Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Cacarulo: Quiz:"Optimal way of playing two hands"

  1. #1
    Cacarulo
    Guest

    Cacarulo: Quiz:"Optimal way of playing two hands"

    Optimal way of playing two hands

    Say you are playing one hand in a heads up game and at
    a particular time you decide to place another bet on a free spot.
    Suppose that there are no other players at the table and
    the game is the following:

    6D,S17,DOA,DAS,SPA1,SPL3,NS,5/6,Hi-Lo,C22 w/floored indices.

    Now, how would you do this?

    A) Wait for a particular TC to place the additional bet? What would that TC be?
    B) Always play two hands?
    C) Never play two hands?

    Obviously there is an optimal answer which gives you the best overall SCORE.

    Sincerely,
    Cac

  2. #2
    Don Schlesinger
    Guest

    Don Schlesinger: Important stipulation

    Although I'm sure you are implying this, it would be best to stipulate, as well, that the size of the two wagers will be optimal with respect to the one-hand wager; i.e., each hand will be about 73% of the one-hand amount.

    The reason a question like this has caused so much debate and downright arguments over the years is that you don't consider the speed of play, either. Are we to consider that, in one hour, we will get two-thirds as many rounds (and, therefore, just as many hands) by playing two hands all the time, as opposed to playing one hand all the time?

    And, if that is the assumption, and we bet, roughly, 150% as much on 2/3 as many hands, then our action will be identical with the two approaches (which, of course, was the basis for the argument in BJA3, pp. 24-26). Now, I'm not saying that this is the correct answer; rather, I'm simply pointing out that it has been argued (and I don't really agree), that a lone player can play two hands faster than, say, two separate players playing those hands.

    Don

  3. #3
    MARILLION
    Guest

    MARILLION: Re: Quiz:"Optimal way of playing two hands"

    > Optimal way of playing two hands Say you are
    > playing one hand in a heads up game and at
    > a particular time you decide to place another bet on a
    > free spot.
    > Suppose that there are no other players at the table
    > and
    > the game is the following:

    > 6D,S17,DOA,DAS,SPA1,SPL3,NS,5/6,Hi-Lo,C22 w/floored
    > indices.

    > Now, how would you do this?

    > A) Wait for a particular TC to place the additional
    > bet? What would that TC be?
    > B) Always play two hands?
    > C) Never play two hands?

    > Obviously there is an optimal answer which gives you
    > the best overall SCORE.

    > Sincerely,
    > Cac

    After having read Don Schlesinger's "BJ Attack", whenever I play such game, I always play one spot. I might go to 2 spots, 73% of one spot bet, only with my max bet at TC 5 and above, because of BR considerations. Should I continue do this in the future?

  4. #4
    Cacarulo
    Guest

    Cacarulo: Re: Important stipulation

    > Although I'm sure you are implying this, it would be
    > best to stipulate, as well, that the size of the two
    > wagers will be optimal with respect to the one-hand
    > wager; i.e., each hand will be about 73% of the
    > one-hand amount.

    Correct.

    > The reason a question like this has caused so much
    > debate and downright arguments over the years is that
    > you don't consider the speed of play, either. Are we
    > to consider that, in one hour, we will get two-thirds
    > as many rounds (and, therefore, just as many hands) by
    > playing two hands all the time, as opposed to playing
    > one hand all the time?

    Yes, speed is not considered for the purpose of this exercise.

    > And, if that is the assumption, and we bet, roughly,
    > 150% as much on 2/3 as many hands, then our action
    > will be identical with the two approaches (which, of
    > course, was the basis for the argument in BJA3, pp.
    > 24-26). Now, I'm not saying that this is the correct
    > answer; rather, I'm simply pointing out that it has
    > been argued (and I don't really agree), that a lone
    > player can play two hands faster than, say, two
    > separate players playing those hands.

    I tend to agree that a lone player can play two hands faster than two separate players playing the same hands.
    The main problem with speed is the shuffle time. If you play two hands, you play less rounds and thus you get more shuffles.

    Sincerely,
    Cac

  5. #5
    Cacarulo
    Guest

    Cacarulo: Re: Quiz:"Optimal way of playing two hands"

    > After having read Don Schlesinger's "BJ
    > Attack", whenever I play such game, I always play
    > one spot. I might go to 2 spots, 73% of one spot bet,
    > only with my max bet at TC 5 and above, because of BR
    > considerations. Should I continue do this in the
    > future?

    I can't tell you now until I get more answers to the quiz

    Sincerely,
    Cac

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.