Ouchez: I will no longer double 11 in big counts

[Ouchez]

but the "great scobee" says I should hit it so I guess I will.

[scobee 1]

> but the "great scobee" says I
> should hit it so I guess I will.

'Double It!' ...hitting it is a given.

Now those twelves require you have an accurate count... I will leave the doubling of twelves to the originator of 'Attacking the Shoe in a Negative Count.' Personally, I like to do whichever play is most likely to fluster the ploppies at the table...especially if I am on third base. If I can get rid of a couple of players I can increase my EV with more hands per hour while giving up only a minimum bet that has little probability of winning anyway.

I would suggest you think about playing two boxes as the outcome of each hand then becomes a little less lethal...especially since you are taking on the great games of the UP. But you are already playing two boxes, if I remember correctly. Milkman once told me that he could tell what was coming when he had Aces to split...and he didn't mean face cards.

Selective memory is a seductive but unstable mistress. I suggest you stick with the math and leave the divining to the preachers and ploppies.

The best advice here is to keep an ace side count since the game is only double deck. You might find that more information will help you stay cool, calm, and collected.

Of course, those Aces will always come up when you need them the least. What hacks me off is when the dealer has a natural against your two max bet twenties and you don't even get a chance to insure.

scobee

[Milk Man]

If you give up on eleven maybe split 10s. No one has ever cured me of this disease. Not even the floor manager. The deviation dog might pop up now and then but I love doubling my 11s when I split my 10s.

[Count of Montecristo]

> actually I based my statement on the count
> with few cards left and a fair to midland
> amount of aces left in a dd game.

> I always hit my 12 when called for except
> under certain circumstances I will surrender
> it.

Please tell me you're kidding about surrendering your 12.

[Ouchez]

[Ouchez]

> Please tell me you're kidding about
> surrendering your 12.

I am playing a game that is very "deep", and I get into some peculiar situations because of that.

I will say that on those occasions when it has happened it proved to be the right move.

Of course I prefer not to do it but, yeah, it does happen.

[Cardkountr]

Or are you having a really really bad week?

First on Jan 8th you posted:
"I know there are a few gems left but doncha think playing the 6 deckers really turn you into a gambler and not a "real" advantage player? I may tend to think that all the time spent trying to beat a 6d could be better spent in other endeavors or pursuits. Maybe just stick to a recreation agenda and not heavy serious play."

False, when in fact the 6 deck game is the game of choice for many Pro's, obviously for reasons unknown to you.

In another post of Jan 8 you stated you will no longer double an 11 in any dd or sd game unless "I am facing a dealer 6 or less!"

Our Host Parker, pointed out the fallacy in this type of thinking suggesting that perhaps you are not ready for advantage play. Then further in this thread, Cacarulo correctly responded by saying This sounds like those people who never hit a 12 because a ten is always waiting for them.

Your response to Cacarulo: "I always hit my 12 when called for except under certain circumstances I will surrender it."

The Count of Montecristo asked if you were kidding.....and this is by far your best response so far: "I am playing a game that is very "deep", and I get into some peculiar situations because of that."

While I would agree that "something" is getting very deep....it certainly is not your game.

May all your hands be blackjacks because it appears you really need them to win.

Card.

[Ouchez]

> Or are you having a really really bad week?

> First on Jan 8th you posted:
> "I know there are a few gems left but
> doncha think playing the 6 deckers really
> turn you into a gambler and not a
> "real" advantage player? I may
> tend to think that all the time spent trying
> to beat a 6d could be better spent in other
> endeavors or pursuits. Maybe just stick to a
> recreation agenda and not heavy serious
> play." False, when in fact the 6 deck
> game is the game of choice for many Pro's,
> obviously for reasons unknown to you.

> In another post of Jan 8 you stated you will
> no longer double an 11 in any dd or sd game
> unless "I am facing a dealer 6 or
> less!" Our Host Parker, pointed out
> the fallacy in this type of thinking
> suggesting that perhaps you are not ready
> for advantage play. Then further in this
> thread, Cacarulo correctly responded by
> saying This sounds like those people who
> never hit a 12 because a ten is always
> waiting for them.

