1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
Did you find this post helpful?
Yes |
No
Originally Posted by
Freightman
We lose more hands with soft doubles against 2,3,4,5,6 than when we don’t double.
We lose more hands with hard doubles against 7,8,9,10 than when we don’t double.
We make more money by doubling, even by winning fewer hands, because the sum total of our wins versus losses exceeds the value of our wins when we don’t double.
I erroneously stated that we won more hands in higher counts by doubling and splitting. 21forme made a valid po8n5 on defensive splits, citing that we are still overall losers, but that we lose less.
Your point makes no sense, and your original statement doesn't have a flaw in it; it's correct as it stands.
The question, obviously, isn't whether you can win (any money at all) more hands by not doubling than by doubling: that's always a given! How can being restricted to a one-card draw ever allow you to win more hands than if you can hit as many times as you like??
You're not even understanding your own objection. You DO win more doubles and splits (percentagewise) in higher counts than in lower ones. What would make you think otherwise??
Don
Bookmarks