Constantine: 11 vs 10: why do experts disagree?

[Constantine]

Why don?t the BJ experts agree?
I just finished reading Richard Harvey?s books on blackjack. He states some controversial thing. For example he writes that doubling down with 11 vs a dealer?s 10 is an unwise move. Only 9-10 would help here to beat the 19.30 the dealer will score on average. Therefore only 38% of the cards will help the player and doubling down is the wrong way to go.
Is it true that the formulas that were used to calculate basic strategy were sometimes faulty, not taking into account certain factors such as the fact that doubling down against a dealer?s 10 only occurs when a dealer?s natural has been excluded?
What is the best sim program I should use to check for myself what the costs or benefits are from DD 11 vs 10 or S 11 vs 10?

[ES]

The real experts, e.g. Schlesinger, Thorp, Wong, Snyder, Braun, Grosjean, ALL AGREE DOUBLE 11 v. 10!

[Parker]

Richard Harvey is no expert. He is a fraud, con artist, and charlatan.

> Why don?t the BJ experts agree?
> I just finished reading Richard Harvey?s
> books on blackjack. He states some
> controversial thing.

They are not "controversial" at all. They are just plain wrong!

> For example he writes
> that doubling down with 11 vs a dealer?s 10
> is an unwise move. Only 9-10 would help here
> to beat the 19.30 the dealer will score on
> average. Therefore only 38% of the cards
> will help the player and doubling down is
> the wrong way to go.

This is the sort of pseudo-math that frauds like Harvey and John Patrick use to make their strategies sound reasonable. It completely ignores the fact that when we do win a double down, we win twice as much money! Sure, we will win the hand less often when we double than if we were simply to hit. However, we are not concerned with winning the highest number of hands, we are concerned with winning the most money.

> Is it true that the formulas that were used
> to calculate basic strategy were sometimes
> faulty, not taking into account certain
> factors such as the fact that doubling down
> against a dealer?s 10 only occurs when a
> dealer?s natural has been excluded?

No. Any book by a reputable author takes all these factors into consideration.

> What is the best sim program I should use to
> check for myself what the costs or benefits
> are from DD 11 vs 10 or S 11 vs 10?

You don't need any program. A quick glance at the excellent, state-of-the-art tables in the back of Blackjack Attack, 3rd Edition, by Don Schlesinger, will show you you all you need. For example, in a 6D S17 game, the EV's for 6,5 vs. dealer 10 are:

Stand: -0.541929
Hit: 0.118582
Double: .178452

Numbers for other rules and other hands totaling 11 are similar. As you can see, it isn't even close.

If you insist on simming it CVData, by Qfit, will do an excellent job. But you're really re-inventing the wheel here.

I suggest that you take the Harvey book and burn it. Don't simply toss it in the trash -- some other poor unfortunate individual might find it.

[LVBear584]

I suggest that you take the Harvey book and burn it. Don't simply toss it in the trash -- some other poor unfortunate individual might find it.

Well said.

[PunkEye]

> I once had the experience of having a neophyte counter try to convince me that if a match play coupon is involved, then doubling down on the conventional hands is a bad move because - and get this - you no longer are in position to win 2-1 but only 3-2! That would also suggest that you decline splitting 88 vs 7, which everyone knows returns a horrendous loss expectation. Is it -24 units? I forget.

[BJ_Player2004]

Doubling down per BS (or per the index) with a match play actually CAN be a bad play, as it's akin to doubling for less. It can sometimes cost more in the restriction to only one additional card than it gains in the double down. The 11 vs 10 double is a good example. In a "real" game, you'd certainly never double this one for less (for example, if you ran short on cash). Rather, you'd keep open the option to rehit the hand if you needed to. Conversely, if you'd take only one card anyway, like 11 vs. 6, then you'd take the double down with the match play.

Of course, if you could double for the full amount including the matchplay value (as some dealers don't know and will let it go), then you'd always double down, same as a regular game.

