6,2 vs 6

[Blitzkrieg]

I got a hand on the sim on BJinfo, a 6,2 vs a dealer upcard 6, the running count was -6 with the strategy I was using and I chose to hit. The program recommended that I double 6,2 vs 6 which I thought was wrong. Maybe I would have had the count been real high positive. In "Beat The Dealer" on P. 24, 25 Table 3.3 Thorp noted in the chart with an asterisk that a player should double down "except" with (6,2). What is the logic behind this? Was it a programming error in the game on BJinfo?

[seriousplayer]

I got a hand on the sim on BJinfo, a 6,2 vs a dealer upcard 6, the running count was -6 with the strategy I was using and I chose to hit. The program recommended that I double 6,2 vs 6 which I thought was wrong. Maybe I would have had the count been real high positive. In "Beat The Dealer" on P. 24, 25 Table 3.3 Thorp noted in the chart with an asterisk that a player should double down "except" with (6,2). What is the logic behind this? Was it a programming error in the game on BJinfo?

Could you tell me the rules of the game you are playing and the number of deck being used.

[Three]

You would split 4,4v6.
You would soft double A7v6.
That leaves 2,6 and 3,5. There is an extra 5 in the deck that would make a dealer 11 with the 2,6 versus the 3,5. With single deck games that probably makes a big difference. Not sure when more decks dilutes the effect enough to make it insignificant to the decision.

[ZenKinG]

Shoe games it's irrelevant, now that would be chasing pennies literally. Beat the dealer and those old books were based on single and double deck games back in the day, in which a 6,2 would be relevant to double or not. When it comes to shoe, composition indices add no significance really. Just go by what your count calls for and react on that and dont worry about the composition of your hand.

[Blitzkrieg]

Could you tell me the rules of the game you are playing and the number of deck being used.

H17, DAS, single deck, no surrender. The same rules I'll encounter when the fiat hits the felt.

[Blitzkrieg]

You would split 4,4v6.
You would soft double A7v6.
That leaves 2,6 and 3,5. There is an extra 5 in the deck that would make a dealer 11 with the 2,6 versus the 3,5. With single deck games that probably makes a big difference. Not sure when more decks dilutes the effect enough to make it insignificant to the decision.

4 different variations of an 8 vs 6. If the hole card was a 5 it would have made a dealer 11 but that was not the case in this hand. I see it as a programming error as to why the sim would recommend to double the 6,2 vs. 6. But that still leaves me perplexed as to why Thorp would not recommend doubling with 6,2 vs. 6.

I will double a hard and soft 8 vs. 6 if my count calls for it and if I have a high running count.... but when my running count is -6 it just doesn't add up.

[Mr. White]

8v6 is a basic strategy double for single deck on any valid chart you'll see from a modern source. The game at BJInfo is correcting you according to basic strategy, without heed to indices or hand composition.

[Three]

I will double a hard and soft 8 vs. 6 if my count calls for it and if I have a high running count.... but when my running count is -6 it just doesn't add up.

For basic strategy in H17, DOA games the composition dependent decision EV's are as follows:

2,6v6: hitting 0.119677, doubling 0.111237 so you hit even though the decision is close.
3,5v6: hitting 0.15181, doubling 0.178469 so you double decisively.

[bigplayer]

The effect of removal for the play for 3,5 is different from 2,6. If you are counting cards you would not worry about hand composition basic strategy, but these plays do come in handy if you're playing, for example, blackjack machines that shuffle after every round and feature single deck and double any first two cards. Consider a 3 level count like Halves and you'd see that there is a different true count for each of those two plays.

[Blitzkrieg]

For basic strategy in H17, DOA games the composition dependent decision EV's are as follows:

2,6v6: hitting 0.119677, doubling 0.111237 so you hit even though the decision is close.
3,5v6: hitting 0.15181, doubling 0.178469 so you double decisively.

Where did you find this info at, did it come from a book or is it a program? thanks for the help

[Blitzkrieg]

The effect of removal for the play for 3,5 is different from 2,6. If you are counting cards you would not worry about hand composition basic strategy, but these plays do come in handy if you're playing, for example, blackjack machines that shuffle after every round and feature single deck and double any first two cards. Consider a 3 level count like Halves and you'd see that there is a different true count for each of those two plays.

I see your reasoning in counting and not worrying about hand composition so much. Do you know if Wong discusses hand composition basic strategy in his book "Professional Blackjack?"

[Three]

A program. Or at least a collection of tables for lots of playing conditions generated by a program.
http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/ev/ev.htm

Cacurulo is a trusted source.

[Blitzkrieg]

For basic strategy in H17, DOA games the composition dependent decision EV's are as follows:

2,6v6: hitting 0.119677, doubling 0.111237 so you hit even though the decision is close.
3,5v6: hitting 0.15181, doubling 0.178469 so you double decisively.

I seen an article that you may be able to help me decipher. With regards to the decimal numbers you responded with could you take a look at this article and could you tell me if "the numbers under the bracketed numbers are meant to be decimals" in particular the "A6 v. 5 in 6-deck S17 hand" Are the numbers the authors produced in the article for hitting and doubling respectively? http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/...t/ACEbjfo1.pdf