Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 14 to 26 of 27

Thread: Natural (3:2) pays on split tens when drawing ace

  1. #14


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by James989 View Post
    For the game of 6 deck, H17, RS4, RSA2, Peek, DAS, DOA, NoSurr :-

    a) T,T vs 6 ----- ev = +47.9%(split TT, draw an Ace, not BJ and pay 1 to 1 if player wins)
    b) T,T vs 6 ----- ev = +62.8%(split TT, draw an Ace is consider as BJ and auto pay 3 to 2 regardless of dealer's final total)
    c) T,T vs 6 ----- ev = +67.7%(No split TT, pay 1 to 1 if player wins)

    There is a big gap between b) and c), so I don't think you have much opportunity to split TT vs 6 !
    Right. But, the traditional indices will surely be lowered by one or two. The idea is to answer the question correctly, and to do that, a sim is needed.

    Don

  2. #15


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    Right. But, the traditional indices will surely be lowered by one or two. The idea is to answer the question correctly, and to do that, a sim is needed.

    Don

    Agreed. Can CVDATA sim it ?

  3. #16


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    Right. But, the traditional indices will surely be lowered by one or two. The idea is to answer the question correctly, and to do that, a sim is needed.

    Don

    For the game of 6 deck, H17, RS4, RSA2, Peek, DAS, DOA, NoSurr :-
    No of card remaining = 312 - 3 = 309, TC(Hi-Lo) = -1 * 52 /309 = -0.17


    a) T,T vs 6 ----- ev = +47.9%(split TT, draw an Ace, not BJ and pay 1 to 1 if player wins)
    b) T,T vs 6 ----- ev = +62.8%(split TT, draw an Ace is consider as BJ and auto pay 3 to 2 regardless of dealer's final total)
    c) T,T vs 6 ----- ev = +67.7%(No split TT, pay 1 to 1 if player wins)


    Further study, removed another 6 "small" card(2,2,3,4,5,6) from the deck, No of card remaining = 312 - 3 -6 = 303, TC(Hi-Lo) = +5 * 52 /303 = +0.86,

    d) T,T vs 6 ----- ev = +53.4%(split TT, draw an Ace, not BJ and pay 1 to 1 if player wins)
    e) T,T vs 6 ----- ev = +68.8%(split TT, draw an Ace is consider as BJ and auto pay 3 to 2 regardless of dealer's final total)
    f) T,T vs 6 ----- ev = +68.0%(No split TT, pay 1 to 1 if player wins)


    The simulation results is
    quite surprising, meaning when TC>=+0.86, player should split TT vs 6 (if Ace and T after splitting TT is a blackjack and pay 3 to 2).

    Please help to verify my calculations.



  4. #17
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Eastern U S A
    Posts
    6,830


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Simple with a C. A. (combinatorial analysis)

  5. #18


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by James989 View Post
    For the game of 6 deck, H17, RS4, RSA2, Peek, DAS, DOA, NoSurr :-
    No of card remaining = 312 - 3 = 309, TC(Hi-Lo) = -1 * 52 /309 = -0.17


    a) T,T vs 6 ----- ev = +47.9%(split TT, draw an Ace, not BJ and pay 1 to 1 if player wins)
    b) T,T vs 6 ----- ev = +62.8%(split TT, draw an Ace is consider as BJ and auto pay 3 to 2 regardless of dealer's final total)
    c) T,T vs 6 ----- ev = +67.7%(No split TT, pay 1 to 1 if player wins)


    Further study, removed another 6 "small" card(2,2,3,4,5,6) from the deck, No of card remaining = 312 - 3 -6 = 303, TC(Hi-Lo) = +5 * 52 /303 = +0.86,

    d) T,T vs 6 ----- ev = +53.4%(split TT, draw an Ace, not BJ and pay 1 to 1 if player wins)
    e) T,T vs 6 ----- ev = +68.8%(split TT, draw an Ace is consider as BJ and auto pay 3 to 2 regardless of dealer's final total)
    f) T,T vs 6 ----- ev = +68.0%(No split TT, pay 1 to 1 if player wins)


    The simulation results is
    quite surprising, meaning when TC>=+0.86, player should split TT vs 6 (if Ace and T after splitting TT is a blackjack and pay 3 to 2).

