My suggestion is really quite simple.
ZeeBabar should sequentially reduce his stakes - until he is completely comfortable
with losing multiple Max Bets. Refusing to do so is de facto evidence of pathological
gambling. Imposing upon yourself emotional stress - without reward - is symptomatic
of compulsive / addictive behavior.
Veritas.
Simply explained, Zee likes uncrowded tables. Lower min tables tend to be more crowded. Therefore, he probably won't play a a lower min table. He would rather play a higher min table, not make plays he should make because he might lose both sides of a higher dollar bet, and then seek approval from the forum, through repetitive questions.Originally Posted by ZenMaster_Flash
We could abbreviate the process by selecting a number of pre approved questions, assigning a numerical value to that question, as well as selecting a number of pre approved answers, again assigning a numerical value to that answer. We could also authorize a 3 or 4 word precedent to the assigned numerical question, in order to gain context to that question.
Example
Question-What would you do with 42.
Answer- with surrender 36, without 57.
Sure save a lot of time.
I accidentially marked this post unhelpful. I was trying to reply. Damn new touch screen computer....piece of junk. Grrr....
Anyway, you're right, bodarc -- it seems like every one of Zee's threads go on like this one. I bet Zee is getting a lot of entertainment value out of these threads he makes.
"Everyone wants to be rich, but nobody wants to work for it." -Ryan Howard [The Office]
The correct index to not split 8,8 vs 10 if surrendering is not available is when the true count is 8 or higher. I looked it up using two source of references."However, say the count goes TC+5, you have a max bet out, dealer has a 10 and you have 8,8. Basic strategy says split but do I want to lose another max bet?"
We never want to lose any bets, but that doesn't mean that we don't make certain plays, if they're correct.
"The odds, even when you split, are that you would lose both bets."
That's not necessarily true and is probably false in this case. With the higher count, you are probably about 65% to lose one hand and 35% to win (exclude ties). So, to lose both hands is 42.25%, but to win one and lose one is 2 x 0.35 x 0.65 = 45.50%. You're more likely to break even than to lose both. Surprised? The problem is that you're very unlikely to win both, so your overall expectation is rather negative.
"Now, with a minimum bet out, in the long run, you would lose less by splitting."
You would also lose less with a maximum bet out, but you are risking more. So, you are correct that, from a risk-aversion point of view, there comes a point (right around +5!) above which splitting is no longer optimal. This is one of those times where you get the "right" answer for the "wrong" reason. Or, maybe you just have a good instinct as to when to make a risk-averse play!
"However, it's not often you get an 8,8 with a TC+5."
You get 8,8, vs. 10 once every 615 hands. The TC is greater than or equal to +5 about once every 36 hands. Ignoring any interaction between the two concepts, you get this holding once every 22,140 hands, or once every 221 hours! For some people, that represents an entire year's worth of play!! Bottom line: do whatever makes you happy.
"Fact is that some pros do not split in such a situation, to save one max bet."
Well, the first part may be true, but it isn't to "save one max bet." It's to forfeit a sliver of e.v. to save the greater variance on the play, by not splitting.
Don
"The correct index to not split 8,8 vs 10 if surrendering is not available is when the true count is 8 or higher. I looked it up using two source of references."
You didn't read what I wrote. I'm not discussing the e.v.-maximizing index; I'm discussing the risk-averse index.
Don
The "odds" are the reason basic strategy tells you to split. The purpose of the play is to either win more or, in this case, lose less because the math said that is what will happen when you follow the guidance.
If you are not willing to follow the directions, why are you playing? If the size of your bankroll causes these plays to be uncomfortable then I suggest you are over betting your bank and/or your tolerance for risk.
Luck is nothing more than probability taken personally!
I guess you guys did not read Don's post or misunderstood it. Basically, when a hand occurs once in some 22000+ , then it is okay to trade a small bit of EV for the variance that would occur by losing 2 max bets.
You also do not seem to notice that in his answers, when he chooses to answer, he does not address the poster, only the post. Unfortunately, some of you have just learned a formula, a bS or BS with index, and want to jump on anyone who suggests otherwise. It's like a cop who will give a ticket to anyone driving 1 mile over the speed limit regardless of the specific conditions (broad daylight, empty road etc). You guys want to shut off your brains and just follow what the book says.
Betting amounts and comfort level do matter and it is not such a big deal to not split that it justifies the need to get your pent up hostilities out on a poster. If you notice, instead of jumping to conclusions, I said I had difficulties with some splits, not that I never split 8's or 3's or others, and that it's only at high TC's that I find it difficult.
Posting Permissions
-*-
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks