How advantageous is heads up play versus playing at a full table?
I am learning that it is very difficult to get to play heads up. I recently played about 4 hours at a full table, then I took a break, and discovered an empty table, the problem was that it was a $50 table versus $10 where I usually play at. Is it worth it to play at a higher min. bet to get the chance to play heads up? Or what that put a serous strain on my bankroll?
The value of heads up play comes from more hands per hour and always controlling the shuffle. I think you're just talking about counting, so the value comes from the increased game speed. This is significant - up to double the hands per hour. What this means for you most likely is that you will go broke quickly. If you typically bet $10 tables and you jump to $50, then unless you were playing with an enormously low ROR at $10 tables, you're just a gambler now. And the game speed will make you a gambler who loses all of his/her money fast.
Of course you could backcount the $50 table, but then you would need people sitting at it. So you know, just wait until the count rockets, sit at the table and fart and burp and talk about this weird contagious fungus you have, then you can successfully play that $50 table heads up.
> How advantageous is heads up play versus playing at a
> full table?
> I am learning that it is very difficult to get to play
> heads up. I recently played about 4 hours at a full
> table, then I took a break, and discovered an empty
> table, the problem was that it was a $50 table versus
> $10 where I usually play at. Is it worth it to play at
> a higher min. bet to get the chance to play heads up?
> Or what that put a serous strain on my bankroll?
> The value of heads up play comes from more hands per
> hour and always controlling the shuffle.
How about getting as many blackjacks as the dealer when one plays heads up, with mine paying 3/2, and with me being able to get blackjacks with a big bet out, hopefully.
> The value of heads up play comes from more hands per
> hour and always controlling the shuffle. I think
> you're just talking about counting, so the value comes
> from the increased game speed.
Also, how about getting more of the high cards during high counts, not having to share them with a full table.
OK. That is the basis of counting - understanding when you have an advantage. When the count is up, you likely do. So in this case you want to get as many hands as possible, as quickly as possible, and you don't want other people at your table eating the high cards that are likely to come out. That's the easy part. If that is all there was to it, then I'd say go ahead and sit at that table.
But, answer this question: if you have a coin that flips 55/100 times heads, and you've got a hundred dollars in your pocket, you can bet as much or as little per flip as you want and you will be able to flip forever, how much should you bet? Counting will teach you how to flip the coin with an advantage, bankroll management will teach you what to do with your money when you know you have that advantage. This is MOST IMPORTANT! I would rather be a basic strategy player at a table with enough money to withstand variance than an underfunded counter. Casinos do not understand why, and for this they are stupidly quick to ban 'counters'. Just because you can count cards does NOT mean you can win.
So in long response, you've got an understanding of counting. But, even with a super high count, you can still drop 10 hands in a row, no problem. You can have hands where you split and double. If this comes at your max bet, of say $400 at your $50 table (because you will at least use an 8x spread if you are straight counting, right?) then you could have over $2000 on the table. And there's probably a decent chance you are going to LOSE that one particular hand. Most $10 players I know are not ready to lose $2,000 then place another $400 bet.
On top of all this - if you are new to BJ, you will probably find it hard to keep an accurate count all alone. I think we all start out looking for the slowest dealer so we can keep count... then you get some experience, and down the road you will walk by a table and decide to not even sit because the dealer is too slow.
Trust me, if you learn this stuff correctly, you will get to a point where you can play those big tables. When a lot of us started counting, we ran the sim software to see how much we could bet with an 'acceptable' error, saw the results, and said "that's it? Wow, I can afford to play for $2/hr". Now you run the results where you wong, etc., and all of the sudden you say to yourself "no way I am going to bet that much". You'll get there...
> How about getting as many blackjacks as the dealer
> when one plays heads up, with mine paying 3/2, and
> with me being able to get blackjacks with a big bet
> out, hopefully.
> How about getting as many blackjacks as the dealer...
I think you need a little more study on card counting theory. The probability of being dealt a snapper is ALWAYS 2 times the number of unseen aces times the number of unseen ten-value cards divided by the number of unseen cards divided by the number of unseen cards -1, regardless of the number of decks, the number seated at the table, or where you're seated at the table (or standing, if you're the dealer).
For example, in the first round off the top of a 6-deck shoe, the prob of being dealt a snapper is 2 * 24 * 96 / 312 / 311 = 0.0475.
IOW, at the start of any round, each player AND THE DEALER have EXACTLY the same chance of being dealt a snapper.
> Also, how about getting more of the high cards during
> high counts, not having to share them with a full
> table.
But you still have to share them with the dealer :-)
> I think you need a little more study on card counting
> theory. The probability of being dealt a snapper is
> ALWAYS 2 times the number of unseen aces times the
> number of unseen ten-value cards divided by the number
> of unseen cards divided by the number of unseen cards
> -1, regardless of the number of decks, the number
> seated at the table, or where you're seated at the
> table (or standing, if you're the dealer).
> For example, in the first round off the top of a
> 6-deck shoe, the prob of being dealt a snapper is 2 *
> 24 * 96 / 312 / 311 = 0.0475.
> IOW, at the start of any round, each player AND THE
> DEALER have EXACTLY the same chance of being dealt a
> snapper.
