Now, how about splitting Aces always?

Now, how about splitting Aces always?

Well, if you take a look in Wong�s �Professional BJ� on table # 10 (Strategy numbers for H17) and see the index numbers for splitting AA vs. 8,9,T and A, they are:

AA vs. 8 split if TC>=-8
AA vs. 9 split if TC>=-7
AA vs. T split if TC>=-8
AA vs. A split if TC>=-4

Now,
If you take a look at the index numbers for doubling down on 11 vs. 8,9,T and A, they are:
11 vs. 8 double if TC>=-6
11 vs. 9 double if TC>=-4
11 vs. T double if TC>=-4
11 vs. A double if TC>= 0

As you very well know in both cases when you split AA or you double down you get only one single card. You give up the option of any subsequent hits for the privilege of doubling your bet after seeing your cards. In both cases you are allowed to take only one card. Also, in both instances you are drawing one single card on 11. Regardless, when you have 56 vs. T for a double or A vs. T and A vs. T for a split in both instances you are drawing one card on hard 11. Further more, when you decide to split the AA you give up the option of counting the Ace =1 and automatically the Ace become hard 11. In essence you give the edge back to the house and you cannot manipulate anymore the Ace to be 1 or 11 while getting one single card when you split. But this is another subject all together.

Let�s get back and compare the two table from Wong�s book.
The table indicate that is correct for a 11 to go against the T if the TC>=-4 while drawing only one card in the case of a double down move. And, also is correct for an A=11 to go against a T if the TC>=-8 while drawing only one card in the case of split AA vs. T.
If is correct to split AA vs. T and drawing and drawing one card only on each Ace=11 in a �8 count why is not correct to double down on any 11 vs. T if the count is �8? Why the count got to be >=�4 for doubling down? In both situations we are drawing on hard 11 one single card. Are we?

The same thing happen for the other double downs or splits. We double 11 vs. A only if the count per deck is zero or positive but we split AA vs. Ace even if the count per deck is negative 4. In both instances we doing the same thing such as drawing one single card on hard 11. �., and so on �

Well, you cannot have it both ways.

Puiu

The flaw is all in your head. When deciding whether or not to split Aces, you should be comparing the result to playing out the 12. In negative counts, splitting the Aces may no longer have +EV, but if it beats playing the 12, then it's a defensive play.

Hey, Rogger,
Is a soft 12 not a hard 12. And that is the BIG difference.
A hard 12 has a negative EV in minus counts but a soft 12 has a positive EV in negative and in positive counts.

But hey, you do what you do best and I do my thing.

Puiu

But a soft 12 is still not the same as a hard 11, hence the differences in the counts. So what was your point?

Hey, SOTSUCK,

Are you aware that you don't have to reply to my posts? You have no obligation whatsoever to even read any of my posts!

Well, you know and I know and most of the people on this board have figure out that you don't have any understanding of the positive or negative EV in this game. Why don't you play by your Basic Strategy from your little book and keep lossing your hard earned $$ to the "Standard Deviation" as long as you want. But hope for the best.

What I can say anymore?

Puiu

Copyright on the Internet. So far none of your posts have been lacking lifted material and it is only a matter of time before there is some scream, "search warrant!"

You wrote: "Why don't you play by your Basic Strategy from your little book and keep lossing your hard earned $$ to the "Standard Deviation" as long as you want."

Now, if card counting will cause us to keep "lossing" our hard earned $$, why do casinos bar counters? Aren't they lossing revenues by doing that?

Puiu, Don't come down on me for this but you sure sound like one. I think it's cool if you are, chicks are little rays of sunshine who give out good vibes and if us cats let it, the positive karma will flow into us too. It's just that sometimes chicks feed on the vibes and let their feelings decide what they should do. The math parts can be a real bummer but without it blackjack can be a real bad trip. From this and your other thread it looks like you're letting your positive energy fool you into thinking the math doesn't matter. Be cool and listen to these cats here. They're cool and won't lay a bad trip on you. Peace

Casinos wants to keep the dream alive that card counting is the way to beat the game.

But the reality is that card counting used properly is useful on deviations from Basic Strategy and mostly gives you guidance when to double or not and when to buy Insurance or not and when to hit or stand. That�s about it!

Now, if you want to find out the real secret of card counting then you have to travel back in time in the 1950�s or 60�s when the card counting was a real weapon against the single deck S17 deal all the way down. In that set-up you could bet big and make money because you knew the composition of the remaining subset. Ed Thorp invented card counting for that type of game! But in today�s games when you�ve got 75% or even less penetration you are flirting with disaster if you bet your money by the count.

Well, it is true that the simulators gives us a positive EV over the long run if we bet by the count, but that EV is a mare 1.5% if not less, and in the process your bankroll can and will go down in negative even couple thousand of units. Practically revealing that you could be wiped out before you get in the profits. And exactly this is the casino's mentality that they based their BJ business on. They want the players to bet as much as possible even in positive counts because the StDev will bring them down regardless of the long term +EV.

