name |
message |
date |
| Midnite |
Bug-On "average" you will get a BJ every 20/21 hands and a same suit BJ once every 84 hands. I have also seen where, out of 12 BJ's, the dealer had 11 of them..... |
2003-07-29 17:55:20 |
| Midnite |
Buffarino- Yes, eights are that weak of a hand, against the dealers 10. By splitting them you can expect to win 38 times and lose 62 times, on average. Still much better than just hitting them ( Win 23 / Lose 77). While splitting eights against the dealers 10 is a losing play, you will "lose less" than if you hit or stand. |
2003-07-29 17:50:06 |
| BuGhOu§eMASTER |
That's true, but I was told by sld that Midnite knows a whole bunch of these stats etc. and myself I was wondering about the % of times I will be dealt BJ, a 20, 19 stuff like that... it'd be very useful to have a website with that sort of info! Anyone know? |
2003-07-29 17:45:49 |
| Desert Dog |
Bughousemaster -- I don't know whether it would be charts of statistics or just mathematical reasoning, the kind I don't have the ability to express myself. In simple terms I guess with a 15 against a ten, you need a 4, 5, or 6 to have any prayer of winning and that's 3/13's or less than a 1 in 4 chance. I know it's not that simple, but that's the general idea, I would think. |
2003-07-29 17:32:40 |
| BuGhOu§eMASTER |
Definitely, DD! Where does he get all of those statistics, etc. about BJ? |
2003-07-29 17:23:01 |
| Desert Dog |
Twice today, for the first time ever, I've seen mention of surrendering a pair of 8's rather than splitting: Against 10 in single deck in Bug's post below, and against Ace if dealer hits Soft 17, in Fred Renzey's article of 7/21, which I quote: "So then, with which hands should a good player surrender? Well, that depends upon the "soft 17" rule and exactly what you mean by a "good" player. If you're a plain basic strategy player and the dealer stands on soft 17, then you should surrender with 15 against a 10 and with 16 against a 9, 10 or Ace. That's because you have less than one chance in four to win any of these hands. And when that's true, losing a half bet every time actually saves you money overall.
Now, if the dealer hits on soft 17, then there are three more hands with which you become worse than a one in four shot to win. In that case, you should also surrender against a dealer's Ace if you have 15, 17 or a pair of 8s." I'll add here that this is also the first time I've ever heard of surrendering a 17. Very interesting stuff, guys!
|
2003-07-29 17:15:35 |
| BuGhOu§eMASTER |
Buffarino - What I quoted you was BASIC STRATEGY, the computer-simulated best play for your cards if surrendering was allowed. My guess is that against a 10 up, even if you did split the 8's you'd probably lose more than you'll win since if you draw even a 10 for one of your 8's all he'd have to have is a 9 or 10 and beat you (5 of the 13 cards right there). But of course if you're playing and surrending is NOT an option you should ALWAYS split 8's. |
2003-07-29 17:09:32 |
| zebra |
renzey -- what are the 340 hands that you reference in your last post? i count 169 true two-card combinations with only 100 different two-card combinations. and if you get beyond two cards, the combinations are countless. so i'm not sure what the number 340 represents. please advise. |
2003-07-29 16:56:13 |
| Buffarino |
Thanks, Bug. So you'd surrendur a pair of 8's against a 10 instead of splitting them? I can see getting rid of the 7's, but are the 8s really that weak of a hand? |
2003-07-29 16:47:10 |
| BuGhOu§eMASTER |
Hey Buffarino, nice to have a new poster :) and welcome to the board! You can try the progressive strategy known as DAHL'S Progression, which if you read the preceding posts, I had a question about it myself which follows this bet format: 1x 1x 1.5x 1.5x ... to 4x I believe. You start at 1x, and every win you continue to the next progression and once you lose you go back to the beginning. You would skip a step for BJ, or skip 2 steps for a Double/Split. The idea behind Dahl's is that it conserves your winnings and is a winning-type of progression. Of course if you have really bad luck and just keep losing your 1x bet you should just get up and move to another table. Dahl's is the only one I know about, since I'm just getting into the betting strategy part of BJ myself, but there are tons out there that other posters on here would know about. As far as surrendering hands, yes 16 against 10 is one, and also 15 against 10 in a multi-deck game and for your purposes, and also 7:7, 8:8, 15s and 16s against the dealer's 10's in single-deck are also resignable hands. BTW, it doesn't matter if you're not counting -- you can still use Dahl's Progression because as I said it solidifies your winnings and leaves you ahead after a winning session. Hope this helps. |
2003-07-29 16:31:07 |
| Buffarino |
New poster here.
