6 deck - 2 spots always?

[VonDox]

At the casinos I play at the $25/$15 min tables I have been going with playing 2 spots always/play all.. It's really hard to wong in ( mentioned this before ) so I have recently started just playing two spots always and it really seems to flatten out the fluxuations in play and I enjoy having a buffer seat as well. So my question is does anyone else play 2-spots always in the lower min. tables? If for some reason, the ploppies leave for the buffet and I get to play head to head I switch back to single spot play mostly unless my bet spread calls for going to 2. Just wondering if other AP's do the same at this bet level/table min?

[name banned]

More than likely, playing two hands through all those negative counts is drastically increasing your ROR. Do you have software to calculate this?

[moo321]

If table minimum in relationship to your bankroll isn't an issue, always playing two is almost always better than always playing one. Playing one and then going to two in positive counts is even better, but it sounds like that's not available due to crowding.

[VonDox]

I ran some CVCX sims and that was the conclusion I came up with. Using RED 7 counting if the count was below -8 was CLEARLY better to go to 1 spot. But anythng above that especially when I hit -4 or above playing 2 spots indicated a reduction in loss/ fluxuation and anything positive was clearly an improvement. Still tinkering with it but I usually take with me $5k for a trip bankroll for a 1/2 day session and again it's at the $10/$15 mostly and maybe the $25 4-deck games.. If I am playing double deck $50min I am NOT playing two spots as standard for sure. The shops I play at don't have lots of black jack tables and if I can more hands played per hour by playing more spots (when the count is more favorable), all the better. When you get 3 or 4 more players at the tables and the side bet slow down starts to grind the game down I was just thinking that if I can play more hands the better for me...

[Freightman]

From a practical perspective
1. Is 2 spot minimum bet the same as 1 spot min bet or is it 2x. Depends on the store. If 1x and heads up, continue with 2 hands. You’re eating up cards faster and are getting to the new shoe with new opportunities more quickly. If not heads up! Let the other help to eat up cards. If 2x min bet required for 2 spots - equates to 4x min bet - why expose yourself to additional variance. Stick to 1 spot.

Now, in positive counts - heads up, stick to 1 spot unless you’re butting up to table max. If not heads up, go to 2 spots. Now, max SCORE is achieved by going to 2 at (assuming .5 house edge) at +1. However, I wait for +2 for 2 reasons. First, you may only have 1 round to play and it looks weird to go to 2 and right back to 1 - so wait for +2 or 3 which gives you more rounds to play 2 spots.

[G Man]

You should all read the following: https://www.qfit.com/book/ModernBlackjackPage116.htm

[Cacarulo]

You should all read the following: https://www.qfit.com/book/ModernBlackjackPage116.htm

Perfectly explained. Several years ago, I remember having posted some simulations with Hi-Lo where it was demonstrated what the optimal strategy was if one wanted to play 2 hands.
Unfortunately, I can't seem to find those posts, but they must be out there somewhere.
Just as there is a "Wong-In " point, there is also an "optimal TC" from which it is convenient in terms of SCORE to play 2 hands.
The SCORE of one hand all the time < The SCORE of two hands all the time < The SCORE of 2 hands on positive TCs and one hand on negative TCs.

Sincerely,
Cac

[Intermediate]

.The SCORE of one hand all the time < The SCORE of two hands all the time < The SCORE of 2 hands on positive TCs and one hand on negative TCs

I think going to one hand in negative counts and then switching to two hands as soon as the count turns positive is a real counter tell. I got quickly backed off doing this red chipping at 2D decades ago. I'd recommend going to two hands with a total of 1.5 x your normal ramped bet (split between the two hands) at TC>=4 to get more money on the table at the same RoR. Whether you are heads-up or there's another player at the table would also be a consideration.

[Cacarulo]

I think going to one hand in negative counts and then switching to two hands as soon as the count turns positive is a real counter tell. I got quickly backed off doing this red chipping at 2D decades ago. I'd recommend going to two hands with a total of 1.5 x your normal ramped bet (split between the two hands) at TC>=4 to get more money on the table at the same RoR. Whether you are heads-up or there's another player at the table would also be a consideration.

We agree on this, and obviously, it depends on where you play. I was simply talking about what the best strategy is in terms of SCORE.
The same goes for splitting tens against a 5/6. The correct play is to split when the TC determines it, but if that makes them realize you're a counter, then don't do it.
If the optimal TC for playing two hands is +1, that doesn't mean you can't postpone it and do it at +4.

Sincerely,
Cac

[G Man]

The SCORE of one hand all the time < The SCORE of two hands all the time < The SCORE of 2 hands on positive TCs and one hand on negative TCs.

This is not what Norm's study suggest.
From the page I am referring to, the SCORE is better when ALWAYS playing two hands.

[Freightman]

This is not what Norm's study suggest.
From the page I am referring to, the SCORE is better when ALWAYS playing two hands.

Then of course - if you don’t care about covariance and have the bankroll behind you, simply play your single ramp bet on 2 squares.

[G Man]

It has nothing to do with "care about covariance or not". You should know how to adjust your bets when playing two hands instead of one and enjoy a better EV.

[Cacarulo]

This is not what Norm's study suggest.
From the page I am referring to, the SCORE is better when ALWAYS playing two hands.

I found the post I was referring to earlier. It was archived in Don's Domain. It's from 2007, and for those simulations,
the number of simulated rounds used to be lower (10 billion).
If I find the time, I could search for the program I used back then and reconstruct the simulations with more rounds.

https://www.blackjacktheforum.com/sh...ying-two-hands

Sincerely,
Cac