what to do when ....

sagefr0g

sagefr0g

Well-Known Member
#1
#1
was wondering how folks handle the following situation:
the game is 6D s17 das lsr with decent pen
you have a really nice true count say tc = 5
you have a sizeable bet out there.
you get a hand that totals say 13
the dealer has a 10 up.

ok i believe correct basic strategy would be to hit, even with basic strategy departure indices (at least the illustrious 18 and fab 4).
but your sitting there with a not so good hand, a relatively high true count and a big bet out there.
i'm often tempted to surrender (because of that big bet out there) even though i believe it's proper to hit.
so i'm wondering how others here view this situation.

best regards,
mr fr0g :D
 
S

ScottH

Well-Known Member
#2
#2
sagefr0g said:
was wondering how folks handle the following situation:
the game is 6D s17 das lsr with decent pen
you have a really nice true count say tc = 5
you have a sizeable bet out there.
you get a hand that totals say 13
the dealer has a 10 up.

ok i believe correct basic strategy would be to hit, even with basic strategy departure indices (at least the illustrious 18 and fab 4).
but your sitting there with a not so good hand, a relatively high true count and a big bet out there.
i'm often tempted to surrender (because of that big bet out there) even though i believe it's proper to hit.
so i'm wondering how others here view this situation.

best regards,
mr fr0g :D
Click to expand...
If you're playing correctly sized bets according to your bankroll then just make the best play regardless of the bet size or hand. Which in this case is to hit. It shouldn't scare you too bad to hit, since your max bet shouldn't be that large of a portion of your total BR.
 
zengrifter

zengrifter

Banned
#3
#3
sagefr0g said:
was wondering how folks handle the following situation:
the game is 6D s17 das lsr with decent pen
you have a really nice true count say tc = 5
you have a sizeable bet out there.
you get a hand that totals say 13
the dealer has a 10 up.

ok i believe correct basic strategy would be to hit, even with basic strategy departure indices (at least the illustrious 18 and fab 4).
but your sitting there with a not so good hand, a relatively high true count and a big bet out there.
i'm often tempted to surrender (because of that big bet out there) even though i believe it's proper to hit.
so i'm wondering how others here view this situation.
Click to expand...
This is a card-counting post and BELONGS in the other forum. The correct play is to hit... but then you already knew that.

recently I had a monster count equivalent to +14 HiLo and a very large bet - and held 13 - I hit expecting to bust - AND GOT AN EIGHT!! You never know so just play correctly. zg
 
Sonny

Sonny

Well-Known Member
#4
#4
sagefr0g said:
ok i believe correct basic strategy would be to hit, even with basic strategy departure indices (at least the illustrious 18 and fab 4).
but your sitting there with a not so good hand, a relatively high true count and a big bet out there.
i'm often tempted to surrender (because of that big bet out there) even though i believe it's proper to hit.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that sucks for sure. But you know what the correct play is, just do it! :D If you decide to stand (or surrender) then you are just like the ploppies that change their play based on hunches. Just because you know that there are lots of high cards left doesn't mean that you should follow your emotions and make the wrong play. Sometimes knowing the count can make you feel justified in making "hunch plays" but don't let that feeling fool you.

As Scott said, if you are betting correctly then busting one hand shouldn't worry you. Your bankroll (and your will power!) needs to be big enough to withstand losing many max bets in a row. It definitely hurts to bust out on that max bet, but there will be plenty of chances to win it back. And, as ZG pointed out, sometimes you'll be pleasantly surprised!

-Sonny-
 
ihate17

ihate17

Well-Known Member
#5
#5
+8 or higher

For hi-low, the indice for surrendering 13 vs 10 is plus 8, so at plus 5 your best off just hitting and praying. You are a big underdog.

ihate17
 
sagefr0g

sagefr0g

Well-Known Member
#6
#6
ok guys thank you for the answers. i figured as much but wasn't sure if there might be some risk averse strategy when big bets are on the table. sorry if i put the post in the wrong category.

best regards,
mr fr0g :D
 
D

dacium

Well-Known Member
#7
#7
If the bet is big to you then obviously your bankroll is not big enough.

if the count is only +5 you would be stupid to be betting so big if you can't afford it. +5 maybe gives you 2% house edge. So the real question is do you want to put your money out with a 48% chance that you will loose it all?