> Your response to Cacarulo: "I always
> hit my 12 when called for except under
> certain circumstances I will surrender
> it." The Count of Montecristo asked if
> you were kidding.....and this is by far your
> best response so far: "I am playing a
> game that is very "deep", and I
> get into some peculiar situations because of
> that." While I would agree that
> "something" is getting very
> deep....it certainly is not your game.

> May all your hands be blackjacks because it
> appears you really need them to win.

> Card.

I am proud of the fact that I am an original thinker.

You know much more than I it seems, and I commend you for that.

I have an opinion on most, but not all, 6 deckers and you are welcome to have yours.

As for play I have several thousand hours of advantage play on 1 to 6 deck games.

I do not need a book to tell me what or how to think. I will consider what has been written and I will either follows those ideas or form my own based on the games I play and the experiences and insights I have gained through that time.

I am not a threat to you and I am baffled as to why you have a need to insult me.

I think you have missed out on some important statements I have made in this thread as to why I would consider, or execute these plays.

[Parker]

> I am proud of the fact that I am an original
> thinker.

> You know much more than I it seems, and I
> commend you for that.

> I have an opinion on most, but not all, 6
> deckers and you are welcome to have yours.

There is a huge difference here. Cardkountr's opinion is based on solid mathmatics, yours is not.

You may believe that the earth is flat and I may believe that it is round. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but that will not change the fact that my belief is a fact and your belief is a fantasy.

> As for play I have several thousand hours of
> advantage play on 1 to 6 deck games.

And we are basing our opinions on over 40 years of research by some of the most brilliant minds on earth, not to mention literally trillions of hands of computer simulations.

I doubt that you were sitting there recording the results of every single hand played over your "several thousand hours" and even if you were, it still is not a statistically significant sampling.

Personal experience is simply not a valid method of determining the effectiveness of a particular play. Our edge is too small and variance is too large.

> I do not need a book to tell me what or how
> to think. I will consider what has been
> written and I will either follows those
> ideas or form my own based on the games I
> play and the experiences and insights I have
> gained through that time.

You may not need a book to tell you how to think, but it appears that you desparately need a book to tell you how to play blackjack.

> I am not a threat to you and I am baffled as
> to why you have a need to insult me.

You espouse playing strategies that are mathmatically unsound. When someone corrects you on it, you respond with more unsound strategies. Now you get offended when someone calls you on it.

> I think you have missed out on some
> important statements I have made in this
> thread as to why I would consider, or
> execute these plays.

I have read all of your posts and the only thing I see is a lack of understanding of the mathmatics behind the game.

What puzzles me is, if you have no intention of making the mathmatically correct play as dictated by the count, why do you bother to count cards at all?

Here at Advantageplayer.com we discuss mathmatically sound methods of beating the game of blackjack. There is no place for voodoo, superstition, hunches, or bogus "systems" that cannot be simulated or supported by mathmatics.

[T-Hopper]

Voodoo Blackjack Board

[SnoopDarr]

[Ouchez]

I am referring to a dd game that is dealt almost to the bottom with regularity which puts me in certain situations on a regular basis that most players rarely get a chance to experience, hence the thoughts on strategy deviations that you claim are vodoo.

Would you not surrneder a 12 versus a dealer high card in a very high count with few cards left when you have a max bet on the table? I would and do, not that I like it, but at times a sound move.

Would you not just hit an eleven in a high count with 4 aces left and few cards remaining and the dealer with a strong card up? This is a simple risk averse move with a max bet out, don't like it, but at times the right move.

I do not view these as unsound moves by the numbers I may be facing.

[Milk Man]

Hey Cardkounter, The answer to the question is this. First understand there is only one correct play for any given situation or hand. That indiviudal play is determined relative to the possibility of what the dealer may have and your total out comes based on what remains in the deck. What ever the mathematical results for that situation turn out to be that is the best play for that hand. So for Ouchez to think there may be a time to surrender a 12 is not so outrageous as you think. To rebuke him with simulations that are not relavent to his particular situation is pointless. The question that should be asked is what was the true count? How many cards left? What was the deck compostion? Two of these questions are answerable one is not. But we could speculate and come up with answers. Now of coarse this is only to determine wheather or not we would differ from basic strategy in a given situation. We are not claiming this how we would normally play. I do not have the fortune of surrender where I play so I have to hit.