See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 27 to 39 of 55

Thread: Spread to Two Hands at TC+5: got 11 and 12 against 7

  1. #27


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by 21forme View Post
    I've been playing a long time and I don't know the index for this one. Standing on 12 v 7 at the correct index (assuming there is one) is probably a once in a lifetime event.

    And just because you're at TC +5, doesn't mean anything regarding your next card.
    Standing 12v7 - if there is an index, it would have to be an absolute monster count. True 5 certainly doesn't come close to qualifying.

  2. #28
    Senior Member Tarzan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Atlantic City
    Posts
    1,013


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    16vs7, 16vs8 are fascinating hands in terms of how a more composition dependent index compares to the Hi-Lo or any other index. It is possible, even likely, to have a very positive TC in which you would hit or a negative TC (for betting) in which you would stand! It is a bizarro world in which middle cards and key cards have a huge impact on the playing decision. They are both extremely negative expectation hands in which you are going to lose no matter what, so perfect play only means losing slightly less. I have surrender indices for 12vs9, surrender and stand indices for 12vsT, but no index for 12vs7, Freightman. If I don't have it or haven't thought of it...

  3. #29
    Senior Member Jabberwocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Agharta
    Posts
    1,868


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by 21forme View Post
    I've been playing a long time and I don't know the index for this one. Standing on 12 v 7 at the correct index (assuming there is one) is probably a once in a lifetime event.

    And just because you're at TC +5, doesn't mean anything regarding your next card.
    Of all my DD hours only twice did I reach the T vs 12 index.

  4. #30


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by ZeeBabar View Post
    So let's not make a big deal about this one.
    Wrong is wrong.....................and REALLY BAD ADVICE FOR ANYONE!

    If you know the right answer but choose to gamble, then say you are gambling.
    Luck is nothing more than probability taken personally!

  5. #31


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    yes sir...

  6. #32
    Senior Member Tarzan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Atlantic City
    Posts
    1,013


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by 21forme View Post
    I've been playing a long time and I don't know the index for this one. Standing on 12 v 7 at the correct index (assuming there is one) is probably a once in a lifetime event.

    And just because you're at TC +5, doesn't mean anything regarding your next card.
    You don't know the index for 12vs7 because there isn't one!

  7. #33


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarzan View Post
    16vs7, 16vs8 are fascinating hands in terms of how a more composition dependent index compares to the Hi-Lo or any other index. It is possible, even likely, to have a very positive TC in which you would hit or a negative TC (for betting) in which you would stand! It is a bizarro world in which middle cards and key cards have a huge impact on the playing decision. They are both extremely negative expectation hands in which you are going to lose no matter what, so perfect play only means losing slightly less. I have surrender indices for 12vs9, surrender and stand indices for 12vsT, but no index for 12vs7, Freightman. If I don't have it or haven't thought of it...
    Nice Post Tarzan,

    The 16 vs 7,8,9 can be considered a nice little bonus esp. w/ace neutral counts..Frankly Speaking, if your hand of 16 is made up with cards A-5 then we as the players should take this into consideration and being a little more apt to standing vs always hitting...Take the "General index" for Ho2 for these hands as an example..Single and DD only..

    16v9+6
    16v8+13
    16v7+14

    Bot honestly if you wanted to break down the hand of 16v7 then the index would look something more like this....

    7,9 +21
    10,6 +17
    10,5,A or 10,4,2 +11
    5,5,4,2(A-5)+7

    Even more remarkable is the index for 16vs 9 can or could be as low as +1 if you held 3 or 5 of the Key Cards A-5...
    Last edited by Jack Jackson; 11-17-2017 at 02:49 PM.
    http://bjstrat.net/cgi-bin/cdca.cgi

  8. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    To give the OP a clue. I had to decide on a double for a 10 when max bet had been called for but I didn't count the chips and overbite because a ploppy was about to join the table. I had over bet both spots beyond my max bet. I thought about hitting because I was barely above the index and it was my last hand of the trip. Winning the hand more often was desired at this point but not mathematically proper. I keep a balanced ace side count so ace density is never known but with the count I had I could make a pretty accurate ace density estimation which is a rarity. The cut card came out so I knew there was about 1 deck left. I figured about 1 in every 6 or 7 cards was an ace. This meant despite the index saying there was hardly any extra EV for doubling over hitting, relatively speaking, there was a huge amount of EV given the ace situation. All this took a nanosecond to figure out. I correctly doubled and it cost me around 6 max bets. When I doubled, I couldn't take a second card which changed the cards from me getting a 20 and 21 while the dealer busted to the dealer getting 21 and sweeping my bets off the felt. But it doesn't bother me because I made the right decision and would do it again in a heartbeat. Had the balanced ace side count been neutral I probably would have errantly taken the poor play with the higher certainty of a win but lower EV. The playing count was right at the index but definitely not below it. Not much difference in EV for hitting and doubling relatively speaking but the aces alone made it a good double. I guess as the cards played out having a rare situation where I knew the ace density from a balanced ace side count really cost me some money but you should always make every decision with as much information as you have.

