Double hands

BradRod

Well-Known Member
#1
I made the mistake recently of playing at a table where each player has 2 betting circles and so the option of playing 1 or 2 spots at will ( without having to occcupy another seat and without having to bet double the minimum bet ). Of course ploppies may complain about the in and out effects on the "natural" flow of the cards.

I realized after a while that this was no place for an advantage player to be sitting. What happens is that in effect you are at a table with up to 10 other players. This may be good for getting through the low card part of the shoe more quickly but when the count does get high you look out over a table of sadly under utilized faces and tens. This became real clear to me when in one hand there were pairs and doubles dealt to most of the full table. Nearly none of the players wound up making a decent hand out of all those opportunities in a high count - - except of course for the dealer who wiped everyone out. When play in tha hand was over the count had dropped to mediocre.

Has anyone else encountered this table layout ? Anyone know anything about the math of playing with 10 other players. It seems to me to dillute the gsme so that blackjacks occur less often, bust outs are a more frequent event, and splits and doubles are unsuccesful. Is this just my subjective observation or is there some math to back it up ?

When I moved to a regular table my performance improved right away.
 

Sun runner

Well-Known Member
#2
RE: ten spots

> Anyone know anything about the math of playing with 10 other players.

Guessing you are talking shoes. I've never seen the layout you refer to but I can't imagine a SD/DD game on it. If so, the ten spots would make a SD/DD game unplayable (generally.)

I'm not long on math skills but I'd say the only down side to playing with ten other players in a shoe game is the overall slow down in the play. I'm thinking you should still get your share of naturals and am hoping your improvement in play, when you switched off that table, was either due to selective memory or the positive EV coming to you quicker.

We'll see.
 
#3
On a game like this...

... you would like to bet 4-hands in +counts. Notwithstanding, your beleif that your +count advantage was somehow negated in the example given is not scientific. zg
 
#4
True Count Theorem

It would indicate to me that the count is equally likely to get better or worse between the time you put your bet down and the end of the hand. In illustrative terms, if the count is good, the dealer can grab a handful of cards from anywhere in the shoe and and start dealing, with equal likelihood of dealing high cards. So I wouldn't worry about the math changing if you're counting on a game like that.

They have a couple of 12-spot tables like that at Mohegan, and I like them for backcounting, simply because the cards move faster than normal and there's less time waiting and watching. Also less time playing (because good counts evaporate quicker) which gives you some protection from heat, when there is heat.
 
#5
are 10 spots better than 12?

Where I play they have 6 sets of two spots, which is good and bad, when it is busy, it is easier to find an open spot because they will only let you play a maximum of your two spots, instead of some idiot hogging 2 or 3 of the 6 spots on the old layout. I also go back and forth between 1 and 2 spots(especially fun right after the dealer breaks) to get rid of some or all of the other players. When its slow, it's great because you can play 2 spots at $10 or $15 instead of having to bet 2 hands of $25. Back counting is even more boring waiting for all the decisions and its hard to see all the hands to count.

I feel the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. By the way, I don't know if it had anything to do with it or not, but about a week before they started phasing in the new layouts, I suggested it to the pit because it was so hard to play 2 hands at a time. Then viola, I got what I wished for. How often does that happen?

Dewayne
 
Top