Doubling

[cargirl4413]

in an attempt to preserve bankroll, i often only double down against a dealers upcards 4/5/6. Knowing this is not bs, would recommend playing the hand out or taking only one card and keeping the cards "in order"?

 

[Canceler]

The sacred flow of the cards

The cards aren't in any order, except random order, so there is no reason to be concerned about keeping them "in order".

Unsolicited comment: You really, really ought to save up enough money so you can play your hands properly, which includes doubling down when BS indicates you should.

 

[ihate17]

Throwing money away and the sacred flow

in an attempt to preserve bankroll, i often only double down against a dealers upcards 4/5/6. Knowing this is not bs, would recommend playing the hand out or taking only one card and keeping the cards "in order"?

The reason you are told to double by basic strategy is that you have an edge. Not doubling will only increase the overall house edge against you, costing you money.

Unless you placed the cards in the shoe in the order you wished and know that no one on the table will take a hit when your order says they should not, I have no idea of what you are speaking about? The cards are shuffled more or less randomly, at least random enough that you have no idea of what is coming out of that shoe next.
I was on a table last night with four other players (way to crowded) at first. The guy at first base would hit his 12-14 against every dealer stiff. Sometimes you won, sometimes you lost but generally he only hurt himself. The three other players ran off after making statements about this guy. I stayed made a ton of money, never said a word to this guy but eventually he lost all of his money. Funny thing is after he left other players came to the table, so I split my 9's against a dealer 9 (basic strategy) and they all left crying about my killing "the order of the cards." Forget that stuff in your mind but remember it because if you ever learn to be a counter then you can use it to appear like a loser when you are really not.

There are two cards left in the deck. You have 12, the dealer has a 3. You know the two cards are an 8 and a 10 but you do not know which is first. Hit and get the 8 and the table calls you a hero. Hit and get the 10 and they scream that you took the dealers bust card. It is all pure superstitious BS (BS does not mean basic strategy)

ihate17

 

[ScottH]

The cards aren't in any order, except random order, so there is no reason to be concerned about keeping them "in order".

She probably doesnt need to hear this, but the cards are not in random order. They try to make the shuffles random, but it is not possible to do.

 

[supercoolmancool]

In the long run I think that real world results are the same as computer simulations using ramdomly dealt cards. So really it is random to a straight card counter or basic strategy player.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

In the long run I think that real world results are the same as computer simulations using ramdomly dealt cards. So really it is random to a straight card counter or basic strategy player.

Very, very, very close, but not exactly. There is an effect with many shoe shuffles where extremes in count are preserved to some degree in the next shoe, and the sign of that count depends on the placement of the cut card.

All that means is that if a bunch of high/low cards come out at once in one shoe, they're not going to be fully diffused through the next shoe and some of them are going to end up together again. Whether that corresponds to a good count or a bad count in the next shoe depends on where that bunch of cards is relative to the cut card.

How this affects a counter is- let's say you are Wonging out of bad counts, and a shoe goes to hell very quickly, depending on the shuffle parameters you may want to be back there for the next shoe. If that clump of cards is near the front of the shoe, you are going to be playing them at a minimum bet for a few hands and then walk away when the count gets bad again. +EV. If they are right in front of the cut card, their absence from the rest of the shoe is going to make the count go up as you play and the high cards are going to be where you expect them to be when you have your big bets out. +EV. The only time they will cause -EV is when they are all behind the cut card and you never see them, even though the count is high and so are your bets. One more reason to play the best pen you can find. The same thing happens when you have a good count in a shoe, some of that improbable distribution is going to carry over to the next shoe too.

Conversely, if I play a shoe and the count never goes high enough to raise my bet nor low enough to Wong out, without even using any shuffle tracking technique I'm not going to play the next shoe at that table, because for the count to go anywhere on the next shoe will require sheer luck.

Note: this is a very small effect, I wouldn't recommend anyone modify their play on account of it without doing their own extensive research.

 

[ScottH]

In the long run I think that real world results are the same as computer simulations using ramdomly dealt cards. So really it is random to a straight card counter or basic strategy player.

That's not the conclusion I was intending.

I was saying that because it is in fact a good thing that shuffles are not random, because players can take advantage of the fact that they are not random. For instance, tracking them.