open two or three hands ?
- Thread starter beyondbj
- Start date
On a purely "cards-used-per-dollars-bet" basis, it's most efficient to play 1 hand heads up, 2 hands with 1 to 2 other players, and 3 hands with 3 or 4 other players. Doing that will get down the most money per card used thru positive counts (as per Don Schlessinger's BJA III, pg. 26). But - there are two conflicting indications to this simplification.
The first is that if you're playing with one other player, the dealer's hand's average number of cards will contain less than the usual 2.7, since he won't play his hand out whenever you both bust. This would make you lean towards playing fewer hands.
Yet, conversely, even playing heads up, I believe Norm finds that two hands yield a better result than one hand. Mysteriously, my own sims with a different software also show that same result. This would make you lean towards playing more hands. I don't think anyone has the explanation.
So -- it's a puzzle!
The first is that if you're playing with one other player, the dealer's hand's average number of cards will contain less than the usual 2.7, since he won't play his hand out whenever you both bust. This would make you lean towards playing fewer hands.
Yet, conversely, even playing heads up, I believe Norm finds that two hands yield a better result than one hand. Mysteriously, my own sims with a different software also show that same result. This would make you lean towards playing more hands. I don't think anyone has the explanation.
So -- it's a puzzle!
Last edited:
I think it was Delaware Park where I was surprised to see 7 betting spots on the table last week. Talk about a crowded table. If a full table is postulated, isn't a 6 player table better than either a 7 or 5 player table? I've read that 5 spots gives a little house edge, but I'm not sure about 7. Could you clear this up?
Renzey
Sorry, Strike that statement! I see it turns out that even if the dealer's hand contains an average of just 2.0 cards (requiring that she never draws), you still get down more dollars-per-cards-used by playing 2 hands with 1 other player (that's going with the 73% rule).
Perhaps the only remaining dilemma is what to do in a positve count when you're heads up:
A - go with the simple arithmetic.
B - go with the sims
Here, if the dealer's hand would contain the full 2.7 cards, playing one hand would get down $100 x 9.63 hands, or $963 while running thru a slug of 52 positive cards. Playing two hands will get down 2 x $73 x 6.42 rounds, or $937 total.
If the dealer's average cards were all the way down to an unrealistic 2.0, because of being heads up, the figures go to $1106 for one hand and $1025 for two.
Anybody?
Sorry, Strike that statement! I see it turns out that even if the dealer's hand contains an average of just 2.0 cards (requiring that she never draws), you still get down more dollars-per-cards-used by playing 2 hands with 1 other player (that's going with the 73% rule).
Perhaps the only remaining dilemma is what to do in a positve count when you're heads up:
A - go with the simple arithmetic.
B - go with the sims
Here, if the dealer's hand would contain the full 2.7 cards, playing one hand would get down $100 x 9.63 hands, or $963 while running thru a slug of 52 positive cards. Playing two hands will get down 2 x $73 x 6.42 rounds, or $937 total.
If the dealer's average cards were all the way down to an unrealistic 2.0, because of being heads up, the figures go to $1106 for one hand and $1025 for two.
Anybody?
Last edited: