of my game that is lacking most is camo, so I have been thinking more about that lately.
I recently went to Vegas with a co-worker, a plopper that frequently plays without regard for rules or BS. He makes a lot of mistakes, for example double for less. He will sometimes do this with 11 v T, 10 v 2, 9v6 etc. There is obviously a fundamental flaw in the thought process. A player realizes they have an advantage, and will increase the bet, but not by the maximum amount, which should not be a large part their trip money (of course they wouldn't want to increase their bet by 1,000 if possible). I see other players double for less, and they are all poor players.
Out of the blue, my inner gambler whispered to me, "maybe you could double for less as cover?" I thought, I could incorporate this apparently foolish move in a spot where the EV of hitting and doubling is approximately 0. That is, if I am indifferent as to whether I should double or hit, and doubling for less will not significantly reduce my EV, why don't I double for less and look like a plopper? I'm not sure if any such scenarios exist... all I could think of was A2 v 5, where I have read the decision is close between hit and double. Maybe the softness of A2 makes doubling for less too costly, since the play is to hit again with soft 17 or less? Maybe at some count, this move would become less costly?
Are there any good spots to double for less for cover? Am I way off here?
Thanks,
nsw
BTW, if I am not mistaken, this option is allowed in all games. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
My first thread. If you can't tell from my few other posts, I'm a beginning player with very limited casino experience. The part of my game that is lacking most is camo, so I have been thinking more about that lately.
I recently went to Vegas with a co-worker, a plopper that frequently plays without regard for rules or BS. He makes a lot of mistakes, for example double for less. He will sometimes do this with 11 v T, 10 v 2, 9v6 etc. There is obviously a fundamental flaw in the thought process. A player realizes they have an advantage, and will increase the bet, but not by the maximum amount, which should not be a large part their trip money (of course they wouldn't want to increase their bet by 1,000 if possible). I see other players double for less, and they are all poor players.
Out of the blue, my inner gambler whispered to me, "maybe you could double for less as cover?" I thought, I could incorporate this apparently foolish move in a spot where the EV of hitting and doubling is approximately 0. That is, if I am indifferent as to whether I should double or hit, and doubling for less will not significantly reduce my EV, why don't I double for less and look like a plopper? I'm not sure if any such scenarios exist... all I could think of was A2 v 5, where I have read the decision is close between hit and double. Maybe the softness of A2 makes doubling for less too costly, since the play is to hit again with soft 17 or less? Maybe at some count, this move would become less costly?
Are there any good spots to double for less for cover? Am I way off here?
Thanks,
nsw
BTW, if I am not mistaken, this option is allowed in all games. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
