Playing only one hand with another player at the table. Question.

[Wino]

I have understood that I should spread to two hands when I have an advantage and playing alongside another player and increase the money wagered to not more than 150% of what I would have wagered if playing alone with one hand due to covariance. My question is what are the implications of just playing one hand while playing with someone else? Table restrictions of requiring to double the minimum bet would lead to risk of ruin I am not comfortable with as well as not being allowed to spread from one hand to two mid-shoe have been imposed by this Casino. Even though count is high, order of the cards being unknown, how would this affect the card-counter?

[ZenMaster_Flash]

The swiftest route to your outing yourself as a Card Counter
is to move to TWO hands when the count is advantageous.
It is the move that is easiest for the pit and E I T S to see.

Avoid at all costs.

The mathematics of the game are one thing,

but "facts on the ground" are something else.

[Jabberwocky]

I am able to consistently spread to two hands in 6 deck and wong out with no heat. But that casino is quite tolerable of APs. I can also get away with inverse betting in any local casino.

[ZenMaster_Flash]

Jabber' ...

As I have taught my students ... "There is no heat; until there is."

[ZenMaster_Flash]

"I can also get away with inverse betting in any local casino."

I know what you mean, but I'll not "put words in your mouth."

Please define and describe what you are referring to for the others.

[ZeeBabar]

I read someplace that playing two hands is always preferable. In any case, in neutral or negative counts, I often spread to two hands or back to one, playing minimum bets and there is often no pattern to it except when the deck is positive where I will stay with two hands if there is another player at the table or keep going back and forth playing one hand or two hands.

i don't know if it's a mistake to go back and forth too often if you are not always doing it by count?

[Wino]

So what about the math of playing only one hand while at table with another player? Not much effect on results right? Less EV due to less money wagered while eating up fewer cards? Anything else that would affect the counter from a math standpoint?

[Three]

So what about the math of playing only one hand while at table with another player? Not much effect on results right? Less EV due to less money wagered while eating up fewer cards? Anything else that would affect the counter from a math standpoint?

From BJA3 page 26:
alone:
1x500 50,000
2x365 at 73% 48,910 (2x375 at the 75% approximation 50,250)
3x285 at 57% 42,750
1 other spot being played at the table:
1x500 33,500
2x365 36,500 (2x375 approximation 37,500)
3x285 34,200
2 other spots being played:
1x500 25,000
2x365 29,200 (2x375 approximation 30,000)
3x285 28,215
3 other spots being played:
1x500 20,000
2x365 24,090 (2x375 approximation 24,750)
3x285 24,795
4 other spots being played:
1x500 16,500
2x365 21,170 (2x375 approximation 21,750)
3x285 21,375 (7 spot table?)

Parenthetical comments added by me. Don's numbers maintain a constant RoR for all 3 approaches. 72% comes up with impractical bets so many use the 75% approximation. RoR is no longer constant with the approximation.

[Wino]

Thanks for all of the replies.