See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 27 to 39 of 70

Thread: Double Down on Soft 12

  1. #27


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Gronbog View Post
    These data were extracted from the sims I ran to generate indices for the upcoming book from Don and I. Too be fair, though, these specific plays are not discussed.
    Gronbog and Don, when do you expect your new book to be available? Will there be a kindle version of the book?

  2. #28


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Anthony Curtis said before Christmas. We shall see. I'm going to see him next week and will discuss. Don't know about Kindle.

    Don

  3. #29


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Apparently this thread is talking about two different sets of rules, one of which is clear and the other is not.

    1) The OP states that the rules are as follows: 6D,S17,DOA,DAS,SPA1,NS and the decks are shuffled after each hand.
    As can be deduced from the photo of the basic strategy, it is possible to DD with soft-12, that is, after splitting a pair of aces and receiving
    another ace in one of the hands (or in both).
    Under this scenario it is only possible to count cards if there are multiple players at the table. Obviously the bets will be flat.
    If the player is not counting cards the basic strategy is the one mentioned by k_c.
    Therefore, the basic strategy would be:
    6D, S17 (or H17)
    AAv6 ==> DD
    AAv5 ==> H
    AAv4 ==> H
    (Even removing three or four aces is still the same)
    The expected values can be verified in BJA3.

    2) The second set of rules has not been specified. If we assume that there is no shuffling after each hand, counting cards would make more sense in this case.
    Gronbog assumes 6D (S17 or H17) and Hi-Lo as the counting system.
    The indices are fine, but there is a little detail that was overlooked in their generation. For example:
    AAv6 assumes that two aces and a six were removed from the pack and this implies that when you receive that hand you are NOT able to split the pair of aces.
    What would have to be done is to remove three aces and a six to make the calculation since the soft-12 appears after splitting the first pair.
    What is the difference? Let's see:

    a) S17

    AAv6 ==> DD if TC >= 0 (two aces and a six removed)
    AAv6 ==> DD if TC >= -1 (three aces and a six removed)

    b) H17

    AAv6 ==> DD if TC >= -1 (two aces and a six removed)
    AAv6 ==> DD if TC >= -2 (three aces and a six removed)

    Sincerely,
    Cac

  4. #30


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    When resplitting is not allowed, Double A-A vs 6 (if allowed) if:
    (s17) number of decks <= 12
    (h17) always
    otherwise hit

    Correct. By example for 6 decks, I got:

    s (17)
    A, A vs 6

    db = 0.190709
    hit = 0.187974

    h (17)
    db = = 0.206312
    hit = 0.189536

    Here the dealer is somehow penalized for the “greed” of hitting soft seventeen, with the player increasing the expectations of both actions.

    When resplitting is not allowed, Double A-A vs 5 (if allowed) if:
    (s17) decks <= 2
    (h17) decks <= 2
    otherwise hit

    Agree. Very close but correct.

    For 2 decks and s (17):

    db =0.170637
    hit = 0,169241

    hit A-A vs 4 if resplit is not allowed, do not double

    Again, for 6 decks and s (17):

    db = 0.071156
    hit = 0.129004

    Here doubling looks but foolish (with BS only).

    My two cents.

    Zenfighter

  5. #31


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    S17 games are so rare these days (except PA and high limit), H17 should be used as the default standard.

  6. #32
    Senior Member Gramazeka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    1,458


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by 21forme View Post
    S17 games are so rare these days (except PA and high limit), H17 should be used as the default standard.
    All Europe has S 17
    "Don't Cast Your Pearls Before Swine" (Jesus)

  7. #33
    Senior Member Gramazeka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    1,458


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    S 17
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by Gramazeka; 09-23-2022 at 06:06 PM.
    "Don't Cast Your Pearls Before Swine" (Jesus)

  8. #34


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Cacarulo View Post
    The indices are fine, but there is a little detail that was overlooked in their generation. For example:
    AAv6 assumes that two aces and a six were removed from the pack and this implies that when you receive that hand you are NOT able to split the pair of aces.
    What would have to be done is to remove three aces and a six to make the calculation since the soft-12 appears after splitting the first pair.
    No such detail was overlooked in my generation of these indices. The indices were computed using simulation and therefore the data were collected across a wide variety of naturally occurring hand compositions, remaining deck compositions and penetrations. No attempt was made to construct representative instances of the possible situations.

  9. #35


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    No attempt was made to construct representative instances of the possible situations.

    Let´s try then, with the aid of exact 6dks EoR´s (checksum = -2.46109 e -13) plus combinatorial analysis, I get the following results:

    S (17) doubling A, A vs 6

    Removing a, a, 6.

    Db if TC > - 0.355349

    removing a, a, a, 6

    Db if TC > - 0.837136

    H (17) doubling A, A vs 6

    Removing a, a, 6

    Db if TC > -1. 32251

    removing a, a, a, 6

    Db if TC > -1,73297

    That every derived index has a certain element of faith in its generation, no matter if it is with Monte Carlo simulated runs, and/ or with the aid of exact combinatorial, is still a valid assumption, that Griffin foresaw, almost now, 43 years ago. Here the discrepancies between your figures and mine, and specially for the h17 ones, speak for themselves. A matter of faith, then? I will agree for close decisions mainly, but not for this case of doubling with the H17 rule in effect. The full -deck favorability for carry on the action, namely, to double down equals:

    m (6) = 0,971026

    And thus, your h17 index can´t be equal to zero, no matter how naturally it has occurred in your sims. It must be lower, then. Think about it, Gronbog. An “Old-Timer” advice, btw.

    Zenfighter

  10. #36


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Zen, after reading your post I was dreading the thought of hashing through all the possible reasons why our results might differ. After all, you and your work are respected here by many.

    Thankfully that won't be necessary. I also get -1 as the H17 index for doubling A,A vs 6. The 0 that I posted was a sloppy oversight when transcribing my numbers. I copied the S17 numbers first and then edited them for H17. I wanted to edit my original post to reflect this, but the time allowed for editing has expired.

  11. #37


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Gronbog View Post
    No such detail was overlooked in my generation of these indices. The indices were computed using simulation and therefore the data were collected across a wide variety of naturally occurring hand compositions, remaining deck compositions and penetrations. No attempt was made to construct representative instances of the possible situations.
    Ok, I understand what you are doing. Would you mind checking AAv3 again (S17 and H17)? I got +7 for both cases. We also have a discrepancy in AAv6. For S17 I got -1 and for H17 I got -2.
    Maybe it has to do with penetration, I don't know. I am using 4.5/6.

    Sincerely,
    Cac

  12. #38
    Senior Member Gramazeka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    1,458


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    I have AAvs3 S 17 (+8.3) H17 (+8.1)
    "Don't Cast Your Pearls Before Swine" (Jesus)

  13. #39


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Gramazeka View Post
    I have AAvs3 S 17 (+8.3) H17 (+8.1)
    Hi Grama, +8 (S17 or H17) is correct only if splitting in not allowed even once.

    Sincerely,
    Cac

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. When to Double Down on a Soft 21?
    By Captain Jack in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 04-03-2018, 11:41 AM
  2. Double on a soft 19
    By radio1324 in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 12-29-2017, 11:00 AM
  3. Soft Hand Double Down Questions
    By Bushie in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 06-30-2017, 08:43 PM
  4. Is it correct to double soft hands in Europe?
    By chonkolonko in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-19-2016, 10:37 AM
  5. BJPlayer: Double soft 19 vs. 4
    By BJPlayer in forum Blackjack Main
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-23-2011, 09:19 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.