CVCX and using two hands

[Norm]

if the count is slightly up then its just waiting to correct itself and the further in you go the more likely it will happen.correcting itself back to a nuetrel true count that is.

Sorry, but this is a common misconception. The running count will tend to correct itself. The TC tends to remain the same.

[Three]

Sorry, but this is a common misconception. The running count will tend to correct itself. The TC tends to remain the same.

Google "True Counts Theorem".

[shorty]

Sorry, but this is a common misconception. The running count will tend to correct itself. The TC tends to remain the same.

well if I'm wrong then I'm wrong and ive been wong before.

Norm, Is it worth it for me to be playing two ,three hands? in a Nutella shell?
For me it seems ludicrous to assume that the big cards are gonna continue to hide out. that's like saying "hey yall .theres a bunch more big cards it that there deck and they'll probably be in the very back" who could possibly make that call?

[Norm]

Generally speaking, always playing two hands is better. There are exceptions.

[shorty]

Generally speaking, always playing two hands is better. There are exceptions.

can you give me an example of what kind of exceptions were talking about?

[Cougfan]

can you give me an example of what kind of exceptions were talking about?

I'm not Norm, but one exception would be if you are playing SD and two hands results in an earlier dealer shuffle.

[shorty]

I'm not Norm, but one exception would be if you are playing SD and two hands results in an earlier dealer shuffle.

Heres some strange thoughts and why there's too much madness with this two hand stuff.
.even in a 8 deck shoe your only playing one or two decks. I mean by the time you bet any real money ,there's usually only one or two decks left in play.
another random thought.I would be inclined to believe that if playing two hands doubled EV then no one would care if it ate up half the cards right?
Is there no calculator programed to take in all the variables? math people may be leaving them out too.
for example. yes your eating up good cards but at least its helping you get to the next shoe and .... one hand can save the next... how bad is eating up cards when all 5 of the other players are just gonna do dumb things to eat them up anyways...where's the calculator that takes allll that and more into consideration?? because its worth a pretty penny

[Cougfan]

Heres some strange thoughts and why there's too much madness with this two hand stuff.
.even in a 8 deck shoe your only playing one or two decks. I mean by the time you bet any real money ,there's usually only one or two decks left in play.
another random thought.I would be inclined to believe that if playing two hands doubled EV then no one would care if it ate up half the cards right?
Is there no calculator programed to take in all the variables? math people may be leaving them out too.
for example. yes your eating up good cards but at least its helping you get to the next shoe and .... one hand can save the next... how bad is eating up cards when all 5 of the other players are just gonna do dumb things to eat them up anyways...where's the calculator that takes allll that and more into consideration?? because its worth a pretty penny

I'm not sure that I am following all of your post.

I don't think that anyone "cares" about you eating up cards. The CVCX software and others like it report the result of simulations of many, many, hands of BJ (typically 1 billion+) and report the results for someone who plays a given set of parameters (index plays, bet rams, etc) consistently for every single hand. This is math. It's not a matter of personal preference. On the off chance that you are talking about whether other players at the table care about you taking cards, then just ignore the other players. Their opinions and actions don't really impact your game. The current sims show you the result of playing 1 hand versus 2 over billions of BJ hands. And they are worth a pretty penny indeed!

You make an interesting observation about the number of decks that really matter being only a fraction of the decks in the shoe. This is a good way to understand the impact of penetration, especially when you consider that playing through the initial decks costs you money as you wait for the "good stuff". Say you are playing a 6D shoe and the first 2 decks typically don't give you any real positive EV opportunities. That means you are paying the waiting toll as those 2 decks play out. You then get a deck that has a few minor plus EV opportunities, on average, and you finally get the reward for all your negative EV min bets and patience. If this is a 4/6 pen game that reward is 1 deck. If this is a 5/6 pen game, that reward is 2 decks. In other words, increasing pen from 4 to 5 decks isn't a 25% increase. It is effectively more like a 100% increase in the real "money" decks.

My example on when 1 hand might be better than 2 hands was specific to SD where dealers will have a set rule on the number of rounds they deal based on how many spots are being played. If you find a table with 2 other players and the dealer is dealing 3 hands to 3 spots but only 2 hands to 4 spots, then you would be better off sticking to one spot for (hopefully) obvious reasons. If you don't play SD then this example may not apply to you.

Another example would be if you are BR constrained and can only afford a unit that is equal to the table min. Obviously you wouldn't want to significantly reduce your spread (or overbet your BR) by betting 2 spots on all hands, especially considering that a lot of places require you to bet double the min on each of 2 hands. As an aside this rule can play into your favor if you move to 2 hands only in a positive EV situation and the count really jumps up quickly. Just bet 2 hands at the minimum mumbling about "changing the cards" or some similar nonsense. When the dealer tells you that you need to bet double the min on each hand, react as if she just said that you are cheap/poor and slap out the required bet amounts, or even more.....

[Jabberwocky]

I play one hand in plus counts but two in neutral counts.

[Three]

.even in a 8 deck shoe your only playing one or two decks. I mean by the time you bet any real money ,there's usually only one or two decks left in play.

You may be overstating things a tad but this is why you need to get those big bets out when you have a nice edge.

another random thought.I would be inclined to believe that if playing two hands doubled EV then no one would care if it ate up half the cards right?

It doesn't double EV. Heads up you get the same amount of money out per card dealt. In 3 rounds playing 1 hand heads you eat the same number of cards as playing 2 hands 2 rounds.
2 hands heads up: 2*2*3/4 = 3
1 hand heads up: 3*1*1 = 3
Amount bet = Number of rounds * Number of hands/round * Amount bet/hand

With others at the table they eat both good cards and bad depending on the situation.

how bad is eating up cards when all 5 of the other players are just gonna do dumb things to eat them up anyways...

It is good to eat cards in a bad situation but bad in a good situation. You want as many bets as you can in a good situation. Card eating that is enough to cost you a round at a good count hurts. Playing 2 hands with another at the table helps get more money and more bets out in a good situation.