Heads up in multi-deck.

[ScottH]

Normally it is better to play with fewer players. Is it still better to play heads up even in a multideck game? It seems like you would have a lot more hands with the disadvantage. I suppose when you get to the positive situations it would last longer also. I guess it wouldn't be great to play heads up because you couldn't wong in or out as easily either. Just wondering...

 

[Cass]

Normally it is better to play with fewer players. Is it still better to play heads up even in a multideck game? It seems like you would have a lot more hands with the disadvantage. I suppose when you get to the positive situations it would last longer also. I guess it wouldn't be great to play heads up because you couldn't wong in or out as easily either. Just wondering...

you've answered your own question. If you are wonging in and out the ideal situation would be for one other player on the table to let them eat all the negative cards. I always look for tables with the fewest players.

 

[Sonny]

Playing alone will actually have you playing less hands at a disadantage because you are playing less hands right after the shuffle. With multiple players at the table there will be more shuffles per hour which means that you will be playing more hands off-the-top against the house edge.

Still, backcounting will always be the best option. You will not be playing any hands at a disadvantage and will be able to play more hands at an advantage because you are abandoning "hopelessly negative" shoes in order to find a positive one.

-Sonny

 

[zengrifter]

Playing alone will actually have you playing less hands at a disadantage because you are playing less hands right after the shuffle. With multiple players at the table there will be more shuffles per hour which means that you will be playing more hands off-the-top against the house edge.

I've been contemplating this comment... and I can't decide if you are correct. zg

 

[tedloc]

House Edge

Playing alone will actually have you playing less hands at a disadantage because you are playing less hands right after the shuffle. With multiple players at the table there will be more shuffles per hour which means that you will be playing more hands off-the-top against the house edge.
-Sonny

With a fresh deck, you are a 101 to100 underdog because of the house edge. This is sometimes as close to even money as you will get in that deck. As each 10 that comes out gets you a more negative count, you become more of an underdog.

 

[Sonny]

With a fresh deck, you are a 101 to100 underdog because of the house edge. This is sometimes as close to even money as you will get in that deck. As each 10 that comes out gets you a more negative count, you become more of an underdog.

I think it’s closer to a 48/43 underdog off the top (the other 9% are ties). Hopefully someone correct me if I'm wrong. I'm pulling that off the top of my head (where the disadvantage is greater ).

You're right that the count might drop from there, but the count is just as likely to go positive and wipe out the house edge. As Scott mentioned, a positive count wil tend to last longer in shoe games which is why they are so valuable to Wong into.

Also, as you get deeper into the shoe your indices become more valuable and help to reduce the disadvantage of those negative counts.

-Sonny-

 

[Sonny]

I've been contemplating this comment... and I can't decide if you are correct. zg

I remember that it was a big concern playing in pitch games. It is the second most important reason that you don't want to play at crowded tables (the most important reason is given below). I'm sure it is less of a problem in shoes (especially since you should be Wonging anyway!), but I don't know to what extent.

I imagine that it will be noticeable since you are also placing your bets at deeper penetration levels when you play alone as opposed to having multiple players eating cards during each round. Not only are you making more bets at deep penetration levels, you are also playing more hands closer to the cut card (those last few cards are as deep as you can get!).

-Sonny-

 

[KenSmith]

Playing alone will actually have you playing less hands at a disadantage because you are playing less hands right after the shuffle. With multiple players at the table there will be more shuffles per hour which means that you will be playing more hands off-the-top against the house edge.

I've been contemplating this comment... and I can't decide if you are correct. zg

I remember that it was a big concern playing in pitch games. It is the second most important reason that you don't want to play at crowded tables (the most important reason is given below). I'm sure it is less of a problem in shoes (especially since you should be Wonging anyway!), but I don't know to what extent.

This is an interesting notion, and I, like zg, can't decide whether it is true or not. I'm leaning toward not true, for this reason:

Yes, with multiple players shuffles happen more often, and therefore you'll play more off-the-top. However, you'll play fewer hands in the earliest portion of the shoe, because those hands are spread around the table. Those two effects would seem to balance out, so there would be no difference. But I really don't know for sure. Interesting.

 

[ScottH]

This is an interesting notion, and I, like zg, can't decide whether it is true or not. I'm leaning toward not true, for this reason:

Yes, with multiple players shuffles happen more often, and therefore you'll play more off-the-top. However, you'll play fewer hands in the earliest portion of the shoe, because those hands are spread around the table. Those two effects would seem to balance out, so there would be no difference. But I really don't know for sure. Interesting.

You'll play fewer hands earlier in the shoe, but you will also play fewer hands later in the shoe. I suppose that is why it's better to play heads up, you can play more hands when there is an advantage.

 

[tedloc]

Underdog

I think it’s closer to a 48/43 underdog off the top (the other 9% are ties). Hopefully someone correct me if I'm wrong. I'm pulling that off the top of my head (where the disadvantage is greater ).

