I know that doubling soft 20 or splitting 10 is never recommended for counters.
I want to use the following cover:
*** Always double A,8 against 5 or 6.
I know that this will cut a tiny pit of my EV. But my question is, does (always) doubling soft 19 cause heat? I have never tried this so I would like to hear your comments...
How is doubling soft 19 a form of cover? If anyting, it is slightly just the opposite. BS for SD is to D against 5 or 6. But stand for multi-deck. Most of your longevity in this area has to do with your act. I think the following BS plays can bring on a watchful eye just as well because the typical ploppy hardly ever plays them correctly:
4,4 v. 5 or 6 is a split (multi-D DAS only)
A,7 v. 9,X is a hit (SD)
A,7 v. 9,X or A is a hit (multi-D)
Stealth Bomber
By always doubling soft 19 against 5 and 6, I want to make the image of a gambler. (The idea behind it, of course, is that it's a wrong move at low count but a correct move at high count.) A gambler doesn't care about basic strategy. He's there for fun. After reading your post, I guess it doesn't work, maybe not worth the heat it brings.
In fact, from Ian Andersen's book, the "correct" cover play for A,7 against 9, X, A is to stand. :-) That's how you act as a ploppy.
I understand more what it is your trying to accomplish now. To make it work though, you have to have been playing the part of appearing to be a little wild like. Because most ploppies will not do anything with A,8 other than just wave off the D and do what ploppies do. If you want to spread high, try acting a little wild and loose with your play when the C is really high, get the D or other players involved with the decision making of "out of the norm" plays, even though it's precisely indexed and calculated. Regardless of what they say, do what's right mathematically. Rub your hands, pat the table or say; "I'm feeling lucky!". Don't look guilty about it. Don't be shy. That's how I get away with splitting faces. Gotta just look the part (CRAZY).
Go get 'em TJ.
Stealth Bomber
I've got to agree with Stealth on this matter. I just don't think incorrect mathematical plays as a cover are worth it in the long run. The better move, as Stealth stated, is to make the right play but do it in a way that doesn't communicate you know exactly what you're doing.
I just don't think incorrect mathematical plays as a cover are worth it in the long run.
For high-end players, longevity is worth far more than a small gain in EV.
Small bettors, like me, can't afford the loss in EV, but, then again, we don't need cover either.
