single and double deck

[MentorZQ]

Does anyone know the optimal amount of players for there to be at a single and/or double deck table.

I have been most successful with playing with two others.

 

[Blue Efficacy]

Does anyone know the optimal amount of players for there to be at a single and/or double deck table.

I have been most successful with playing with two others.

The optimal number of players in these games is one. You get a good count, those cards are all yours (if the dealer doesn't get them of course :joker: )

You get a bad count, you need to use the restroom. Come back and get a fresh deck!

 

[MentorZQ]

thank you

 

[bj bob]

The optimal number of players in these games is one. You get a good count, those cards are all yours (if the dealer doesn't get them of course :joker: )

You get a bad count, you need to use the restroom. Come back and get a fresh deck!

I beg to differ. Playing with one other person at a SD table is optimum, simply because 2 players extend the penetration of the deck dealt.In double deck I agree that heads-up is ideal.

 

[bigplayer]

Disagree

I beg to differ. Playing with one other person at a SD table is optimum, simply because 2 players extend the penetration of the deck dealt.In double deck I agree that heads-up is ideal.

You should always want heads up. You can play 2 spots heads up to create the pen you need at single deck. If you're not heads up you'll never know if you have a dealer who might give you 7 or 8 rounds and some do. If they give you only 5 rounds to 1 then you can spread to two hands to create a 4 rounds to 2 game. Heads up you also get fewer off the top rounds (where you might have to make negative EV cover bets) and a faster game. Preferential shuffling is more likely with other players as the dealer might not be sure they have enough cards to finish the round.

For Single Deck my favorite games are heads up playing 1 or 2 spots or sitting at third base playing two spots on a completely full 7-spot table (rare these days) with a dealer who gives always 2 rounds to 7.

For Double Deck definitely heads up. The count moves less between rounds making bet jumps more gradual and cover betting at the shuffle less expensive (off the top rounds make up a smaller percentage of overall rounds).

 

[bj bob]

The question from the OP was "what is the optimal amount of players....", not spots, hence the reason for my reply.

 

[Blue Efficacy]

The question from the OP was "what is the optimal amount of players....", not spots, hence the reason for my reply.

With all due respect your reply is wrong. 1 player with the ability to jump to 2 spots when needed is much better than two players each playing one spot.

Problem is you cannot control the other player. Let's say 2 rounds go by and no aces come out. Now he jumps to 2 spots, to try to get those aces. You just had your advantageous situation ruined by the other player.

Heads up is always ideal. It's not even close.

 

[Sucker]

Heads up is always ideal. It's not even close.

Assuming that the OP is talking about the win rate for a card counter, I'm having a hard time believing that someone would argue otherwise.

If we're talking about a ploppy or even a BS player, the optimal number of players would be: As FULL of a table as you can get. The slower the game goes, the less everyone loses in the long term.

There ARE some advanced AP techniques, with or WITHOUT team play; when certain table configurations are desired, and even sometimes are imperative. But I don't think that that's what the OP had in mind here.

 

[bj bob]

With all due respect your reply is wrong. 1 player with the ability to jump to 2 spots when needed is much better than two players each playing one spot.

Problem is you cannot control the other player. Let's say 2 rounds go by and no aces come out. Now he jumps to 2 spots, to try to get those aces. You just had your advantageous situation ruined by the other player.

Heads up is always ideal. It's not even close.

Respect back at ya. The primary problem with spreading to 2 hands in SD is HEAT It can get pretty toasty on a heads-up SD table when you are, in effect using a 1:8 spread. Been there, done that.Starting the deck with 2 spots may be feasible. Secondly, if we assume the normal player/dealer card per hand content (2.7-2.8) and then compare a dealer dealing 7 rounds to one player vs. 5 rounds to 2 players, we get a net gain of 2.5 cards/ deck or about 5%. That difference in pen. is significant in SD. As far as a second player is concerned, you're presuming an intelligence level exceeding room temperature, where I am not.

 

[Blue Efficacy]

Respect back at ya. The primary problem with spreading to 2 hands in SD is HEAT It can get pretty toasty on a heads-up SD table when you are, in effect using a 1:8 spread. Been there, done that.Starting the deck with 2 spots may be feasible. Secondly, if we assume the normal player/dealer card per hand content (2.7-2.8) and then compare a dealer dealing 7 rounds to one player vs. 5 rounds to 2 players, we get a net gain of 2.5 cards/ deck or about 5%. That difference in pen. is significant in SD. As far as a second player is concerned, you're presuming an intelligence level exceeding room temperature, where I am not.

But even with a couple less cards of penetration, isn't it better to get two rounds deep into the deck rather than one?

 

[FLASH1296]

Nearly every floor-person immediately learns to be vigilant of players starting with one hand and spreading to two hands.

The way to go is to play TWO hands 'off the top' and spread to 2 hands if indicated; reduce from 2 hands to 1 hand as needed; but never spread to two hands after you have played a round with one hand.

 

[Sucker]

Nearly every floor-person immediately learns to be vigilant of players starting with one hand and spreading to two hands.

