The single dumbest play I have ever seen

[Brock Windsor]

Well, you wouldn't stand on a seven...

If you KNOW the next card is a 10 you should stand on a seven total against any dealer up card except 7. All other considerations being equal.
BW
p.s. single dumbest play I've seen was doubling 16 vs 10 with $100 out for a 26. Perhaps he was trying to turn the pit's eye in which case it worked quite convincingly. That guy acted, gambled and played every bit the absolute fool. Of course he was soon parted with his money.

 

[callipygian]

If you KNOW the next card is a 10 you should stand on a seven total against any dealer up card except 7.

Why should 7 be any different, unless you're playing with no hole card?

 

[Brock Windsor]

You don't know the hole card, you only know the NEXT card. Guessing the 7 likely hits vs a 7 up card because of the high probability the dealer has 17. Those numbers are from Grosjean's book, not my calculations.
BW

 

[Sonny]

Hey Zg, Want to join me at the Flamingo and team up against that fantastic single deck game?

I'll join you too. Does the Flamingo SD game still pay a whopping 6:5? :laugh:

-Sonny-

 

[SD Padres]

Thanks. Actually, I'm 26 and up until now been a BS player but I've decided to "take the plunge" into card counting now that I actually have money to set aside for a bankroll. My first post was actually a semi-true story except that I was of course the "moron who hit A7 against a 9" and the "AP" was a ploppy extraordinare who mumbled that I was an idiot then stormed off the table after that hand (to his "credit" I made up the standing on 7) and it was a shoe game at Foxwoods. I look forward to getting insight from this forum.

Yeah...you are a BS player for sure! :laugh:

 

[markhsp]

...based on the results of my 13 hand computer simulation

13 hands? That's not enough simulation to draw any kind of conclusion...

 

[Thunder]

Word of advice... Never lie. It's -EV in the long run.

 

[zengrifter]

I'll join you too. Does the Flamingo SD game still pay a whopping 6:5? :laugh:

-Sonny-

Yes, but it becomes an advantage when you track the FoC index. zg

 

[zengrifter]

13 hands? That's not enough simulation to draw any kind of conclusion...

Thats more than enough if you use fractal-compression analysis - because the microcosm IS the macrocosm - get it? zg

 

[standard toaster]

Thanks. Actually, I'm 26 and up until now been a BS player but I've decided to "take the plunge" into card counting now that I actually have money to set aside for a bankroll. My first post was actually a semi-true story except that I was of course the "moron who hit A7 against a 9" and the "AP" was a ploppy extraordinare who mumbled that I was an idiot then stormed off the table after that hand (to his "credit" I made up the standing on 7) and it was a shoe game at Foxwoods. I look forward to getting insight from this forum.

whats going on... why would you make make up a story for your first post about a bad beat and the dumbest player in the world hitting his a7 against a dealer 9... tracking the flow of cards and the blackjack gods...then someone says hitting the 18 was the right thing to do and all fo a sudden you were the idiot! but of course now the idiot was making the right play making you not such an idiot at all. idk if you could have been just a bs strategy player... I have never even heard of the Foc index and if you went into detail on it, im sure you were using it. you even gave numbers!

Just tell the truth
I cant really trust a single oen of your posts now

 

[standard toaster]

I am, but I'm a different breed of AP than most of the posters here. I don't buy into that "card counting" and "shuffle tracking" and "hole carding" mularkey. I however excel at calculating the flow of card index. This guy's insane hit on A7 caused it to go from +267 to -389, so I had to on hard 7 as a "short term tactical disadvantage play" to get the gaming gods back on my side. Besides, I knew I was a big favorite to win anyway because I know that the dealer busts 61.54% of the time when showing 5 based on the results of my 13 hand computer simulation (in fact, that's probably a conservative estimate, seeing as how I used the absolute unluckiest number of trials.) I didn't do so well last time dropping that $2700, but I'll be back in Vegas in no time to crush those single deck games on the Strip. They don't call it the "party pit" at the Flamingo for nothing!

Woah wait I missed this one... The dealer busting 61.54% fof the time does no matter at all. Over the long run the dealer will bust a certain percentage but in a single shoe the dealer can win every single one of them. It would not suprise me if he busted 6% of the time or even 90% of the time. A 13 hand computer simulation is about as usefull as me flipping a coin to tell me if im going to win that hand or not. you need a simulation with millions and millions of hands say a minimum of 500,000,000. I would suggest not going back to vegas any time soon to try and win your money back its really not a good idea. Dont stand on a 7 unless your holecarding like a true ap because there are no blackjack gods and if they do exist they are not on your side. the casino has much more to offer to them in sacrafice.

 

[ihate17]

Let us say you were hole carding----you still HIT!

Well, you wouldn't stand on a seven...

The hole cardcarder knows that the dealer has a stiff but he does not know the next 1,2, or 3 cards to be dealt next. Without knowing if the dealer will bust or not and knowing that he can not bust by hitting, the holecarder should hit.

ihate17

 

[bj bob]

I'll join you too. Does the Flamingo SD game still pay a whopping 6:5? :laugh:

-Sonny-

Now Sonny, there you go bursting everyone's bubble. I was even all set to book my flight on the Enterprise and join Zg.

 

[callipygian]

Word of advice... Never lie. It's -EV in the long run.

Agreed.

I have never even heard of the Foc index

I assume FoC = flow of cards = Sacred Flow.

 

[standard toaster]

Agreed.



I assume FoC = flow of cards = Sacred Flow.

Ah which is why I immediatley remove it from my memory... useless

 

[bjhack]

Thanks. Actually, I'm 26 and up until now been a BS player but I've decided to "take the plunge" into card counting now that I actually have money to set aside for a bankroll. My first post was actually a semi-true story except that I was of course the "moron who hit A7 against a 9" and the "AP" was a ploppy extraordinare who mumbled that I was an idiot then stormed off the table after that hand (to his "credit" I made up the standing on 7) and it was a shoe game at Foxwoods. I look forward to getting insight from this forum.

Has everyone actually been reading this thread? I love it! Kudos to gordon5432!

 

[EasyRhino]

Wow, I don't think I've seen this much sarcasm get soo missed.

... but seriously, has a FoC index ever been mentioned anywhere before this thread?

 

[cedgarnolan]

Cause you to lose?

"Not only did his idiotic play cause everyone at the table to lose..."

If in fact the cards are in random order, his bad play could just have easily caused everybody to win or a correct play might have caused everyone to lose.

Of course we can always go back after the fact and see what might have occurred if some guy hadn't done thus and so. That assumes that God intended for everyone to win and had set the deck for that to happen.

The only thing worse than a bad player is one who goes on a fault finding mission.

Think about it. I deal with this crap on a daily basis.

 

[FLASH1296]

Truly horrid plays

Other than absurd but legal plays, the worst play likely to be seen other than standing on a Soft 17 vs. a dealer 7 would likely be a failure to split EIGHTS vs. a dealer SEVEN in a DAS game or surrendering any 12 against anything or doubling down on a hard 12 vs. anything. The latter is popular among some Chinese players.

 

[rarensu39]

that's a little racist flash haha. racial profiling haha

but this past weekend i was in vegas and i saw a guy double down a 13 (to 19) and win. a deck or 2 later, he doubles down a 16 (to 20) and wins!

wth?!!?!?