    Please help to verify my calculations.
    The only comment I have is that I'm not sure the OP said that the payoff was automatic. If the dealer draws to 21, the hand(s) might push, no?

    And yes, the index is lower than I thought it would be, if you've done it correctly.

    Don

  6. #19


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by ZenMaster_Flash View Post

    Simple with a C. A. (combinatorial analysis)
    Any C. A that can handle special rule : Ace and T after splitting TT is a blackjack and pay 3 to 2 automatically regardless of dealer's final total ?

  7. #20


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    The game in question is ENHC. If the dealer draws to 21 (A and Ten) then It is a push. Obviously against an ENHC game a more conservative approach is needed therefore splitting TT's versus A or Ten would be completely disadvantageous.

  8. #21


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by ferenc11 View Post
    The game in question is ENHC. If the dealer draws to 21 (A and Ten) then It is a push. Obviously against an ENHC game a more conservative approach is needed therefore splitting TT's versus A or Ten would be completely disadvantageous.
    Why are you focusing on split TT vs T/Ace ? I don't think it is wise to split TT vs T/Ace especially for game with ENHC rule

    We are now talking about TT vs 6, dealer will not get BJ anyway.

    The question here is if split TT vs 6 and player get both T,A and TA, delaer get 6,5,T, push or pay 3 to 2 ?
    Last edited by James989; 03-07-2019 at 10:30 PM.

  9. #22


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by James989 View Post
    Why are you focusing on split TT vs T/Ace ? I don't think it is wise to split TT vs T/Ace especially for game with ENHC rule

    We are now talking about TT vs 6, dealer will not get BJ anyway.

    The question here is if split TT vs 6 and player get both T,A and TA, delaer get 6,5,T, push or pay 3 to 2 ?
    I'm sorry James. I misunderstood something. Must have been tired.
    So if dealer draws to 21 (5,6,10) the player gets paid 3:2 regardless.


    Sent from my SM-J730F using Tapatalk

  10. #23


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by ferenc11 View Post
    I'm sorry James. I misunderstood something. Must have been tired.
    So if dealer draws to 21 (5,6,10) the player gets paid 3:2 regardless.


    Sent from my SM-J730F using Tapatalk
    Then you should split TT vs 6 when TC>+0.86 as shown in post #16 . . . .


    How about split AA vs 6 ? will pay 3 to 2 if draw a T ?

  11. #24


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by James989 View Post
    Then you should split TT vs 6 when TC>+0.86 as shown in post #16 . . . .


    How about split AA vs 6 ? will pay 3 to 2 if draw a T ?
    Now that is a very good question! I need to either ask it or test it.

    Sent from my SM-J730F using Tapatalk

  12. #25


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by ferenc11 View Post
    Now that is a very good question! I need to either ask it or test it.

    Sent from my SM-J730F using Tapatalk

    You have to wait until TC>1.74(removed eleven "small" cards from the deck) before split TT vs 5.
    Last edited by James989; 03-08-2019 at 09:26 PM.

  13. #26


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by James989 View Post
    You have to wait until TC>1.74(removed eleven "small" cards from the deck) before split TT vs 5.
    Thank You James! Appreciate your work on this one! Is this for Enhc game right? Or Peek?

    Sent from my SM-J730F using Tapatalk

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Brick: If I decide to never split tens,
    By Brick in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-11-2005, 04:43 PM
  2. ETZ: Not a natural after a split
    By ETZ in forum Blackjack Beginners
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-29-2004, 09:58 AM
  3. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-06-2004, 06:27 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.