Double for less

**blue_phantom** · 06-25-2018, 02:27 AM

Is there any instances where double for less is an acceptable play??

As fate has it, recently there are some life changing events that caused me to decide to invest more and put up a larger risk appetite on BJ.

I have increased my bet size and session Ror to almost fully kelly. As a result, when I push out a max bet, or what somebody calls a super max bet. I'm hesitant to double per strategy to protect my BR.

Is there instances where doubling for less is acceptable? I wouldn't hesitate on a 10 vs 6 of course.
What about A2 v 5? 8v6?
Or is it better to just hit?

**21forme** · 06-25-2018, 05:14 AM

No. Suppose you get a 2 or a 3 on that 8v6?

You might want to double for $1 on 12v2 if your play is being evaluated by software.

**blue_phantom** · 06-25-2018, 05:34 AM

Originally Posted by 21forme

No. Suppose you get a 2 or a 3 on that 8v6?

You might want to double for $1 on 12v2 if your play is being evaluated by software.

double on 8 v 6 is a correct index play on TC >1. I'm asking a legit question. Are you trying to troll me?

**21forme** · 06-25-2018, 05:56 AM

Originally Posted by blue_phantom

double on 8 v 6 is a correct index play on TC >1. I'm asking a legit question. Are you trying to troll me?

Not at all. My point is if you're going to double, do it for the appropriate amount. There's a cost to doubling - you only get one card. So doing it for less is a bad play.

**Freightman** · 06-25-2018, 06:10 AM

Since, by definition, doubling at proper index is plus EV, any double for less reduces EV, therefore it is sub standard play.

Having said that, they're times that doubling for less is the proper move. The best example would be that steamer double you're putting out, being a few dollars short. Not a good idea to go into your pocket to complete a double, when the pit thinks you're steaming.

**Freightman** · 06-25-2018, 06:14 AM

Originally Posted by blue_phantom

double on 8 v 6 is a correct index play on TC >1. I'm asking a legit question. Are you trying to troll me?

He's not trolling. He's simply saying that it's a good idea to put out a stupid double, provided you're being watched and can get some mileage out if it. You're stupid double should be at table minimum - further your original bet should be at table minimum. These caveats are because the double in question is stupid, is minus EV, and therefore there is a cost associated with it.

Having said that, they're stupid peop,e making stupid doubles. The 13 v 10 double I saw that other day would qualify, and did not bode well for its perpetrator.

**Meistro123** · 06-25-2018, 06:48 AM

Yes, there is a very rare instance where doubling for less is the correct play. If you know that you are going to get an ace as your first card, it is correct to bet a very large percentage of your bankroll. Having done that, and having received a soft double, it may become correct to now double for less, when you have a hand that is only going to take one card anyway, like A6 v 6.

RS · 06-25-2018, 06:48 AM

1. It is never mathematically optimal to double for less.

2. You may opt to double for less for camo/cover type purposes. I don’t really have an opinion either way on this.

**Three** · 06-25-2018, 06:59 AM

When you would only take one card anyway, and you are right at the index, while there is little EV gain at the index for doubling, the gain in cover for doubling for less could be worth more than the pennies lost in EV as compared to full doubling. Of course everything scales with bet size.

**Stealth** · 06-25-2018, 07:43 AM

My suggestions would be to use risk-averse indexes that are intended to reduce variance. Not doubling for less.

Otherwise, your underlying problem is bankroll size and bet structure, fix these before play, not making "on the fly" decisions because you are uncomfortable.

**Jabberwocky** · 06-25-2018, 07:45 AM

But redoubling for less is similar to doubling for more.

**blue_phantom** · 06-25-2018, 07:59 AM

Originally Posted by Freightman

Since, by definition, doubling at proper index is plus EV, any double for less reduces EV, therefore it is sub standard play.

Having said that, they're times that doubling for less is the proper move. The best example would be that steamer double you're putting out, being a few dollars short. Not a good idea to go into your pocket to complete a double, when the pit thinks you're steaming.

Sorry i misunderstood the reply. Never thought about doubling on 12 vs 2 as an cover play. That being said, cover is not something I'd need to consider at current play level yet.

I understand now. So it's either a hit or double full amount. Double for less reduces EV yet removes my chance of hitting again if i got a small card so it's not worth it.

**blue_phantom** · 06-25-2018, 08:04 AM

Originally Posted by Stealth

My suggestions would be to use risk-averse indexes that are intended to reduce variance. Not doubling for less.

Otherwise, your underlying problem is bankroll size and bet structure, fix these before play, not making "on the fly" decisions because you are uncomfortable.

Where can I find those index?
I get what you mean, usually i waiver on allowable decisions, i think, rather than "on the fly". I mean like A2 vs 5 is a hit instead of double at minus count, it wouldn't be a crime to choose to hit rather than double at a TC+0.5 would it. I understand now double for less is the wrong decision. Thanks everyone.