I cant believe I did that...

[SleightOfHand]

Yesterday was the first time that I did not follow an index play and I am feeling pretty bad about it. I was playing at a store when I had a max bet out. I received 7,7 v 8. According to index sims that I ran a while back, the index for this play is +4 (Zen). The TC was around +8 so I split with little hesitation. I received another 7, and I split again. This time I am not feeling so good, and put out another max bet. 7 again! With 3 max bets already on the table, I am thinking to myself, "How is splitting 7s at a high count a better move? Unless I get lucky and get some small cards to double or an Ace, I am most likely getting 17s vs 18. I know that there is a problem with CVData regarding 8,8 v X when surrender is involved, maybe this is another one?" I can see that hitting will have a great chance to bust, but putting out more money doesn't seem right. I probably took 3 minutes thinking about this situation and just decide to hit, going against what I had taken to be correct strategy.

I don't really need to reveal what the results were, as they are irrelevant, but I would like to ask some members of the forum a few things. Does anyone else know the index for 7,7 v 8? If my index is correct, are we expecting the kind of results that I mentioned the majority of the time and just hoping that the dealer has a stiff?

PS: I just checked BJA3 and the EV for splitting vs hitting is actually pretty close, so I guess the index is probably correct, which makes me feel a lot better about the first splits, but worse about the hand I didn't split. However, now with this confirmation I won't question this index again, which is more important.

 

[21forme]

In HiLo the index is +5 for splitting in a DAS game. It's also BS in DD games (as is 6,6v7).

You gotta stick with the numbers and not try to rationalize your play. How many times have you doubled 7,4v6 in a big count and just KNEW you had a sure thing, but wind with a lousy hand, then the dealer flips a T and draws a 5?

 

[Gamblor]

Personally I never went out of my way to remember the split indexes, because I don't want to eat up cards at a high count, and I do want to eat them up at a low count. AA v A is the only exception (with a non-extreme index).

But your right, splitting 77 v 8 does seem unnatural, especially at a high count? Can't think of an intuitive reason why this is the right move, I assume its because its a defensive split.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Personally I never went out of my way to remember the split indexes, because I don't want to eat up cards at a high count, and I do want to eat them up at a low count. AA v A is the only exception (with a non-extreme index).

But your right, splitting 77 v 8 does seem unnatural, especially at a high count? Can't think of an intuitive reason why this is the right move, I assume its because its a defensive split.

It's an offensive split, and its value is based on doubling after splitting.

Your reasoning is right, this is a very risky play and its the kind of thing where the slope of the increased advantage goes up very slowly with count. I'd want to make sure I was playing an RA index before doing that. Also, the card-eating effect of splitting is significant too, especially in a DD game. I'd rather have another round than a split.

 

[SleightOfHand]

It's an offensive split, and its value is based on doubling after splitting.

Your reasoning is right, this is a very risky play and its the kind of thing where the slope of the increased advantage goes up very slowly with count. I'd want to make sure I was playing an RA index before doing that. Also, the card-eating effect of splitting is significant too, especially in a DD game. I'd rather have another round than a split.

I always choose RA indexes in favor of EV maximizing ones. But thats an interesting thought though... can the effect of card eating be incorporated into an index? Is the effect even significant enough to affect the index?

 

[Sucker]

It's an offensive split, and its value is based on doubling after splitting.

There is no count at which 7 vs. 8 is a favorite; therefore it's a DEFENSIVE split.

If the count is 0 and DAS is allowed:
Splitting 7s vs. 8 will yield a negative EV of about 16.5% of a bet on EACH hand (for a total expected loss of about 33% of one bet) even after including profits from double after split.
Keeping the hand as 14 and hitting yields a negative EV of about 37.5% of one bet. You SAVE about 4.5% of a bet by splitting.

 

[creeping panther]

Soh

Was LS allowed?

Interesting thread.

