Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 26

Thread: When playing heads-up, only play one hand? not two hand?

  1. #1


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    When playing heads-up, only play one hand? not two hand?

    MY strategy was always play one hand at TC 0 or below, play two hand at TC 1 or higher. I thought play more hands reduce the risk, and save more cards to be dealt. Shockingly, I just realized I was wrong.

    On page 26 of BJA3, it explained that when playing alone, keeping the same RoR, play one hand produces higher EV than play multiple hands! (except the last cut card hand) The text explanation is well written, it makes a lot of sense!
    WeChat Image_20180323052937.jpg

    I understand that for camouflage purpose, play two hand of $75 looks better than one hand of $100.
    If I only consider the math, is it true I should never play more than one hand until the cut card hand when playing alone?? (I just can't believe it... though I know it makes sense.)
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Help, I didn't attach the matrix colored chart, but it follows me everywhere.. and I can't delete it. How to delete it?

  3. #3


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    If not close to table max, then optimal would be spreading to 2 with 1 round to cut card. Other optimal would be to play 1 hand only, except when butting up against table max, then spread to 2.

    One further note. Issues of covariance suggest that the bet per square is 75% of the 1 square bet, I.e. 2-75 v 1-100. If ror and variance are not issues, then, per example shown, 2x100 is just fine.

    Conclusion.
    If bankroll is strong, variance and ror are not issues, then do whatever floats your boat. If not, follow protocol.

  4. #4


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    It has been some time since I read Professional Blackjack by Wong. That being said I remember him specifically recommending one hand when playing heads up and two (at good counts) if any other players are at the table. And as Freightman said, you would play 2 hands the round before shuffle heads up (I believe this is because you would like to get as many cards out of a positive shoe as possible). Again, it has been some time since I read it but when playing heads up, you will get the same number of rounds as you would playing two hands, but your playing decisions would be more accurate than it would be on the first of two hands due to unseen cards. To address bet sizing, Snyder recommends if spreading to two hands betting 1.5 times the total amount of your bet and 2 x your total bet if playing three hands

    e.g.

    Optimal 1/2 Kelly $100
    1 hand $100
    2 hands $150 (2x75)
    3 hands $200 (3x66)

    Hope all this helps.

  5. #5


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    I'll add a bit more to this topic - more of the do as I say, it what I do, type of scenario. My typical game is 6d shoe, min 25 to max 500 or 1000. I no longer play in my local hometown. I'm on an out of town trip right now, first stop at this nice little hole in the wall in the middle of nowhere. I've played this little low level delight, managing 1-2 stops a year -about all they can take of me. I'll compare this place to a shit hole low level sweat shop fairly close to home.

    I've said previously, something to the effect of deck pen 4.0/6 earnings are X, 4.5/6 are Y, 5.0/6 earnings are Z, and 5.5/6 earnings are super Z. Where I'm leaving this morning, with super Z conditions, wouldn't open their hi limit min 10 max 200 game. Thus, I was relegated to the 5-100 table, as has been the case on most of my visits.

    For about 1/2 hour, I shared a table with the local hot shot, who criticized my surrender, as he confidently split 2's v10 plus other assorted misplays. I had heads ups conditions for about 2.5 hours. In a game with conditions, that you know you are absolutely going to crush, most if the time, I didn't bother spreading to 2 at table max. Primarily, I'm at the upper end if being tolerated, though, other than grimaces, no other countermeasures. My result last night, about 1400 for 3 hours. Making another few hundred dollars, simply to puss them off a bit more simply didn't make sense. My win rate per hour is really beyond belief for these stakes are beyond belief. They can't figure out what raising my bets in a declining count is all about.

    Closer to home, a stinky smelly sweat shop, with similar limits (5-200), see Freightman walk thru the door 1-2 times a year, and its only an hour from my front door. I'm immediately half shied - fortunately, this 0place has some if the dumbest dealers on earth. I only occasionally violate the sacred 100 rule, though I employ every trick in the book that I'm aware of - though pen, for me, averages 4.0/6 or less. My last trip there was about 700, but typically it's under 3,4 or 500. I'll make my complaints to game Nv once they bounce me.

    Message is
    Evaluate your game potential. Consider all factors before making certain EV decisions. I work by my win policies, which work well for me. Now, off to more traditional stakes, as soon as I finish breakfast.

  6. #6


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Except in the instance of playing heads up, I am generally a proponent of playing two hands at positive counts adjusted by co-variance to allow more EV with the same risk. That is, 2X75 creates same risk as 1X100 but EV is higher.