As for splits, you'd not take many of the defensive splits for similar reasons. These splits are taken to help you lose less money, not to win more. Since you'd have to put twice your original bet out to make the split, you'd have 3X the initial wager in a negative EV play (where you'd barely make some of these when only 2x would be at risk). Adding insult to injury, you'd not be able to fully double down on one of the hands if the opportunity presented itself, which would kill the play EV.

I'm no expert on this, but there is a body of work out there somewhere addressing coupon EV.

[Fred Renzey]

> A quick glance at the excellent, state-of-the-art tables in the back of Blackjack Attack, 3rd Edition, by Don Schlesinger, will show you all you need. For example, in a 6D S17 game, the
> EV's for 6,5 vs. dealer 10 are:

> Stand: -0.541929
> Hit: 0.118582
> Double: .178452

>snip: Another down-to-earth way to to state this is that when just hitting 11 vs. a playable 10, you win 56 times out of 100 and lose 44 (counting pushes as a half win and half loss).
When doubling, you win 54.5 and lose 45.5, but for double stakes. Hitting nets 12 units -- doubling nets 18 units.

[ET Fan]

... would you consider Richard Harvey an expert on backjack??? Does he have a degree in mathematics? Has he written any simulation or combinatorial analysis programs? Is he in the catalog of any reputable blackjack site (bj21, rge21, bjmath, wizardofodds, etc. etc.)? No offence, but I almost fell out of my chair laughing, when I saw who you were writing about. You actually read his books, plural?

Anyone who writes a blackjack book is NOT a blackjack expert. In fact, close to half the books written are sheer lunacy. Sometimes they are written by casino stooges. One way to tell the difference is the good ones all agree on the fundamentals. In fact, they've all been saying the same thing since 1956! All the stuff you brought up, and more, has been dissected and taken into account for 48 years.

The truth is often boring. It only sells because it is the truth.

ETF

[The Phantom]

Would the always double 11v10 rule change if you're at a high count?

> When doubling, you win 54.5 and lose 45.5,
> but for double stakes. Hitting nets 12 units
> -- doubling nets 18 units.

[Ouchez]

[Don Schlesinger]

> Would the always double 11v10 rule change if
> you're at a high count?

Surely, you mean if you're at a very low count, no? At a very high count, with all the extra tens available, the play becomes much more attractive.

Conversely, when the Hi-Lo count is below -4, doubling is no longer the right play.

Don

[Cacarulo]

> Why don?t the BJ experts agree?
> I just finished reading Richard Harvey?s
> books on blackjack. He states some
> controversial thing. For example he writes
> that doubling down with 11 vs a dealer?s 10
> is an unwise move. Only 9-10 would help here
> to beat the 19.30 the dealer will score on
> average. Therefore only 38% of the cards
> will help the player and doubling down is
> the wrong way to go.
> Is it true that the formulas that were used
> to calculate basic strategy were sometimes
> faulty, not taking into account certain
> factors such as the fact that doubling down
> against a dealer?s 10 only occurs when a
> dealer?s natural has been excluded?
> What is the best sim program I should use to
> check for myself what the costs or benefits
> are from DD 11 vs 10 or S 11 vs 10?

I haven't read Harvey's book so I can't comment but, are you sure that he's referring to "American" rules? Because we do not double down on 11vT with ENHC rules.

Sincerely,
Cacarulo

[Parker]

> I haven't read Harvey's book so I can't
> comment but, are you sure that he's
> referring to "American" rules?
> Because we do not double down on 11vT with
> ENHC rules.

I have seen his book and he is most certainly talking about western rules. His "basic strategy" deviates from accepted standards on several plays.

It's charitable of you to try to give him the benefit of the doubt, but this guy is in the same league as John Patrick, a fraud and rip-off. In fact, a lot of his strategy appears to be blatantly copied from Patrick.