CP

 

[Sharky]

and as we know, splitting 77 v 8 is BS in S & DD...same for 66 v 7

 

[tthree]

There is no count at which 7 vs. 8 is a favorite; therefore it's a DEFENSIVE split.

If the count is 0 and DAS is allowed:
Splitting 7s vs. 8 will yield a negative EV of about 16.5% of a bet on EACH hand (for a total expected loss of about 33% of one bet) even after including profits from double after split.
Keeping the hand as 14 and hitting yields a negative EV of about 37.5% of one bet. You SAVE about 4.5% of a bet by splitting.

The index play is way above TC 0. It isnt even a defensive split at TC 0, its a stupid split. Automatic monkey had it right.

AM can you give me any other offensive splits or doubles that dont warrant the risk? I have a small bankroll and they are to costly for me. I would like to be able to either eliminate these or raise the index so I only take the bump in EV when it reaches a high enough threshold.

 

[BJgenius007]

Yesterday was the first time that I did not follow an index play and I am feeling pretty bad about it. I was playing at a store when I had a max bet out. I received 7,7 v 8. According to index sims that I ran a while back, the index for this play is +4 (Zen). The TC was around +8 so I split with little hesitation. I received another 7, and I split again. This time I am not feeling so good, and put out another max bet. 7 again! With 3 max bets already on the table, I am thinking to myself, "How is splitting 7s at a high count a better move? Unless I get lucky and get some small cards to double or an Ace, I am most likely getting 17s vs 18. I know that there is a problem with CVData regarding 8,8 v X when surrender is involved, maybe this is another one?" I can see that hitting will have a great chance to bust, but putting out more money doesn't seem right. I probably took 3 minutes thinking about this situation and just decide to hit, going against what I had taken to be correct strategy.

I don't really need to reveal what the results were, as they are irrelevant, but I would like to ask some members of the forum a few things. Does anyone else know the index for 7,7 v 8? If my index is correct, are we expecting the kind of results that I mentioned the majority of the time and just hoping that the dealer has a stiff?

PS: I just checked BJA3 and the EV for splitting vs hitting is actually pretty close, so I guess the index is probably correct, which makes me feel a lot better about the first splits, but worse about the hand I didn't split. However, now with this confirmation I won't question this index again, which is more important.

When TC is high, you split 77 against upcard 8. The question is how high is high?

This is an interesting case because Hi Lo and Omega II give you different results.

For Hi-Lo, you split 77 against 8 when TC = 1 or above. You stay when TC = 0 or below. (So Basic Strategy from Hi Lo perspective is to stay. You split only when TC is positive. You stay when TC is 0 or negative.)

For double precision Omega II (half Omega II), you split 77 when TC = -0.5 or above. You stay when TC = -1 or below. (So Basic Strategy from Omega II perspective is to split 77 against 8 as you split when TC is positive, 0 and -0.5.)

 

[blackriver]

automonkey, time for you to make a risk avervse, heat averse, card eating/perserving, ploppies at the table, drinks at the table, cirque du soleil, ethics, utility, nihilism, many universes, cinco de mayo, domino effect, humidity and inflation adjusted cartesian index for us. Headed to vegas soon, can have in 2 days please?

 

[Pelerus]

... can the effect of card eating be incorporated into an index? Is the effect even significant enough to affect the index?

I would think it would be more of a factor in double and single deck than shoe. If it's a close play and you are fairly certain that not splitting will give you an extra round, it seems likely that not splitting is correct - but I'm not sure if there's a way to easily quantify it into an index adjustment that applies to all situations.

 

[Friendo]

Horror at Re-Splitting Tens

I have a similar issue with re-splitting tens in enormous counts. It's the one play I just don't have the coconuts to make every time.

The count is mortal high when it's ten-splitting time, and so there will likely be max bets out, and more tens to cover those split ones. Once re-split, there will likely be even more paints to cover those tens.