When I said 101/100 underdog, it means that the house is a slight favorite to WIN the next hand.. In this case a tie is in your favor as you do not lose when you push. The numbers you are quoting are the percentages for winning/losing/push. In plain English: Your odds of losing the hand in a new deck, are 101/100

 

[KenSmith]

On this 48/43 vs 101/100 debate:
Both of you are right, and neither of you are right...

48/43 is fairly close on lose vs win percentage for the next hand. Of course, some of those hands pay 3:2, sometimes you'll win 2,3 or even 8 bets, sometimes you'll lose multiple bets.

101/100 is trying to convey that the house edge is about 0.5% off the top. True, but there's definitely no meaning to the 101/100 ratio in the game.

Blackjack is a messy game mathematically. Anytime you try to state the situation too simply, you're going to leave information out.

 

[Sonny]

Odds vs. Percents

In this case a tie is in your favor as you do not lose the push... In plain English: Your odds of losing the hand in a new deck, are 101/100

Ah, I understand what you are saying now. When you said “101/100” I thought that you meant 101 per 100 hands, or 101% in favor of the house. Now I see that you meant to say that the odds were 101:100 (usually written 1.01:1) against the player. Although, I still don’t think that is correct.

If the house wins 48% of the hands then the odds are about 1.08:1 in favor of the player, so the house becomes the underdog. That is why we cannot include pushes as player wins. If we exclude ties then the house wins about 53% of the hands, putting them at the 1.12:1 favorite over the player. In reality the player is a bigger underdog than you first thought.

-Sonny-

 

[E-town-guy]

Playing alone will actually have you playing less hands at a disadantage because you are playing less hands right after the shuffle. With multiple players at the table there will be more shuffles per hour which means that you will be playing more hands off-the-top against the house edge.
-Sonny

I see Sonny's point and agree but I think more important then having to play a few hands right after the shuffle is the fact that the other players are taking away the good cards when the count goes high. I guess this point applies mostly to those who aren't wonging in and out.

 

[tedloc]

Winning vs Losing

If you exclude ties then, we have to rethink the meaning of odds. When you double down 11 vs a 10, you are an 6 to 5 favorite. That means you will win 6 and lose 5. If you do this 11 times, sometimes you will tie. You can't consider this a loss after all is said and done. With a .05% house edge and the odds being 101 to 100 that means the house will win 101 and not win 100. I think the question is, "What are the chances, the house wins the hand on a fresh deck".

 

[Sonny]

First of all, I did a little research and found that the numbers I used above were overall probabilities, not probabilities for the first hand only. More accurate numbers are:

Win = 43%
Loss = 49%
Tie = 8%

As more hands are played from the shoe these numbers will approach my initial 43/48/9 estimates, but the numbers above pertain only to the first hand of the shoe.

If you do this 11 times, sometimes you will tie. You can't consider this a loss after all is said and done.

That’s exactly my point. You can’t consider it a loss because the player did not lose any money, but you can’t consider it a win because the player did not win any money either. That is why we ignore the pushes and only use the actual wins and losses. The question only asks about wins and losses so pushes are meaningless.

With a .05% house edge and the odds being 101 to 100 that means the house will win 101 and not win 100.

In this case, the house edge does not dictate the odds because the results are skewed by doubles, splits, surrenders, and 3:2 blackjacks. The odds of 101:100 will give the house a 50.25% chance of winning the first hand, which is not accurate. The house will win more hands than that but the house edge is decreased because we are winning more than 1 unit on many of the hands we win while often only losing 1 unit (or half of a unit in some cases) on the hands we lose. That is why you can’t use the house edge directly to calculate the odds in this case.

I think the question is, "What are the chances, the house wins the hand on a fresh deck".

There is about a 54% chance that the house will win the first hand, which gives odds of 1.17:1 (excluding ties) or 1.12:1 (including ties). Simulation results using CVCX support this.

If we reword the question a few times you can see that including pushes will give us much different results:

“What are the changes that the house will win or push on the first hand?”

49% + 8% = 57% = 1.33:1

“What are the chances that the player will win or push on the first hand?”

43% + 8% = 51% = 1.04:1

As Ken said, blackjack is a messy game mathematically. Hopefully some of the mess I've made will clear things up.

-Sonny-

 

[tedloc]

Thanks`

As Ken said, blackjack is a messy game mathematically. Hopefully some of the mess I've made will clear things up.

-Sonny-

Thanks for the research and input.

 

[Sonny]

Thanks for the research and input.

No problem. I understand what you are saying though. If we ignore the possibility of ties then we have completely changed the odds of the game. After all, there’s a big difference between a house win rate of 49% (including ties) and 54% (excluding ties). It was my understanding that the question was only concerned with the win/loss ratio and not the overall odds (including ties). I may have misunderstood the question though. I’ve edited my answer above to include both results just in case I goofed.

-Sonny-

 

[zengrifter]

I have NEVER been concerned with win/loss ratios/odds... ONLY EV and variance. zg