I have no idea of how much is your bankroll and I even don�t care but if you�ve got let�s say 2500 units of $100 each and if you lose 1000 of them or ($100,000) are you sure that you will still be able to come back up? Because the next day or the next 50 days you will have the same chance to go up or down another 1000 units. Now, if your bank is unlimited then betting by the count is the way to go. Else, play your hands by the TC and bet your money the way the dealer is breaking or making his hands. Only one sure thing is in blackjack and that one is: nothing is certain yet until the hand is over.

I am at 1,900 hours of casino BJ and I never lost a single session. I always get out from the game with more cash that I start with and I assure you that I am playing black units for about 4 hour per session/day.

Puiu

Your theory is that casinos bar card counters (who can't win) because that keeps alive the "lie" that card counting can beat the casino, but do not bar progression (and other such voodoo) players like yourself (who you think can beat the casino.)

Where's the sense in that? Why would they allow that? Don't say that the casinos have bought into card counting because you've already said that they bar counters because they want to keep that lie alive. Do you think the casinos are all lossing their minds or something?

Could you tell us what's all about floating advantage?
Can I make any real money in a real BJ game in a real casino using your theory? Hmm?

Puiu

All the knowledge in the world will not help you if you don�t know how to bet your chips. If you do not know how to manipulate your money will never be a winning player. I�m not saying that the chip manipulation will change the EV but it will be your downfall if you do not know how to bet regardless of the count. If you�ve lost the last 3 hands on positive counts when you have bet your MAX and the count is still positive and you plunk another MAX thinking that you�ve got the edge you are looking for disaster to happen. Yes! You�ve got the edge if you are able to make the same move thousands of times in a similar situation but you�ve got to get the opportunity to do that and you got to survive. At a TC=5 you have a 2% edge over the dealer in the very long run. For the next 1000 similar situations you could lose 499*MAX and win 501*MAX and you probably will have 2 MAX profit but how you handle when you lose MAX after MAX after MAX?

Puiu

Puiu IMHO is to the TARGETiers what ML is to the clones, and worse Puiu has to steal what he(she?, it?, that...) posts to do so!

has found where you have stolen your posts from, about 90% of the time!

Ah but alas these days anyone telling the truth, and writing their own posts, probably does not fit in with the Modern World.

You have discovered what the math bunch ignores. the odds are against
the play. Plus the odds on each draw are are 1-3 against. Therefore
in their "long run" they will lose. There is one thing in your posts
that is wrong. Ed Thorpe did not invent BJ card counting. When he
was writing his first BJ book there was evidence of plus one, minus
two unbalanced count with a side count of aces. This was coupled with
a basic strat that had all the always and nevers that the math boyz
sill use. I do not question your play. You have some skill and
enough luck to make it work, and I suspect alot of patience.

You keep "lossing" track of the question because you get sidetracked.

Congratulations on realizing that you can lose at blackjack even if you are counting - some dirty "people" think that if you lose it must be because you're being cheated. As for being wiped out, well I know it would involve reading someone else's posts instead of prattling on yourself but, haven't you noticed the endless discussions on Kelly betting?

I know it's complicated because it involves math and stuff, but give it a whirl and ask on BJ21 if you don't understand it.

Here's some motivation for it - if you apply your logic about betting, then you should play roulette and wait for red to come up a bunch of times in a row and then bet that it will keep coming up. That would be silly, right? Well it's no sillier than believing that your chances of winning or losing the next hand has anything to whether you won or lost the last hand (ignoring counting.) (and cheating!)

I know, I know - you've played 20 billion hours and never lost. Well I've played 21 billion hours and I always bet in a way that's completely opposite to what you say, and I've always won too. There, I said it - but that doesn't make it true - and you'll never convince me that your claims are true so let's skip that portion of the discussion.

http://bj21satellite.com/misc_bj/index.cgi?read=116168

Basic Strategy takes cognizance of the cards removed from the deck/shoe.

Thus the removal if two Aces reduces the probability of the dealer having an Ace under his 8, 9 or Ace. This hurts the "house." In addition, it reduces the possiblity of the player drawing a 3rd or 4th Ace to his split pair, which hurts the house by helping the player.

The removal of the cards for a 2-card hard 11 (29, 38, 47, 56) do the opposite: they help the house by making it more likely the dealer will have a Ten or Ace under his 8, 9, Ten or Ace; and they help the player by making it more likely he will draw a Ten to his doubled hand.

Thus, a standalone Ace after a split AA is *NOT* the same situation as a 2-card hard 11.

I have used Basic Strategy in the examples to keep things simple. But the same logic applies to the various count indices. Obviously, the deeper you go into the deck/shoe, the greater the magnification of the effects I have described.

IOW, you (or the author you stole this from) are trying to compare apples to oranges, and the conclusions drawn from this faulty comparison are factually, logically and mathematically incorrect.