Lucky 13, turning a bad count into a good hand?

A profitable Hard 12 or 13?

Lately I've been studying the strategy tables for various counting
systems, primarily level 1 but also Wong Halves and the Uston APC. I have not yet come across a strategy matrix recommending to double a Hard 12 or 13, nor have I seen somebody take advantage of a bad situation of being dealt such poor hands(perhaps because it doesn't exist), but I wonder if such a hand with this play(hard double) could be lucrative, and profitable in the right circumstances.

I would never dream of doubling down on a Hard 14-16 given the breaking percentage of such hands, but I was interested in the amount of investigation that has gone into considering doubling a Hard 12 or 13 against a weak dealer upcard, because I believe if the count were low enough you could take one down for double without the fear of busting and turn a very poor playing situation to your favor. I do realize with a low or negative count the dealer also has less of a tendency to bust, but maybe with your 12 or 13 you could catch a card that would make you pat while the same, or next card would bust the dealer, giving you twice your wager in return.

Again, I ask how much research has gone into this subject, and if that amount is minimal does it warrant further study?

Are you saying that about fifty years of research says not to make this play of doubling down on a hard 12 or 13 vs. dealer 4,5, or 6 (in optimal circumstances) at any time, because it is very unprofitable to say the least?

P.S. I hope not, because I thought I hit upon something, an unlikely fortune in an inauspicious time, but if this is not so I thank you for correcting me.

Now how about a little bit of luck? Thanks!

If you stand on a hard 12 against the dealer's 4, your expected value is to lose about 20% of your money...If you take a card you will lose about 22% and if you double down you will lose 44%...That is a perfect defininition of a no brainer decision.

I'm no expert, but it seems to me that it's mostly negligible, since the count at which this *might* be safe would be so far negative that you shouldn't even still be playing. And now that I think about it, if your chances of busting on 12 is so low that you would want to double, then the chances of the dealer busting on that 4/5/6 isn't all that good either.

The determination of basic strategy and also count indices involves considering all playing options (hit, stand, double, split, etc) and all possible outcomes, calculating the expectation for each option and then selecting the best one.

There is no need to re-examine particular situations such as doubling hard 12 versus 6 - all these and more (even ridiculous things such as standing on 4 and doubling hard 20) are already considered in the above determination.

Unless you have some other information that this sort of analysis doesn't considered, there is no point in second-guessing it. The only practical reason to double a hard 12 would be knowledge of either the next card or the hole card. Even in these situations, correct strategies have already been developed. You're unlikely to discover anything new there either.

Years ago at the MGM Grand (the old one, before the fire), I was at third base counting a 4-deck shoe where the dealer was being lazy and only cutting about a half-deck out of play, and got to a situation where the deck only had 26 cards left and the (hi-lo) count was -26.

Since is was 4 am and I had a 7:15 am flight out, I decided, "What the Hell?" and doubled my A5 against the dealer's Nine.

The dealer wouldn't take the bet, and instead called out to the pit critter, "Doubling Ace-Five against Nine!"

The pit critter came over, looked at my two $50 bets, and whispered into the dealer's ear, in response to which the dealer nodded, "Yes."

Obviously, the question HAD to be, "Is he winning?"

The PC contemplated for a couple of seconds, then told the dealer, "Go ahead, take the bet."

I was dealt another Five to my A5, then the dealer revealed the Two he had down. He then dealt himself two more Twos and a Three for a 5-card 18.

They paid the bet, then the pit critter asked/told me, "You don't mind cashing out now, do you sir?"

"No," I replied, "not at all." Frankly, I was rather thankful they didn't take my picture and put my face into the dreaded "book."

But there's a moral here.

I violated one of the sacred rules of card counting: NEVER call attention to yourself!

The *worst* thing that can happen to you is to WIN those "idiotic" plays you propose. Then you'll find out what REAL "heat" is all about.

The PC should have comped you, not thrown you out. :-)

More important, why did you have $100 wagered at a TC of -52?

Because I knew EVERY remaining card was a 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6.

One has no choice but to assume an even distribution, thus: I had a 20% chance of getting 18; a 20% chance of 19; a 20% chance of 20; a 20% chance of 21; and a 20% chance of 12.

At that count, it's a virtual certainty the dealer will make a hand; but it will almost always be a low hand: 17 or 18. With the remaining cards having an average value of 4, the average hand he should get with a 9 up is 17 (i.e., 9 plus 2 cards totalling 8).

Assuming he ends up with 17; I have an 80% chance of winning and a 20% chance of losing -- a 60% edge!

Assuming he ends up with 18; I have a 60% chance of winning; a 20% chance of losing; and a 20% chance to push -- a 50% edge!

Averaging the above two scenarios: 70% chance to win, 10% chance to push, 20% chance to lose - a 55.6% edge!

"Fudging" that for the few times he might get a hand > 18; you're still looking at about a 60-40 proposition, at worst. IOW, at least a 20% edge!

IMHO, doubling with a 20% or better edge would be the correct play.

BTW, if you check your literature, once the TC gets to -18 or so, the advantage begins to swing back toward the player. Admittedly, that is mostly due to the times you would be hitting things like hard 17 vs 9 or hard 15 vs 3, and seldom any doubles, but still.... I have to wonder what the player advantage is at a TC of -52.

It takes more than a John Patrick-style argument to convince me. used PBA, with strip rules and a custom deck of five 2s, 3s, 4s, 5s and 6s (one card short, but closer to an even distribution) to come up with the following EVs for A5 v 9:

Stand: -0.93
Hit: +0.43
Double: +0.24

You are correct that the advantage begins to swing back toward the player - the only losing hands are hard 17 (except against 5 or 6) and hard 18. You are also correct that the dealer will always make a hand, but it won't almost always be a low hand. Here's the breakdown:

17: 22.8%
18: 23.6%
19: 20.3%
20: 16.6%
21: 11.4%
Bust: 5.3%

These are averages; with a 9 up the dealer is more likely to make 17-20 and less likely to make 21 or bust. The correct basic strategy with this ultimate low count is to always split 2-9, never double, and hit to hard 18 or soft 19. Just for fun, I simulated 100 million hands of flat betting with this deck and basic strategy. The result was a player edge of about 18.08%.

Who needs high counts?