The way to go is to play TWO hands 'off the top' and spread to 2 hands if indicated; reduce from 2 hands to 1 hand as needed; but never spread to two hands after you have played a round with one hand.

Excellent advice, especially for SD.

 

[bj bob]

Nearly every floor-person immediately learns to be vigilant of players starting with one hand and spreading to two hands.

The way to go is to play TWO hands 'off the top' and spread to 2 hands if indicated; reduce from 2 hands to 1 hand as needed; but never spread to two hands after you have played a round with one hand.

Roger that.

 

[Jack_Black]

part 2

Ok, let's move on to other side this question can bring up.

What is the max amount of players/spots an SD/DD game can have before affecting the WR/SCORE etc etc?

i.e. when is it better to just get up and leave to find a less crowded table/session?

 

[bj bob]

Ok, let's move on to other side this question can bring up.

What is the max amount of players/spots an SD/DD game can have before effecting the WR/SCORE etc etc?

i.e. when is it better to just get up and leave to find a less crowded table/session?

I'm gone at a SD table when the 2nd player sits down (other than moi). On a DD table I'm comfortable with 2/3 others. After that I start looking for greener pastures.

 

[creeping panther]

2 hands

Nearly every floor-person immediately learns to be vigilant of players starting with one hand and spreading to two hands.

The way to go is to play TWO hands 'off the top' and spread to 2 hands if indicated; reduce from 2 hands to 1 hand as needed; but never spread to two hands after you have played a round with one hand.

I hope you are talking about sd and not dd when you stressed never.

CP

 

[Jack_Black]

I'm gone at a SD table when the 2nd player sits down (other than moi). On a DD table I'm comfortable with 2/3 others. After that I start looking for greener pastures.

I've ran sims that show decreases across the board, but it's only a few points for each category. Of course heads up provides the best figures, but DD with 7 spots being played has a decrease of about 4 points for SCORE, a few bucks for WR/hr and less than 1,000 N0 added.

So is "2/3 other players" more of a personal preference? I guess I can see that 7 spots takes a helluva lot more time to play through than heads up or 2/3 other players, resulting in less hands/hr.

 

[bj bob]

I've ran sims that show decreases across the board, but it's only a few points for each category. Of course heads up provides the best figures, but DD with 7 spots being played has a decrease of about 4 points for SCORE, a few bucks for WR/hr and less than 1,000 N0 added.

So is "2/3 other players" more of a personal preference? I guess I can see that 7 spots takes a helluva lot more time to play through than heads up or 2/3 other players, resulting in less hands/hr.

You got it. A DD table with say 4 other players really slows down the hands/hr. When 5 players (including me) are sitting at the same table, there are invariably going to be glitches in the "flow", someone wants more color, another guy is telling the dealer to call over a cocktail waitress, another bozo can't find his players card etc. Then there are the idiots who ponder "tough" hands e.g. 16 v.7 A7, v 10 "should I dd this 10 vs Dealers Queen this time?". Not to mention your second spot is in more jeopardy on a crowded table and the infamous "Could you put out that cigarette?" even when I was there long before anyone else.
The only things that will keep me at a crowded table is great pen or the lack of any other available tables.

 

[bigplayer]

Respect back at ya. The primary problem with spreading to 2 hands in SD is HEAT It can get pretty toasty on a heads-up SD table when you are, in effect using a 1:8 spread. Been there, done that.Starting the deck with 2 spots may be feasible. Secondly, if we assume the normal player/dealer card per hand content (2.7-2.8) and then compare a dealer dealing 7 rounds to one player vs. 5 rounds to 2 players, we get a net gain of 2.5 cards/ deck or about 5%. That difference in pen. is significant in SD. As far as a second player is concerned, you're presuming an intelligence level exceeding room temperature, where I am not.

you have to keep in mind that when talking about penetration with single deck it's not the total penetration that matters, but how far in you are when the last round is about to be dealt. Surely deep total penetration matters in terms of play deviations, but penetration prior to the final round is what matters for betting purposes. In a game with 7 or 8 rounds heads up you might get 2 or 3 chances at the apple past the 50% point. 3 rounds to 3 and 4 rounds to 2 get the same total penetration but the 4 rounds to 2 game is much better because the 4th round happens happens at a deeper point than the 3rd round in a 3 to 3 game.

With double deck, less players is always better. Double deck, despite being a pitch game, really plays much more like a shoe game unless you have really really deep penetration. You have to spread big at double deck and consequently you usually have to use multiple unit random bets off the top. More players means you have more off the top bets as a percentage of your total number of wagers which really cost you in terms of win rate and variance. Playing alone maybe 1 out of 8 or 9 rounds is a shuffle bet. At a full table one in 3 o 4 rounds is a shuffle bet. (Same thing applies somewhat in single deck, fewer players means fewer off the top bets with no advantage and multiple unit cover bets).

 

[zengrifter]

I beg to differ. Playing with one other person at a SD table is optimum, simply because 2 players extend the penetration of the deck dealt.In double deck I agree that heads-up is ideal.

Au contrair mon ami.
Heads up is always better in 1D, especially if you can play two hands.
If the 1D game is a Ro6 deal, then always play two hands. zg