    These considerations are part of a larger understanding of bankroll size/RoR/casino tolerance and specific playing conditions. Isolating one characteristic and concluding what is optimal is somewhat dangerous.

    As an example, having a partner spread to 2 spots to eat negative counts may be beneficial by providing the partner making big bets with more opportunities per hour. Overall, the EV is much better but then so is the variance higher. Just saying, design your plays with a open mind about what can/should be done.
    Luck is nothing more than probability taken personally!

  7. #7


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Freightman View Post
    If not close to table max, then optimal would be spreading to 2 with 1 round to cut card. Other optimal would be to play 1 hand only, except when butting up against table max, then spread to 2.

    One further note. Issues of covariance suggest that the bet per square is 75% of the 1 square bet, I.e. 2-75 v 1-100. If ror and variance are not issues, then, per example shown, 2x100 is just fine.

    Conclusion.
    If bankroll is strong, variance and ror are not issues, then do whatever floats your boat. If not, follow protocol.
    This. When heads up 1 box is always optimal unless the cut card is due and theres a good count, in which case you'd open as many as possible (I've opened up 5 boxes once doing this hehe). Co-variance dictates that when spreading to 2 hands that each bet should be 75% of what a single box bet would be. For 3 hands it's 50% each.

    I've also read what determines how many boxes you should open in positive counts is the number of boxes that are open by other players.

    i.e

    1 open box = 2 boxes (75% in each)

    2 open boxes = 3 boxes (50% in each)

    3 open boxes = 4 boxes ( 33% in each)

    Past that it's best not to play at the table anyway, as crowded tables slow everything down and put a dent in your EV p/hr. Personally I only manage two other players who play 1 box each. Two players who play two boxes each kills your game unless its a significantly low count, in which case, welcome them with open arms..

  8. #8
    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
    The info in Don's chart doesn't take into consideration practical betting which would likely have you bet at 75% of your initial bet. This would even things up. But then you have to consider that the dealer will not have to play his hand out more often when you are playing one spot and that tilts things back to favoring one hand. The differences are minimal so while there is a winner, playing one hand heads up, it really makes little difference. Just do what you like better.

    If you do wish to split hairs take into account your actual bets you would make. If you don't want to bet a rainbow stack to speed up the game which would result in more money per 100 rounds than Don's chart implies and used Don's example of 1 hand of $500 and 2 hands of $365, instead you would bet 1 hand of $500 or 2 hands of $375. That would not change the 1 hand total bet of $50,000 but would increase the total bet on the two card hand to $50,250 and be the better choice. But that doesn't factor in the increased number of rounds the dealer didn't have to play out his hand because you got a BJ or busted on one hand, which would narrow that gap.

    A practical bet may have been rounded down to the $350 even though that is not the closest $25 increment or rounded down with other bets because the larger increment of chips you are betting was not closer to the 73% bet. That would make the lead for 1 hand be even more.

    So you might want to look at how playing 2 hands the way you would in a casino affects things rather than what computer optimal says. Just remember there is still a cost in RoR to be factored in when your practical bet has you stray from the computer bet that has the same RoR for 1 spot and 2 spots. If you play to a high RoR this may be the most important factor to consider. If your RoR is essentially 0 then the RoR change is meaningless.

  9. #9


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    if consider cover,
    One hand $200 vs two hand $150, which one looks more innocent in heads-up play?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  10. #10
    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
    Quote Originally Posted by San Jose Bella View Post
    if consider cover,
    One hand $200 vs two hand $150, which one looks more innocent in heads-up play?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    It depends on the observer. I think 2 hands. Where I play the aggregate bet on a round can't exceed the table max. If you go over table max on one hand they never accept your action. If you go over on the aggregate of 2 spots they don't seem to care, up to a point. I have gone way over table max playing 2 spots before and they said nothing. The casinos reaction in these cases should answer your question.

  11. #11


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Three View Post
    If you don't want to bet a rainbow stack to speed up the game which would result in more money per 100 rounds than Don's chart implies and used Don's example of 1 hand of $500 and 2 hands of $365, instead you would bet 1 hand of $500 or 2 hands of $375.
    What is a rainbow stack?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  12. #12


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Multi coloured bet. Consists of 2 or more chop denominations. Slows the game down.

  13. #13


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    That’s chip, not chop

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 12-01-2015, 12:27 PM
  2. Replies: 37
    Last Post: 10-25-2015, 04:42 PM
  3. Playing one hand vs 2
    By abukase1 in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 11-14-2013, 11:22 AM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-11-2004, 12:39 PM
  5. steve: winning hand/losing hand
    By steve in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 05-16-2003, 08:42 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.