Split a pair of 4

[ellenc]

The basic strategy calls for to hit when you have a pair of 4 against dealer's 2, 3, and 4. In high positive, should it be modified to a split?

[marriedputter]

It does't need to be a high positive. Basic Strategy says to split 4s against a 5 or 6. You do need a positive count to split 4s against a 4, but it's not that high. For my count(s), Hi-Opt II and Zen, you split 4s against a 4 at a TC of 4 (a particularly easy index to memorize obviously).

[Freightman]

The basic strategy calls for to hit when you have a pair of 4 against dealer's 2, 3, and 4. In high positive, should it be modified to a split?

There's an index for almost, if not everything. If you want to split 44v2, simply wait for your next true +17. Or true 8 for 44v3.
Just because there's an index for it, doesn't necessarily mean you should do it. On these non standard high count solit's, you really need to evaluate the extra EV against variance of the move.

Having said that, I do recall my 7v6 double once, wishing that I had the balls to make that play a second time, but that's another story.

[Freightman]

There's an index for almost, if not everything. If you want to split 44v2, simply wait for your next true +17. Or true 8 for 44v3.
Just because there's an index for it, doesn't necessarily mean you should do it. On these non standard high count solit's, you really need to evaluate the extra EV against variance of the move.

Having said that, I do recall my 7v6 double once, wishing that I had the balls to make that play a second time, but that's another story.

Another thing to consider on these high count splits would be to practice risk aversion, and wait for counts above index before making the play.

[Meistro123]

44 v 4 is a split at +1 for hi lo and 44 v 3 is a split at +6. but pair splits are relatively unimportant because they occur less frequently.

[Halbruno]

44 v 4 is a split at +1 for hi lo and 44 v 3 is a split at +6. but pair splits are relatively unimportant because they occur less frequently.

According to Wong's Professional Blackjack, hi lo split 4,4 v 4 @ TC 3 and 4,4 v 3 @ TC 8. This is the same for S17 and H17. Where did you get your info from?

[terry0222]

Ultimately, one can use CVData and figure out these sort of questions for whatever counting method they are using in their game.

You would think Norm charges thousands of dollars for his software. He doesn't. <Although it's WORTH thousands>

[AndretheGiant]

I think it depends on what year of Wong's book you have.
Earlier versions had some inaccurate split decisions, ehich Wong acknowledged in later versions.

[Freightman]

I think it depends on what year of Wong's book you have.
Earlier versions had some inaccurate split decisions, ehich Wong acknowledged in later versions.

Which is true - issues if improved computing power over the years. Also, don't believe Wong always floored, which would also account for some differences. Regardless, Prifessional Blackjack by Wong is a must have classic.

[Midwest Player]

Everybody missed one important point. It depends if you can double after split. If you can't then splitting 4's against 5 & 6 is not basic strategy.

[Freightman]

Everybody missed one important point. It depends if you can double after split. I you can't then splitting 4's against 5 & 6 is not basic strategy.

It was assumed based on OP. The thread is meaningless without DAS.

[Bigdaddy]

It was assumed based on OP. The thread is meaningless without DAS.

A little cranky today Freightman? Midwest Player's post was on point.

[Freightman]

A little cranky today Freightman? Midwest Player's post was on point.

Not in the least. Simply stating the obvious. I could use another MWP trip report story though.