The thought of the pit boss wandering by to check out my 3-4 hands of 20, with max bets out, does not give me a warm fuzzy.

I don't give a damn if they see me doubling A/8 against 6 or hitting soft 18 against 9, but I don't have a ready-made explanation for multiple split tens.

 

[tthree]

When TC is high, you split 77 against upcard 8. The question is how high is high?

This is an interesting case because Hi Lo and Omega II give you different results.

For Hi-Lo, you split 77 against 8 when TC = 1 or above. You stay when TC = 0 or below. (So Basic Strategy from Hi Lo perspective is to stay. You split only when TC is positive. You stay when TC is 0 or negative.)

For double precision Omega II (half Omega II), you split 77 when TC = -0.5 or above. You stay when TC = -1 or below. (So Basic Strategy from Omega II perspective is to split 77 against 8 as you split when TC is positive, 0 and -0.5.)

Hilo has aces included in the count that affects the sim. Omega II is ace neutral so the player should be side counting them. That probably makes the index stronger but the ace adjustment to the index for this match up would be small but ace rich is good for the player as far as splitting goes. This is one index that HILO probably does better than usual for.

 

[tthree]

I have a similar issue with re-splitting tens in enormous counts. It's the one play I just don't have the coconuts to make every time.

The count is mortal high when it's ten-splitting time, and so there will likely be max bets out, and more tens to cover those split ones. Once re-split, there will likely be even more paints to cover those tens.

The thought of the pit boss wandering by to check out my 3-4 hands of 20, with max bets out, does not give me a warm fuzzy.

I don't give a damn if they see me doubling A/8 against 6 or hitting soft 18 against 9, but I don't have a ready-made explanation for multiple split tens.

At first I thought you were incorrectly saying splitting tens when called for is a weak play but your issue is cover related. I guess if you play with a big enough spread and high min bet it might. Thats a big bump in EV to give up.

 

[Gamblor]

I would think it would be more of a factor in double and single deck than shoe. If it's a close play and you are fairly certain that not splitting will give you an extra round, it seems likely that not splitting is correct - but I'm not sure if there's a way to easily quantify it into an index adjustment that applies to all situations.

Not sure how to "indexify" it, but at a full table (6 players + dealer) I would roughly estimate for each car you not eat/eat, you increase the chance you get one more hand by +5%/-5%. Much much higher when your playing heads up.

 

[bj21abc]

Never had an index for this. So out of interest - couple of sims later (hi-lo floored)

Regular index: +4
RA index (RA ratio as low as 1.0): no split

So - think I'll keep hitting 77 vs 8....

D.

Yesterday was the first time that I did not follow an index play and I am feeling pretty bad about it. I was playing at a store when I had a max bet out. I received 7,7 v 8. According to index sims that I ran a while back, the index for this play is +4 (Zen). The TC was around +8 so I split with little hesitation. I received another 7, and I split again. This time I am not feeling so good, and put out another max bet. 7 again! With 3 max bets already on the table, I am thinking to myself, "How is splitting 7s at a high count a better move? Unless I get lucky and get some small cards to double or an Ace, I am most likely getting 17s vs 18. I know that there is a problem with CVData regarding 8,8 v X when surrender is involved, maybe this is another one?" I can see that hitting will have a great chance to bust, but putting out more money doesn't seem right. I probably took 3 minutes thinking about this situation and just decide to hit, going against what I had taken to be correct strategy.

I don't really need to reveal what the results were, as they are irrelevant, but I would like to ask some members of the forum a few things. Does anyone else know the index for 7,7 v 8? If my index is correct, are we expecting the kind of results that I mentioned the majority of the time and just hoping that the dealer has a stiff?

PS: I just checked BJA3 and the EV for splitting vs hitting is actually pretty close, so I guess the index is probably correct, which makes me feel a lot better about the first splits, but worse about the hand I didn't split. However, now with this confirmation I won't question this index again, which is more important.