Damn Aces

I recently was in the finals of a blackjack tournament.

I was BR1 on the last hand and last to bet. If I win my hand, I
win the tourney. I put out a near-maximum bet-that's all I needed.

I'm dealt a pair of Aces. I've always split aces. In fact, I've never ever
NOT split aces. For a brief moment, I consider just hitting away because
a Loss-Loss or a Win-Loss will doom me. One card only is dealt for each
ace.

Well, I split them. I'm dealt an A-3 and A-5. The dealer's up card is a 7 and he turns over a 10 for 17.
I have just snatched defeat from the jaws of victory!!!
I go from BR1 to BR6. Of course, A-A-3-5 would have been a winning hand.
That's a tough loss, but I'm over it.

My goal was to win. My mindset is that I'll settle for last place as a result of trying for the win.
Perhaps, I need to rethink this type of bravado.

In a sense, this is like doubling down or splitting a pair for
a win when it's not necessary. That act puts the player in jeopardy.

The prize money difference between BR1-BR3 and BR6 was significant.

Question From an ev point of view, should I have just hit away for the win and with a loss-settled for BR3--- OR followed the standard (Always Split Aces) course of action in this instance????.

 

Always go for the gold

One of Max Rubin's (WSOBJ) favorate sayings is "blackjack is a great game to play backwards" - you always know what you should have done.

First, in my opinion your mindset was correct - ALWAYS go for the gold. Settling for second bet is not acceptable to me, it makes me feel like a looser. Sure there are occasions when going for 2nd, 3rd, or 4th would have given me a higher dollar prize but I play to win.

Second, splitting those damm aces. One thing that many players do not realize is that, in most cases, splitting is the mathematically correct strategy to loose less money in a normal blackjack game. Therefore, in your situation, I would not have split the aces. You stated that all you had to do was win the hand to win the final table. Since you split the aces, now you have to win 2 hands to win the table - you just made it more difficult to win.

I have made plenty of errors under the heat of battle. But I learn from my minstakes and hopefully will not repeat them. Good luck to you in your future tournaments.

 

You were in a situation that I do not think should be conclusively answered with out more info. What were the rules? What was the count? Youu were in a situation to preserve capital, not increase it. So your decision should be based more on Kelly Risk Adverse Indexes rather than EV.

 

Rich,

This is not a clear-cut decision.
I don’t have all the numbers available but this is what was happening.
One should split Aces to increase Expected Value, but if one needs to gain at least one bet then hitting Aces vs. dealer’s 7 is a better play by some six or seven percent.

What makes it murky is the fact that you were BR1 and if you pushed your hand and nobody else had a better total than the dealer’s then you win the tournament as well.
When you split Aces you push almost 30% of the time, mostly by losing one hand and winning the other. Losing/winning means the dealer makes a hand and even if somebody else wins with the dealer you wouldn’t drop down on prize list drastically.
However, if you lose only a single bet and the dealer beats your opponents you claim the first place.

So, depending on prize structure split if it is not top heavy and if your opponents’ totals are 17, 18, (or 19).
If they having stiffs or twenties, or twenty-ones - just hit.


S. Yama


PS
Springbac, this was the last hand, and even if not...Kelly Risk Adverse Indexes rather than EV --in tournaments forget about both of them.

 

Well Articulated Mr. Yama - again, a concise and accurate assessment of the situation - including your Post Script. Tournament play decision criteria not what is used in live play.

The Count

 

Ev?

I am not as technically advanced as many of the members on this web site are. This may sound basic to some but what is "EV"?

Thank you in advance for any response.

 

Ev== Expected Value

 

Thanks to S.Yama

-----------and the others who offered their advice.

S. Yama's analysis is always clear, succinct, and right on
the money.

We're very fortunate to have S.Yama on this website!!!

Thanks to all,
Rich Garcia

 

Thanks for the kind words

Rich, Count de McArds and others - thank you for your appreciations - always glad to share.

S. Yama