Playing two hands in postive counts.

[Vandammage]

Quick question .... How many of you guys play two hands when the counting is in postive. Is there more EV opportunity doing this and just generally more chance of winning off variance also ?

[Freightman]

Bet sized correctly, in positive counts, you can play 2 hands equalling same EV with less variance. Conversely, if playing with minuscule ROR, play 2. If not heads up, This grabs more of the good cards and simply reduces the agony time for your ploppy table mate. If heads up, from a strict EV perspective, you should play 1 hand only until such time that you are by putting up against table max. Exceptions to everything.

[bigplayer]

When playing with others you always want to play two hands anytime you have the advantage. Other players hurt you by eating your positive rounds when the edge favors the players. When you don't have the edge it's best to play one hand (or no hands if possible) and let the other players eat up the negative rounds. When heads up it doesn't much matter whether you play one or two hands, but I'd say that one hand of $700 looks more threatening than two hands of $500 in terms of what the casino sees and you can chew through a shoe somewhat faster in terms of time (shoes per hour) playing two spots in plus count than you can playing just one spot so even when I'm heads up I prefer using the wins and losses and my bet sizes to make natural switches from one to two hands. It works for shoes because the count moves far more gradually up and down.

For double deck and single deck moving from one hand to two hands in plus counts is a very transparent move and makes you very easy to detect as a counter. I don't suggest it unless you also move from one hand to two hands almost as often in negative counts. For example you could range your bet from 1x$25 to 1x$100 between -1 and +1 then go to 2x$100 at +2 or go to 2x$25 at -2. (just an example). In general though it's better to stay at either one hand or two hands all the time when playing single or double deck and if you add a hand mid-shoe keep on playing two hands for the next several shuffles and if you drop to one hand mid-shoe don't add the second hand back for a few shuffles.

[Aslan]

When playing with others you always want to play two hands anytime you have the advantage. Other players hurt you by eating your positive rounds when the edge favors the players. When you don't have the edge it's best to play one hand (or no hands if possible) and let the other players eat up the negative rounds. When heads up it doesn't much matter whether you play one or two hands, but I'd say that one hand of $700 looks more threatening than two hands of $500 in terms of what the casino sees and you can chew through a shoe somewhat faster in terms of time (shoes per hour) playing two spots in plus count than you can playing just one spot so even when I'm heads up I prefer using the wins and losses and my bet sizes to make natural switches from one to two hands. It works for shoes because the count moves far more gradually up and down.

For double deck and single deck moving from one hand to two hands in plus counts is a very transparent move and makes you very easy to detect as a counter. I don't suggest it unless you also move from one hand to two hands almost as often in negative counts. For example you could range your bet from 1x$25 to 1x$100 between -1 and +1 then go to 2x$100 at +2 or go to 2x$25 at -2. (just an example). In general though it's better to stay at either one hand or two hands all the time when playing single or double deck and if you add a hand mid-shoe keep on playing two hands for the next several shuffles and if you drop to one hand mid-shoe don't add the second hand back for a few shuffles.

Like you say, I have found camo to be of paramount importance playing pitch games, since most any AP move is more transparent in these games.

[Jabberwocky]

Like you say, I have found camo to be of paramount importance playing pitch games, since most any AP move is more transparent in these games.

Strange that no one mentioned spreading horizontally in neutral counts and vertically in plus counts. Am I the only one doing it?

[bigplayer]

Strange that no one mentioned spreading horizontally in neutral counts and vertically in plus counts. Am I the only one doing it?

Uston discusses it at length in Million Dollar Blackjack but for the modern game with mediocre pen and for shoes I don't think it's all that effective, especially when many casinos require players to double the table min to play two spots. In many jurisdictions they don't allow you to spread to multiple hands if you start with one hand at the shuffle on pitch games. Ideally if you're gonna spread horizontally you'll want to play three hands of very tiny bets in minus counts.

[Jabberwocky]

Uston discusses it at length in Million Dollar Blackjack but for the modern game with mediocre pen and for shoes I don't think it's all that effective, especially when many casinos require players to double the table min to play two spots. In many jurisdictions they don't allow you to spread to multiple hands if you start with one hand at the shuffle on pitch games. Ideally if you're gonna spread horizontally you'll want to play three hands of very tiny bets in minus counts.

Point taken. Thank u bigplayer. However I exit the table on minus counts.