Split or Double Down??

[nwkfern69]

If you have a pair of 4's and the true count is at point were you would double down 8 against dealer 5 or 6. What do u do, split the 4's or double it down?

[BigJer]

If you can DD after split then split. Otherwise just DD.

[ZeeBabar]

What is the index where you split 4's against a 5,6?

[BigJer]

What is the index where you split 4's against a 5,6?

It's basic strategy. But it's TC-1 against a 5 and TC-5 against a 6.

[DSchles]

How many decks? What count? What rules? When you ask questions like this and don't furnish any of the above, it isn't possible to answer.

Don

[KJ]

What is the index where you split 4's against a 5,6?

Are you serious? I try really hard not to join the other's in piling on, but really!?!....you don't know the index for 4,4 vs 5,6, which as BigJer says is not even an index play, but basic strategy? It's becoming harder and harder to take you seriously. This must be some sort of act, for what purpose, I have no idea.

[DSchles]

"you don't know the index for 4,4 vs 5,6, which as BigJer says is not even an index play, but basic strategy?"

Two quick comments: 1) If BigJer was attempting to furnish Hi-Lo indices for multi-deck, then surely, the -5 vs. 6 is incorrect. 2) What does "is not even an index play, but basic strategy" supposed to mean? Is not standing on 12 v. 4 at below 0 "not even an index play" because it is basic strategy to stand?? What is your point? There ARE indices for splitting 4,4, vs, 5 and 6 precisely because, below those indices, you don't split.

Don

[BigJer]

"you don't know the index for 4,4 vs 5,6, which as BigJer says is not even an index play, but basic strategy?"

Two quick comments: 1) If BigJer was attempting to furnish Hi-Lo indices for multi-deck, then surely, the -5 vs. 6 is incorrect. 2) What does "is not even an index play, but basic strategy" supposed to mean? Is not standing on 12 v. 4 at below 0 "not even an index play" because it is basic strategy to stand?? What is your point? There ARE indices for splitting 4,4, vs, 5 and 6 precisely because, below those indices, you don't split.

Don

Don,

I got those indices out of Wong's book.

[KJ]

"you don't know the index for 4,4 vs 5,6, which as BigJer says is not even an index play, but basic strategy?"

Two quick comments: 1) If BigJer was attempting to furnish Hi-Lo indices for multi-deck, then surely, the -5 vs. 6 is incorrect. 2) What does "is not even an index play, but basic strategy" supposed to mean? Is not standing on 12 v. 4 at below 0 "not even an index play" because it is basic strategy to stand?? What is your point? There ARE indices for splitting 4,4, vs, 5 and 6 precisely because, below those indices, you don't split.

Don

Don, you can nit pick if you want. I know you enjoy that sometimes. But the fact is this guy wasn't asking if there is an index where he should not split, he was asking what the index is for splitting 4,4 vs 5,6, which for the games that he commonly talks about is basic strategy.

Being a member of both sites, you, like the rest of us have seen this pattern play out a hundred times now. First he continually asks questions, that if he really wants to know the answer, he should look up himself. He can't be bothered doing any of the work himself, instead, repeatedly asks such elementary questions, expecting the members of to 'spoon feed' him. I am all for helping other players as much as I can (with my limited knowledge and ability), as others did for me. But you have to feel like the person is at least attempting to help himself, putting in some effort, otherwise it's insulting that he values us and our time so little.

Secondly, he tells us that he is attempting to be a serious card counter AP. His claim is it's a two year trial run for him, to see if he can supplement his retirement. We are well into that two year run and he doesn't know basic strategy for the games he commonly plays. Give me a break.

I know I am sounding harsh here, and that's really not who I am. But you, as well as I and everyone who is a member of both sites has seen this play out dozens of times. It's frustrating. I tried to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I no longer can. It just feels like this isn't real. It feels like we are all being played.

For those that don't want to wait, here is how this will play out. Zee will respond, either here or at BJ21 (he loves to play the two sites against one another), saying how mean-spirited everyone in the BJ AP community is. How people are all picking on him and obsessed with him.

[21forme]

KJ - so what's your opinion, troll or dumb as dirt?

[muckz]

1. Very in depth cover play revealing location and identity to disguise HC as horrible card counter, or other distraction purposes.
2. Ploy used by consultants to convince casino's to buy services because counters aren't a threat
3. A serious effort by a real ap to improve bj conditions using the same premise as above
4. Takes trolling as serious as a day job
5. Really dumb

[KJ]

KJ - so what's your opinion, troll or dumb as dirt?

I have to go with 'troll'.

I didn't want to believe it and really tried hard to give him the benefit of doubt. But here's the pattern: When things are 'quite' for too long, he will post something ridiculous, question or statement, that he knows will get many members fired up and generate many responses. It can be an elementary question (that he can't be bothered to look up himself) or a ridiculously erroneous statement regarding blackjack. It can something about his 'shoebox accounting system'. It can be something outside of blackjack, like how he spends some of his BJ winnings on a prostitute for his 13 year old son, which we shouldn't judge him on, because that is perfectly acceptable in his culture. Whatever it is, he knows it will generate responses. And then he will cry that we are all picking on him, and he'll likely do this cross site-posting as he loves to play the two sites against each other.

[21forme]

The other day, an older, well-dressed, Indian subcontinent-looking guy sat down at my table. He was a horrible player - splitting tens against a 9, etc. I wondered to myself if it was Zee