4,4 with DAS?

[moo321]

If I can double after splitting, should I always split 4's against 5-6, or should I double when I hit my index for 8 v. 5 or 6?

Seems like in positive counts you'd be less likely to catch your 5 or 6 to double after the split, and more likely to win by doubling the 8.

 

[bj bob]

If I can double after splitting, should I always split 4's against 5-6, or should I double when I hit my index for 8 v. 5 or 6?

Seems like in positive counts you'd be less likely to catch your 5 or 6 to double after the split, and more likely to win by doubling the 8.

I've encountered this very same problem and it's a rather simple answer, i.e. if you dd you've in effect ended the hand. One card and that's it. If you split, there is the possibility of catching more 4's and thus the chance of exposing more bets at a + count, making the split scenario more profitable, not to mention the advantage of multiple hits on each 4.

 

[sagefr0g]

example for a six deck das game

it wasn't said what number of decks, but here is something for a six deck games. note: ev split vs double.....

 

[jack.jackson]

With Ho2 and Ao2,(L2) the indices are virtually the same, when DAS is allowed.

44v6/0>

44v5/+3>

44v4/+7>

If DAS is not allowed treat 44, as hard 8.

The same thing happens with 66v2.

For example, in a neutral count, (DAS) split 66v2, but you would hit it, if DAS were not allowed.

Regardless if it's DAS or not, you will ALAWAYS split 66v2 opposed to standing at the same index you would hit with 12v2. What, say what???lol.

 

[moo321]

So, is there an index at which we double instead of splitting?

 

[jack.jackson]

So, is there an index at which we double instead of splitting?

No! Splitting always precedes, when DAS is allowed. (The higher the count, the more likely you are to split verses double)

Use the standard index(s) for doubling hard8(44) when DAS is not allowed

 

[moo321]

No! Splitting always precedes, when DAS is allowed. (The higher the count, the more likely you are to split verses double)

Use the standard index(s) for doubling hard8(44) when DAS is not allowed

I wonder why that is. It must be the uncounted 7, which is your most valuable card to get on a split. Ace probably helps, too.

 

[sagefr0g]

I wonder why that is. It must be the uncounted 7, which is your most valuable card to get on a split. Ace probably helps, too.

it looks like your on to something:

 

[FLASH1296]

In a DAS game you always prefer splitting by a wide-margin.

However, for very advanced players, if you are WAY above your index for splitting,
you have the opportunity to make a Risk-Averse play and double down.

The explanation for this is fairly complex, but it has to do with reducing
risk in a situation where the difference in profit making the
split preferable over the Hit or Double is small,
but requires you to invest twice the amount of money for
only a small increase in profit.

 

[moo321]

In a DAS game you always prefer splitting by a wide-margin.

However, for very advanced players, if you are WAY above your index for splitting,
you have the opportunity to make a Risk-Averse play and double down.

The explanation for this is fairly complex, but it has to do with reducing
risk in a situation where the difference in profit making the
split preferable over the Hit or Double is small,
but requires you to invest twice the amount of money for
only a small increase in profit.

Ahh, the risk averse index. Any ideas where the risk averse index might be located?

 

[FLASH1296]

This is of academic interest only as this play (involving both holding a specific pair - and being at a VERY high count) will be an issue for you maybe once every 2 or 3 years - if you play enough.

More importantly you must understand that in a DAS game it is ALWAYS better to make the OPTIMAL play which is the play that maximizes your profit - namely SPLITTING -- unless you have concerns re: your Risk of Ruin.

I believe that there is a mention of this precise question of 4-4 vs. 8 in Blackjack Attack, in the short section where the author modifies the old "Illustrious Eighteen" to become the "Catch-22" with 5 indices changed to Risk-Averse indices.

 

[moo321]

I guess you probably wouldn't get close to the risk averse index at least until you had split several times and kept getting 4's. And you started with a max bet out.