williwong21: Multiple Hands

[williwong21]

While wonging at a table with 9 spots as opposed to the standard 6 or 7,should I play 3 squares when the other 5 and/or 6 are taken and my 3rd would otherwise not be grabbed by somebody else?Willi.

[Don Schlesinger]

> While wonging at a table with 9 spots as
> opposed to the standard 6 or 7,should I play
> 3 squares when the other 5 and/or 6 are
> taken and my 3rd would otherwise not be
> grabbed by somebody else?Willi.

Your first mistake is playing at a table with 9 spots! Is that the best you can do?

It makes little difference, betting optimally, if you spread to the third spot or not.

Better yet, wait until there aren't 9 hands being played at once, and play one or two spots! You aren't going to get rich playing 9-handed blackjack!

Don

[Karel]

I performed the precise calculation at some point. The result is that it is correct to spread to 3 hands if there are another 3 players (or 3 hands) on the table. The bet size is lower than for 2 hands, but of course the total money on the table with 3 hands is higher. A formula for calculating the optimal bet size can be found in the section V.(4) in the "Statistics of Blackjack" electronic book accompanying SBA. The formula is:
MH = SH / [1+(N-1)r],
where N is the number of hands, r is the correlation coefficient (usually around 0.36), SH is the single-hand optimal bet size, and MH is the multiple hands bet size. For example, for 3 hands and correlation coefficient 0.36 we get:
MH = SH / [1+2*0.36] = 0.5814 SH,
so the bet size at each of the three hands should be 0.5814 times the optimal bet size for a single hand.

Best regards,

Karel

> While wonging at a table with 9 spots as
> opposed to the standard 6 or 7,should I play
> 3 squares when the other 5 and/or 6 are
> taken and my 3rd would otherwise not be
> grabbed by somebody else?Willi.

[williwong21]

Thanx for the responses.I have little choice for the next week or two,so this will be my game.I believed playing 2 spots when another 5 were taken and 3 when 6 were taken was optimal.I'm basically just sitting out until plus 1,all bets less than plus 1 must average a penny or two.The penetration is horrible also,2-3 decks out of eight.DAS,LS,S17.I'm going to take your advice when 3 others are taken and play 3 also.I usually do anyway because I receive more dealer errors that way.They always look at your next hand,it's more of a natural continuous motion unlike from one player to another.Also If I believe the cut card will come out because of only my additional cards I'll sit out the next to last round,even with a tiny edge hoping for better oppurtunities the last round.Is that wrong?I'll just sit out the last round if it's negative.Willi.

[Karel]

That is completely correct. You may also want to play only one hand with higher bet size, if you believe that one hand will not cause shuffle. On the other hand, if you know for sure that shuffle will come and you have an edge, you should spread to as many hands as possible, with appropriate optimal bet sizes.

The difficulty of these, theoretically optimal, strategies is that there may be an error in your estimate, and such an error could be relatively costly.

Best regards,

Karel

> Also If I believe the cut card will
> come out because of only my additional cards
> I'll sit out the next to last round,even
> with a tiny edge hoping for better
> oppurtunities the last round.Is that
> wrong?I'll just sit out the last round if
> it's negative.Willi.