That is quite a formula, hats off to the one who came up with that. It takes all the surprise out of getting a snapper.
Although it doesn't make sense that the number of blackjacks one receives isn't a function of (affected by) the number of players at the table. Are you saying that
you will be dealt just as many blackjacks at a full table as you would playing heads up?
> OK. That is the basis of counting - understanding when
> you have an advantage. When the count is up, you
> likely do. So in this case you want to get as many
> hands as possible, as quickly as possible, and you
> don't want other people at your table eating the high
> cards that are likely to come out. That's the easy
> part. If that is all there was to it, then I'd say go
> ahead and sit at that table.
> But, answer this question: if you have a coin that
> flips 55/100 times heads, and you've got a hundred
> dollars in your pocket, you can bet as much or as
> little per flip as you want and you will be able to
> flip forever, how much should you bet? Counting will
> teach you how to flip the coin with an advantage,
> bankroll management will teach you what to do with
> your money when you know you have that advantage. This
> is MOST IMPORTANT! I would rather be a basic strategy
> player at a table with enough money to withstand
> variance than an underfunded counter. Casinos do not
> understand why, and for this they are stupidly quick
> to ban 'counters'. Just because you can count cards
> does NOT mean you can win.
> So in long response, you've got an understanding of
> counting. But, even with a super high count, you can
> still drop 10 hands in a row, no problem. You can have
> hands where you split and double. If this comes at
> your max bet, of say $400 at your $50 table (because
> you will at least use an 8x spread if you are straight
> counting, right?) then you could have over $2000 on
> the table. And there's probably a decent chance you
> are going to LOSE that one particular hand. Most $10
> players I know are not ready to lose $2,000 then place
> another $400 bet.
> On top of all this - if you are new to BJ, you will
> probably find it hard to keep an accurate count all
> alone. I think we all start out looking for the
> slowest dealer so we can keep count... then you get
> some experience, and down the road you will walk by a
> table and decide to not even sit because the dealer is
> too slow.
> Trust me, if you learn this stuff correctly, you will
> get to a point where you can play those big tables.
> When a lot of us started counting, we ran the sim
> software to see how much we could bet with an
> 'acceptable' error, saw the results, and said
> "that's it? Wow, I can afford to play for
> $2/hr". Now you run the results where you wong,
> etc., and all of the sudden you say to yourself
> "no way I am going to bet that much". You'll
> get there...
I understand what you are saying, and it is excellent advice. In order to keep the same ROR at the $50 table as I am comfortable with at the $10 table, I'll have to put more in my bankroll. To have enough to weather the storms.
> Also, how about getting more of the high cards during
> high counts, not having to share them with a full
> table.
Have you considered the effects of NOT playing heads up and GETTING to sharing all those negative counts with the others?
You really need to figure out what your BR truly is, figure out what risk you are willing to take with it, figure out a correct bet ramp against various games and conditions using that bankroll, then play the best game that's available to you. If that is grinding out $2 an hour, well, that's life in your world. Get a bigger BR. Find a better game. Play poker.
Playing heads up is about game speed. If you have more hands per hour in a positive expectation environment, over the long run, it's better than slogging along at half that pace. That's pretty much it. Not getting to hog the high counts or having to suffer (alone) all the negative counts. Game speed.
And about getting equal BJs as the dealer but you at 3/2 is true, but what about you having to bust first before the dealer? That's true also.
Heads up play is about game speed. Getting more hands in a positive environment. All this other stuff you mention is true (I think, don't recall it all) but it is just helping create that positive environment in the first place.
Interestingly enough, I've heard these days, the big money players don't play SD so much as it's watched like a hawk and they can't get as big a spread on as they'd like. Makes since to me. And they Wong.
Point of this story is BJ, like any other 'investment' of time and money is .. you get out what you put in, over the long run, unless you are one of the unfortunate few who fate decided to punish. A $5K BR might grind $5 an hour. A $50K BR might earn $100 an hour. It's all about playing whatever game they will let you earn at, and the multiplyers you place against it.
> Are you saying that you will be dealt just as many blackjacks
> at a full table as you would playing heads up?
Please read and re-read my earlier post until you understand why the formula is what it is.
Assuming 6D and an even count, 4.75% of all hands will be snappers. That's 4.75% of your hands, 4.75% of the dealer's hands, and 4.75% of all the other players' hands.
Thus, on average, you will get more BJs per HOUR playing head up simply because you will see more hands per hour. But then, so will the dealer.
In the long run, the random distribution of BJs will approach an even distribution among the dealer and players, but this is irelevant and does not change the fact that 4.75% of all hands will be snappers.
In other words, playing head up will NOT increase the percentage of the time you are dealt a snapper.
to increase the % of time you have a snapper. When you get one, hold onto it for 10-20minutes before flipping it over.
You are blowing me away with these BJs stats. I now know what they mean when they say Black Jack is the most analyzed game.
Can we simplify the discussion alittle, using the KISS philosophy, is it safe to say that when playing heads up, one will get as many BJs as the dealer in the long run, and one will get more BJs than playing at a full table?
Posting Permissions
-*-
Bookmarks