I tend to think if people ask this question then need to play VERY differently. IE. NEVER BET WHEN THE COUNT IS BELOW +3. That way every bet is a long term winner and you don't even have to spread your bets. This works EASILY at higher limit tables. Consider a $100 table that would typically only have 1 or 2 people playing. Count in the background and either come in when a positive count or simply backbet them (if they are playing properly). even if they dont do the 18+fab 4 you will come out ahead. If you only bet when you have 2% edge you only need to make 10 $100 bets per hour on average to be up $20 an hour. Most time if the count gets going you can probably make 10 bets in a row once every 2 shoes or so.
 
zengrifter

zengrifter

Banned
#8
#8
dacium said:
Most time if the count gets going you can probably make 10 bets in a row once every 2 shoes or so.
Click to expand...
The frequency of 2% advantage opportunity is NOT that frequent. And 2% advantage DEFINETLY requires that your big bet be out.

If you get your topBet of 1% BR out when you have a 1% edge, and you don't bet any higher even when the edge is higher, then overall you won't be overbetting. zg
 
sagefr0g

sagefr0g

Well-Known Member
#9
#9
dacium said:
If the bet is big to you then obviously your bankroll is not big enough.

if the count is only +5 you would be stupid to be betting so big if you can't afford it. +5 maybe gives you 2% house edge. So the real question is do you want to put your money out with a 48% chance that you will loose it all?

I tend to think if people ask this question then need to play VERY differently. IE. NEVER BET WHEN THE COUNT IS BELOW +3. That way every bet is a long term winner and you don't even have to spread your bets. This works EASILY at higher limit tables. Consider a $100 table that would typically only have 1 or 2 people playing. Count in the background and either come in when a positive count or simply backbet them (if they are playing properly). even if they dont do the 18+fab 4 you will come out ahead. If you only bet when you have 2% edge you only need to make 10 $100 bets per hour on average to be up $20 an hour. Most time if the count gets going you can probably make 10 bets in a row once every 2 shoes or so.
Click to expand...
thank you for your reply. i appreciate your comments with respect to wonging in and or back line betting. i pretty much can only back line bet at my local joint as wonging in generates heat but i can't overdo the back line betting either. so i sit and play and wong out a lot.
yeah my bankroll is rather meager but i'm fortunate that i can bet optimally through the true count levels up to +5 . i only very rarely see a count above tc = +5 . tc = +5 is where i bring my big bet out.
i had earlier seen a post where some posters where talking about circumstances where they would bypass splitting certain pairs even though basic strategy called for it when they had a big bet on the table. that post was what got me wondering if there was a risk averse measure for the scenerio that i posted. i'll try to find that posting and repost it with comments.
best regards,
mr fr0g :D
 
sagefr0g

sagefr0g

Well-Known Member
#10
#10
sagefr0g said:
was wondering how folks handle the following situation:
the game is 6D s17 das lsr with decent pen
you have a really nice true count say tc = 5
you have a sizeable bet out there.
you get a hand that totals say 13
the dealer has a 10 up.

ok i believe correct basic strategy would be to hit, even with basic strategy departure indices (at least the illustrious 18 and fab 4).
but your sitting there with a not so good hand, a relatively high true count and a big bet out there.
i'm often tempted to surrender (because of that big bet out there) even though i believe it's proper to hit.
so i'm wondering how others here view this situation.

best regards,
mr fr0g :D
Click to expand...
here are the posts that got me to wondering about the above scenerio:

Automatic Monkey said:
Default Sequencer's Basic Strategy?
Has anyone published a Basic Strategy for sequencers who put down large bets and have no idea what the true count is? Marginal split and double plays which can double your risk with only a tiny increase in win rate are to be avoided for Kelly bankroll considerations. E.g., yes, you got your ace, and then a two, and the dealer shows 5... I might double if I have a table min down but if I have 5% of my BR down, no way!

So what I'm envisioning is a BS chart for bets placed with a 1% advantage, a 2% advantage, 5%, 10%, etc. It will be the opposite of a Counter's Basic Strategy chart which assumes the count is high, SBS would assume the count is zero. If no one has worked out these numbers yet I'll be happy to do it, I just don't want to reinvent the wheel.
Click to expand...
Sonny said:
Originally Posted by Automatic Monkey
Marginal split and double plays which can double your risk with only a tiny increase in win rate are to be avoided for Kelly bankroll considerations.

Good point. So basically this would be a risk-averse BS. You would be avoiding plays that increase your risk too much (beyond your critical value of certainty equivalence) and don’t add much to your EV. You could even make “indices” for several borderline plays, such as “Double A,2 vs. 5 if my bet is less than X units, otherwise hit.” Essentially you would be using your bet size, instead of the TC, to adjust your play.

As far as I know this information has never been published anywhere. You could use Schlesinger’s formula for risk-averse indices as a starting point.

-Sonny-
Click to expand...
so i realize that Automatic Monkey and Sonny were discussing advanced methods such as card sequencing but i'm just having a bit of trouble seeing why such logic would not hold for a high bet made as the result of a good true count that looks as if it is headed for a negative fluctuation result.

best regards,
mr fr0g :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top