I just lost a 1 on 1 game, and I'm not sure if I played my hand right. I was a slight BR1, acting second in the last round. My opponent bet the max and I matched him. Dealer: 4 BR2 : I can't remember his first 2 cards, but DD'd to a total of 18 BR1 (Me): T,T Now if he'd reached a stiff total, I could have split for a lock. And if he'd reached 17 I'd have split too. ( A pushed 17 with my two hands both being stiff, or a 17 and a stiff, would be the only way he could win). With 18, I wasn't sure (and the timer of doom was ticking away - this was on GameAccount where if you let it expire you forfeit the game ). In the end I stood, the dealer busted, and so I lost. Did I make the right choice? (And is there a table anywhere for this kind of decision?)
Is there a table for this stuff? Not to my knowledge. But, here are the numbers for this case, using infinite deck: If you stand with 20, your chance of advancing here is 47.5% If you split the tens, and don't hit a busting hand after splitting, your chance of advancing is huge, at 87.16% Sorry, you should have split.
Split the hand With the dealer shows a 4, I would spit my 20 especially if your opponent double down and make 18. The only situation that I will not spit my hand is if the dealer shows an 8, 9 or a face card.
Does the dealer card really make much difference here? If I split, I don't mind losing both bets, so long as my opponent does the same. It's correlating with his result that I assume is the main factor. A dealer 8 might be signifcant as it would increase the chances of a push with BR2's 18.
The dealer's upcard 8 is not significant, because if it pushes with your opponent, you will win on your 20. With the dealer's upcard 9 or 10, the dealer would most likely make 19 or 20 and you would be in the money with your 20. However, your opponent's chance of winning with his 18 significantly increases if dealer's upcard is anything between 2 and 7, thus I would split my 20 to corrolate the opponent's outcome. I don't have time to look up the exact odd, but I think this is the way to play.
There is a table... On p. 138 and 139 of Wong's CTS. This is known as the "Strong Variation of Curt's Revenge". When you and your opponent lose single bets you win, but if you both win your bets, you lose. You should split all pairs in that situation when your opponent has 18 and dealer shows 4. Not sure where to go from there. I'm assuming you would play it regular and stand on the stiffs if thats what you turned them into. I read somewhere that the best way to win BOTH hands when you split a 20 is by dealer bust so you are to stand on all stiffs. I'm not sure if that would change according to the upcard and opponents total? Anyway thats the table. I have it memorized because every few percentage points helps. Good luck... Rounder21
I don't think you've quite understood what I was trying to say. It doesn't matter much whether the odds of winning the hand go up or down by spliitting or not splitting, what matters is the odds of getting the same result as BR2. I'd be perfectly happy for us both to lose two max bets. The significance of an 8 would be that if I split and catch two stiff hands, then 18 (or 17) would be the only dealer totals that would cause me to lose out to BR2, and there must be rather more chance of 18 with an 8 up than with other up cards. I suspect splitting may be the right choice for any up card though. (So quite why I elected to stand is a mystery to me. ) I think this case would be an 'even stronger version' of Curt's Revenge. That table is introduced as being relevant to BR2, having taken the low against BR1. I was BR1 with the high and the low. BR2 took the high by doubling. I could get it back (and keep the low) by splitting.
Good point... That makes it even more to your advantage by splitting because youre still keeping the low since he doubled down. I didnt think about that one. You do give up the low in the strong variation of curt's revenge. Since youre not giving up the low in this situation, I would expect you would play even more aggresively. Splitting was definately the way to go in your situation. Rounder21
Indeed I started this thread immediately after playing the game. My head was still spinning. I sensed I'd probably made a mistake, but still wasn't thinking clearly enough to realise how big a mistake. (Then Ken kindly spelt it out for me in percentages )
Don't feel bad London Colin. This game is tough. JoeP and I have been researching a hand that arose in Aruba. I think it will be in next month's All-In magazine. It was a similar case where a player had a pat 20 and should have split. Joe and I both said stand, but there were also a lot of other experienced players that said split. Joe and I were wrong. P.S. Joe, I don't know how this will be presented in the mag. If I've given away too much, blast this post.
For any Dlr up card - split the 10's Original situation: BR2 bet 500 + 500 DD to 18 BR1 bet 500 10 + 10 Dealer 4 Reguardless of dealer up card in this situation BR1 should always split the 10's BR1's gain will be anywhere from 17% to 44% over standing. With dealer A up: stand 64.46%.........split 81.22% With dealer 6 up: stand 41.14%.........split 85.23% BR2 didn't play the hand correctly either. He should have doubled for less. He should double for 250 and now BR1 cannot correlate the bet by splitting. Also if BR2 had ended up with a stiff (after doubling for 250) then he could not have been shut out by BR1 by splitting. See "Doubling for Less" in Blackjack Tournament Information and Strategies at Blackjackinfo.com. If BR2 had doubled for 250 and ended up with 18 as above and the dealer up card of 4 then splitting still gives BR1 a 69.75% chance of advancing while standing gives BR1 only 47.50% channce. ....................BlueLight
Know Your Player When I originally posted this early this morning after a late night of Blackjack Play in Las Vegas . BTW a winning session I was not aware of the new policy that was in place.So I would like to enter this as my contribution to our new attitude and demeanor.I hope you enjoy my post. I always have good intention in mind just sometimes I get sidetracked Ken you may have given away a bit much, but I believe that when it is presented. I'm not sure if it will make this month magazine as there is so much stuff in it covering Aruba that parts of articles had to be trimmed I still don't believe the numbers but I believe with the 3rd player in the mix here and with the hand that he had,if played wrong there might be a reason to throw the numbers out the window. I have always been of the opinion that based upon a player's previous habit's in betting and playing hands that you can and should take that into your playing and betting decisions. This again is a personal preference and not all will do this. The Math will always in the long run excel over hunches/guessing but in a short run I believe you can make adjustments by what you have seen go on in your round Here is an example that I used in a semi Final Table at the Pioneer we were down to 3 players and I had a short lead over Br3 and I was betting first.During the match he either bet minimum or max and almost never made any bets that had some sort of meaning to them. He also set his bet up early . So on the last hand I knew that if I waited just a tad longer than normal he just might set his bet up ready to push it into the circle.He did I bet what he had set up and we both won the hand and I advance to the Finals and made 6,000 The math there tells you to force him to win his bet. My observations told me different The funny part of the story was after the hand his wife said to him why did you bet the same as he did. He really didn't, I bet what he was about to bet Joep
Thanks Thanks for posting those results Bluelight. I managed to miss your post until today. No double for less allowed on this particular site (although it's something I've requested).