I've got a quick question. I understand (and use) basic strategy and have always done OK for myself, but I have a couple questions about progressive betting and surrendur.
Progressive betting - I've seen the 2-1-2-3-4-5 strategy earlier on the board. What other progressive bets are out there for a non-counter (I usually end up playing at tables with automatic shufflers), or is it even worth it to use progressive betting if you're not counting?
surrendur - what hands should be surrendured? Obviously (to me, at least), you'd surrendur a hard 16 against a 10, but what other hands would fall into the surrendur rule to minimize the house advantage?
Thanks in advance, this is a great board! |
2003-07-29 15:47:11 |
| BuGhOu§eMASTER |
Mr. Renzey, I just read one of your articles, this one about "10 BJ tips most players need to learn" and I had a question about your #10. You said: 10. Betting progressions based on the previous outcome offer virtually no increased chance to win the next hand, and are therefore useless as a strategy tool. You'll simply end up winning the same percentage of your one-unit bets as your three-unit bets and your five-unit bets, etc. That's because where your probability to win the next hand is concerned (which is not dependent upon the last outcome) you've actually sized your bets randomly. The only way to size your wagers according to your chances of winning the next hand is to keep track of the cards. Other than that, you'll do just as well to bet the same amount on every hand.
...
Well, doesn't Dahl's Progression fall under this category, since it only says to increase the bet after initially winning the first 2 hands? Mind you this is a WINNING betting progression, I dont see how it would hurt us, because if we are winning, we are only SLIGHTLY increasing our bet, actually just by 0.5 units at a time. I'm sure you're familiar with this winning progression, and am wondering how you are against this since it only solidifies our GAIN when winning, and starts it back down to 1 unit when losing. |
2003-07-29 15:43:38 |
| BuGhOu§eMASTER |
BTW, have yall ever heard of a BJ video? I just saw 2,m including "Play to Win" and was wondering how they are. It say they talk about Basic Strategy and how to take advantage of some points (situations in the casino) but other than that... what else do they contain besides illustrating BS played out?
Also, Renzey, I've always wondered... but in a 6-deck shoe, what is the % of being DEALT a BJ? What about the dealer getting a BJ (it should be the same right?)? Also, I'm interested in knowing know the % of being dealt any 20 as well. Thanks. |
2003-07-29 15:38:41 |
| BuGhOu§eMASTER |
Renzey, ohhhhhhhhhh.... that's my bad... you had be totally confused... the way I was thinking it was that I would be paying the guy who got BJ for free, and I was like HUH?!?!?!? -- I totally neglected the fact that the dealer has to still pay THE BLACKJACK regardless, right? Do the dealers care if this happens? I've never heard of this wonderful addition of OFFENSIVE HAND INTERACTION, but that sounds like a really good idea! So is it ALWAYS good to offer even money to someone's BJ? When's the ideal time to offer this to them, about the same time you would offer to pay them a $1 more for a bet of >$30? Not much opportunity I dont think! Zebra, sld, I'm glad to make this board worthwhile and entertaining at the same time, at least for the 2 of you. I dont know who else appreciates my "spark" to this board with my gestures about poor playing etiquette etc. but thanks anyway! Both of you have pretty nice comments yourself, especially you sld! You are like my BJ mentor :) |
2003-07-29 15:13:58 |
| Grifter |
Renzey - That was me that asked, and thank you. I just "eyeballed" it and got the <0.05%.....Just wondered how close I was. |
2003-07-29 13:46:24 |
| Renzey |
To Ace of Spades; Disappointingly, the net gain from playing the Mag 7 hands is defined on pg. 99 of B/J Bluebook II as .03% for the six deck shoe and .05% for single deck (based upon 2.5 billion simulated hands). That gain is so small because these are only 7 hands out of 340, and they're close ones to begin with.
Moreover, learning to manage these discriminately teaches the basic strategy player to think like a card counter, rather than just obey like a robot -- which should prepare him for bigger things down the road. |
2003-07-29 13:39:22 |
| Grifter |
SLD - Damn....Make that "but DON'T read that wrong". |
2003-07-29 13:17:05 |
 |
|
|
|
