Splitting 10s

[moses]

Delete

[Norm]

Unseen cards are unseen cards.

[DSchles]

"The purpose the large bet was expectation of garnering more large cards. If so, the TC would then slide below the suggested split index on the first hand."

Or not. While Norm's answer is, of course, concise and correct, what would YOU propose as to the value of those two cards? You make a decision on the hand in front of you based on all reliable information up to the moment. The two cards lying face down on the table, to your left, are NO information whatsoever. How can it matter if they are on the table or in the shoe, yet undealt?

Don

[Norm]

The only time I can think of that unseen cards on the table are useful, is if they are another player's, in which case you may get a clue as to their value by the player's move.

[AnzaExo]

It really depends on your stakes to be viewed as an AP when splitting 10s. I've seen plenty of tourists do it with <$50 bets and not get much attention at all, other than a groaning table.

[bigplayer]

Splitting 10's does not have to be an absolute either/or proposition. Instead of choosing never splitting 10's you can just decide to do it only at a much higher than normal TC. The standard indexes are +4, +5, and +6, Bump them up to +7, +8, and +9. I don't remember the exact numbers but you wind up splitting something like 30% as often but still get 60% of the EV possible from the play because of more frequent re-splits and greater chances of catching pat hands. There is a post in the BJ21.com Archives by Mathprof which has details on this.

[forecast rain]

Splitting 10s can be an attention getter for AP in a heads up game. I realize only counting the "seen" cards is a Cardinal rule in BJ. However, suppose your system suggests the count suggests a max bet and you're playing two hands. This situation is rare but could be costly...or a handsome profit. The rule is the first hand must complete play before looking at the second hand.

The first hand is two 10s which put your true count square on line. My question is do you give any consideration to the unseen hand in this instance? It could be fair to assume one or both are ten/Ace. The purpose the large bet was expectation of garnering more large cards. If so, the TC would then slide below the suggested split index on the first hand.

.

If you think about it, the situation where your second hands unseen value could affect the play variation of the first hand happens a lot. My thought is to assume all unseen cards are valued at 0 unless you have information that would suggest otherwise .... A good example is you have 7,3 vs 9 using an index of -1 for double and the current TC is -1. Lets say you are playing 1 hand and there are 2 other players in front of you. (lets also say for each 10,A it will subtract 1 from the TC because youre deep in a shoe or playing SD) With all this, if I'm looking at a 7,3 vs 9 and the 2 players in the front stay pat, one could deduce there is atleast one (10 or Ace) with no low cards in either hand which would make the TC below the variation of -1. In this instance I would just hit, even though the TC of seen cards does meet the variation of double.

I hope that makes sense!

Norm covered such topic in Chapter 17 of "Modern Blackjack" ~ Counting by Inference Strategies ~ http://www.qfit.com/book/ModernBlackjackPage495.htm

[Exoter175]

Splitting 10s can be an attention getter for AP in a heads up game. I realize only counting the "seen" cards is a Cardinal rule in BJ. However, suppose your system suggests the count suggests a max bet and you're playing two hands. This situation is rare but could be costly...or a handsome profit. The rule is the first hand must complete play before looking at the second hand.

The first hand is two 10s which put your true count square on line. My question is do you give any consideration to the unseen hand in this instance? It could be fair to assume one or both are ten/Ace. The purpose the large bet was expectation of garnering more large cards. If so, the TC would then slide below the suggested split index on the first hand.

I make zero guesses at what the next card out of the deck is, I only rely on what the count tells me, and what I can see. I've watch something like 11 straight baby cards come out on a TC5 before, and watched 6 straight kings come out at TC-1. There's no way to garner the information aside from simple counting and conversion. At that point, you're just going to make the highest percentage move given your information.

Unseen cards are unseen cards.

Bingo.

[Gramazeka]

http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=19280

[nicetrades200303]

What is the worst thing the dealer would say or do if you looked at the second hand before making that decision? Dealers make mistakes. Why can't players "mess up" too? When the dealer shows an ace up, they allow you to look at the second hand for your insurance decision. Pretend to be ignorant and just look at the second hand when splitting tens is borderline--just like leaning over to your neighbors and glancing at their cards and asking them “Do you have any face cards?” when the dealer asks for insurance.

By the way, ploppies split tens more than you think--and against 2's and 3's.

[KronikBuddha]

A SCORE of 50 is around my minimum target.

[Three]

I can't include. I read somewhere that a SCORE of 50 is about the max target...is this correct?

That's the minimum for what is considered playable. Less of a SCORE and certainty is so far gone that you are pretty much gambling. You have EV and certainty. EV tells you your expectation. SCORE and N0 are measures of certainty and tells you how likely you are to be at your expectation. A high N0 (low SCORE) takes so many hours to reach certainty that you may never see it. With a SCORE of at least 50 you should reach a good degree of certainty to be at EV within a year for mot players. If you play a lot maybe half that. It all depends on how much you play.

[mofungoo]

With a SCORE of at least 50 you should reach a good degree of certainty to be at EV within a year for mot players. If you play a lot maybe half that. It all depends on how much you play.

When you are at N0 it means you have a 65% (approximately) chance of being in the + column. It will take, depending on the game, over a million hands to be reasonably certain of being at EV. This is not going to happen in a year if you are playing solo.