    What is important is making the right decisions, especially when the EV difference is a lot. If you do that the long run will take care of itself and come more quickly. If you regularly don't the long run EV is eroded and will take much longer to reach.

  9. #35


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Three View Post
    To give the OP a clue. I had to decide on a double for a 10 when max bet had been called for but I didn't count the chips and overbite because a ploppy was about to join the table. I had over bet both spots beyond my max bet. I thought about hitting because I was barely above the index and it was my last hand of the trip. Winning the hand more often was desired at this point but not mathematically proper. I keep a balanced ace side count so ace density is never known but with the count I had I could make a pretty accurate ace density estimation which is a rarity. The cut card came out so I knew there was about 1 deck left. I figured about 1 in every 6 or 7 cards was an ace. This meant despite the index saying there was hardly any extra EV for doubling over hitting, relatively speaking, there was a huge amount of EV given the ace situation. All this took a nanosecond to figure out. I correctly doubled and it cost me around 6 max bets. When I doubled, I couldn't take a second card which changed the cards from me getting a 20 and 21 while the dealer busted to the dealer getting 21 and sweeping my bets off the felt. But it doesn't bother me because I made the right decision and would do it again in a heartbeat. Had the balanced ace side count been neutral I probably would have errantly taken the poor play with the higher certainty of a win but lower EV. The playing count was right at the index but definitely not below it. Not much difference in EV for hitting and doubling relatively speaking but the aces alone made it a good double. I guess as the cards played out having a rare situation where I knew the ace density from a balanced ace side count really cost me some money but you should always make every decision with as much information as you have.

    What is important is making the right decisions, especially when the EV difference is a lot. If you do that the long run will take care of itself and come more quickly. If you regularly don't the long run EV is eroded and will take much longer to reach.
    T3, I get the point but sometimes, psychological needs come in. As an example, I know I am done for the trip, it's the last round before I get into my car and drive home. Doubling on both hands leads to the possibility that I might be heading home a loser while just hitting assures that I will be taking the long drive home a winner even if I lose both hands.

    Thus, to be honest, I might stand on an Ace,8 against a 6 or hit a 9-2 instead of doubling under certain conditions that have little to do with BJ and usually at the end of a trip, a little assurance that the trip home is pleasant.

    In the same line, if I am down a bit, the last show might be played a bit differently in hopes of recovery, maybe doubling when slightly below required count.

    Goes to show I have not become a total robot, huh.

  10. #36


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Why are you worried about the result of a trip or session? Violating BS in fear that you will lose the hand and be a loser for the "trip" is an absolutely horrible thing to do. Then on the opposite end.... doubling under the index "in hopes" to "recover" makes it even worse. Surely you understand how bad this is... in one instance you live in fear of the short term and try to reduce variance when you should be welcoming it. Then turn around and increase your variance on situations where you shouldn't...

  11. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Trip results are an artificial barrier. It is all one big session. Altering play to hit desired trip results will hurt you in the long run, which is the session you should be worrying about. I just played another shoe or two and won the money back. Then things conditions started to deteriorate so I went home.

  12. #38


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Good points from JimmyBond and T3. I am just explaining the psychological issues with it. We are all human and having a good day does wonders for the evening and the next while returning home having lost feels terrible. So I make these concessions which I agree are WRONG. I am simply admitting my mistakes and sharing the reasons for it. I have not yet overcome these issues. Maybe I will.

    When you guys point out how wrong it is, next time, hopefully, I will go for it. Its just the last shoe, the one before I am going back home is where I do these things. Thanks for the pointers. Its why I love this forum. I can admit or share my play and get quick, sometimes nasty, feedback and it helps me for the next time.

    Another error I will admit is say the count is TC+3, I place a $125 bet, have only $50 in chips in front of me. I lose that $125 bet, count remains at TC+3 or even go higher but rather than cash for more money (and perhaps attract heat), I just place the chips I have in front of me for the next bet. So I place $50 (instead of the $125). I win, it and I place the $100 (basically I am underbetting). I probably do this because the act of reaching for my wallet means I might lose more and hoping I can "recover" without cashing any more money.

  13. #39


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by ZeeBabar View Post
    I get the point but sometimes, psychological needs come in. As an example, I know I am done for the trip, it's the last round before I get into my car and drive home. Doubling on both hands leads to the possibility that I might be heading home a loser while just hitting assures that I will be taking the long drive home a winner even if I lose both hands.
    To all the newbies on the forum - if you think like this, you should not be playing. If you do play, you are a compulsive gambler and NOT an AP. Advantage play is 100% playing by the numbers. Hunches and short term results mean absolute nothing.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. can CVCX tell you the optimal time to spread and drop hands?
    By weballinoutacontro in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-04-2017, 04:47 AM
  2. Quick ? about hands per shoe/hands per session
    By MDAP in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-08-2016, 05:41 AM
  3. Big Spread or 2 Hands?
    By LV_STATUS in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-21-2015, 06:16 AM
  4. 1,000 hands or 100 million hands
    By Rainmaker in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 09-16-2013, 12:22 PM
  5. Wonging, Hands played / percentage hands played per hour?
    By zolas in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-27-2013, 08:04 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.