Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: ShoelessD: Are we missing something?

  1. #1
    ShoelessD
    Guest

    ShoelessD: Are we missing something?

    Is the pure math approach to this game that AP's take the only way to win at this game? I do not mean voodoo or progressions, but something tangible that can make our great cover word "variance" more predictable.

    Baseball is essentially a game of math also. Not only the great quantity of statistics, but scoring runs is much like hitting and standing in BJ.

    If there is a runner on first base with none out, the team at bat has something like a 42% chance to score that run. If the manager elects to have the batter bunt that runner to second base, then the team at bat has a 38% chance to score that runner from secondbase with one out. Therefore statistically, one should never bunt because even if you are successful, you have lowered your chances to score that run. Yet the sacrifice bunt is alive and well in baseball.

    I think a significant distinction should be made for full time players and casual players. What is mathematically correct for a full time AP is still correct for a casual AP, but the casual AP may never reach the long run to make these applications correct for him. 'Variance' may well dominate this player, and the decisions/results may not turn out as expected.

    We have all seen the player who comes to the table and doubles down his 12 against the dealer six on the first hand. He wins, laughs, and walks away. His decision we all think was wrong, but he won.....so who is wrong?

    AP's tend to dismiss all things that cannot equal out the math equation. Not only dismiss, but ofter refuse to even discuss.

    Is there something we are missing?

  2. #2
    Sun Runner
    Guest

    Sun Runner: Re: Are we missing something?

    > His decision we all think was wrong, but he won.....so who is wrong?

    He was.

    If he had lost, you wouldn't even be asking the question.

    You play by the rules .. and by the way that goes for the low roller you spoke about with the small BR. He has already broken the first rule concerning ROR, he really shouldn't be there playing anyway. But we have all been there, I understand his predicament, and in large part his only salvation at the start to his career is variance. Not the rules, not the math, just variance .. luck.

    Some get it and some don't; those that do hopefully go on to build their BR and play by ALL the rules. Those that don't probably don't come around here much any more.

    Back to your guy who doubled that hard 12.

    Maybe he caught a flasher; maybe he saw the 9 coming. If that is where you were going (and I don't think it was) then I agree.

    There is much more to playing blackjack, for sure in today's environment, than just following the rules.

  3. #3
    Victoria
    Guest

    Victoria: apples and oranges

    Blackjack = baseball?

    If the manager choose to bunt it could be based upon the skill of the batter at bunting, the capabilities of first and third at fielding bunts and the type of pitcher they are facing.
    So are you saying that we for instance choose to double in blackjack because of our skill at doubling, the way a dealer pulls cards out of the shoe and the ability of the other players to do something in our favor?

    Baseball is a team sport where the team is comprised of different players with different skill levels.
    Blackjack is not a team sport(with exceptions of blackjack teams) where you must base everything upon your skill only.

    Victoria

  4. #4
    ShoelessD
    Guest

    ShoelessD: Re: apples and oranges

    > Blackjack = baseball?

    > Victoria
    No Victoria. You took the analogy far beyond where it was meant to go.

    The point was that statistically the runner on first has a better chance at scoring than the runner on second with one out. Yet, the bunt is still employed and coveted by baseball managers we consider good.

    In transferring this thought to BJ, maybe we are all missing something by solely considering the math in our decisions.

    I don't know what that is, if anything.

  5. #5
    Don Schlesinger
    Guest

    Don Schlesinger: Re: apples and oranges

    > I don't know what that is, if anything.

    It's nothing. In my 30 years of answering blackjack questions, I think the number one question I've seen is "Should I play one hand or two?" The number two question is, "Since, for many of us, we will never get into the 'long run,' why should we play as if the long run applied to us?"

    The answer, of course, is, "How else would you propose to play?" I've given this answer a thousand times: No one blows a whistle and says, "OK, Joe, now you're in the long run; that last hand was the end of the short run for you!" The so-called "long run" is an abstract concept, and, as we play more and more hands, we approach greater certainty of achieving our objectives. But, to think that, while getting there, it makes sense to violate the dictates of intelligent play, because there's some preferable alternative is, well, simply illogical.

    Don

  6. #6
    Sun Runner
    Guest

    Sun Runner: Re: apples and oranges

    > So are you saying that we for instance choose to
    > double in blackjack because of our skill at doubling,
    > the way a dealer pulls cards out of the shoe and the
    > ability of the other players to do something in our
    > favor?

    If you are asking me .. no, not at all. I play by the rules.

    But if I'm holding a hard 12, and I happen to see a 9 coming my way, and my big bets are out, and they take me for a moron anyway, and maybe I won't be back here soon, you better stand back if your sqeamish because I'm doubling, the dealer is about to go vertical, and I'm about to start acting like it's Christmas time in August.

  7. #7
    Parker
    Guest

    Parker: Re: apples and oranges

    > No Victoria. You took the analogy far beyond where it
    > was meant to go.

    No, it's just a flawed analogy.

    > The point was that statistically the runner on first
    > has a better chance at scoring than the runner on
    > second with one out. Yet, the bunt is still employed
    > and coveted by baseball managers we consider good.

    Baseball statistics are not laws of mathematics. They are merely the averages of all players, of all skill levels (at least in the major leagues), over a long period of time.

    There is plenty of variation in individuals. The manager may know that a particular player is very good at laying down a bunt, but often hits into double plays when swinging away.

    > In transferring this thought to BJ, maybe we are all
    > missing something by solely considering the math in
    > our decisions.

    Blackjack is different. The dealer plays to a fixed set of rules (suppose all pitchers threw 85 mph fastballs exactly waist-high across the middle of the plate). Assuming that the player is competent enough to keep the count without making mistakes and remember indices, there is no skill involved in counting. There is only one correct way to play a given hand at a given count. It's all pure mathematics.

    Your rookie didn't win the double on hard 12 because he was really good at doubling - he just got lucky.

    Variance is the 800 pound gorilla with which we are forced to share the table. In your original post, you wrote " . . .something tangible that can make our great cover word "variance" more predictable."

    Sorry, but "predictable variance" is an oxymoron if ever there was one.

  8. #8
    Victoria
    Guest

    Victoria: Re: apples and oranges

    Sunrunner

    I think you know I was asking sarcasticly to shoelessd, but yes if the way the dealer pulls the cards from the shoe lets me know a 9 is coming, I would also double my 12 and take my chances with a 21.

    Victoria

  9. #9
    Sun Runner
    Guest

    Sun Runner: Re: apples and oranges

    > I think you know I was asking sarcasticly to shoelessd ..

    Since it follwoed my post, and not his, I was not sure.

    My bad.

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.