Double on 12 v. 2/3

[ThunderWalk]

Maybe this has been covered before, but a search didn't locate it.

Over the weekend, when a player at the table followed basic strategy and hit his 12 vs. a dealer's 2 or 3, she tells the player that she likes to double-down in that situation. Later, at another table, a different dealer announces that he not only doubles against a 2 or 3, but also 4s.

I know that around a third of the deck or shoe contains a 10 card, leaving the odds in favor of pulling something other than 22, but I swear, (maybe it's selective memory of bad events) more often than not when I hit 12 against a 2 or 3, I receive a queen or something similar, making me uneasy about doubling down.

Any wisdom?

 

[supercoolmancool]

You should base all of your playing decisions on basic strategy, and when counting, also use basic strategy deviations that are based on the count.

 

[ScottH]

My wisdom says do not double down with a hard 12 or higher!

 

[ChefJJ]

My wisdom says do not double down with a hard 12 or higher!

Yeah, I would have to say that you should never double on anything that can bust. At least the double hands as per BS and index deviations won't end up with you beating yourself!

 

[SecurityRisk]

The theory to many people is, I'm only going to take one card anyway, so I might as well double down. Doesn't make any sense to me.

Forgetting about counting, I have heard that if you stand on a 12 vs. 2, you have a 35% chance of winning. If you hit on 12 vs. 2, you have a 37% chance of winning. Both are pretty bad, but isn't 37% better than 35%? Might as well take the better odds.

But why double down? 37% means you're probably going to lose. Why would anyone want to lose twice as much money?

 

[rogue1]

also

Never mind it could affect the sacred order of the cards!

 

[EasyRhino]

A negative count could make you hit 12 vs 4, and a positive count could make you stand on 12 vs 2. But I'm not sure what it would take to double down. Probably exact knowledge of remaining cards in the deck. Preferably in order.

I did see a drunk trucker doubling 12 vs 2 regularly in Sparks. I think he lost every time he tried it, it was horrible.

 

[shadroch]

Depends on the circumstances.If you are in a casino where the dealer calls out to the pitboss when you double down for less,doing so on a 12vs. anything is an excellant way of convincing the boss that you are a fool and don't merit his attention.If you are betting $10,toss out an extra buck or two and proudly ask for one card only. A side benefit is that no one is likely to ask your advice after that,so its a double winner with only a slight loss of EV:devil:

 

[SystemsTrader]

I know that around a third of the deck or shoe contains a 10 card, leaving the odds in favor of pulling something other than 22, but I swear, (maybe it's selective memory of bad events) more often than not when I hit 12 against a 2 or 3, I receive a queen or something similar, making me uneasy about doubling down.

Any wisdom?

Yes, don't do it! Using a 6D S17 game as an example. While 12 v 2/3 is a losing hand either way it will cost you more if you double.
12 v 2 -.5074885 double
12 v 3 -.4666342 double
12 v 2 -.2537442 hit
12 v 3 -.2333170 hit

 

[ScottH]

Depends on the circumstances.If you are in a casino where the dealer calls out to the pitboss when you double down for less,doing so on a 12vs. anything is an excellant way of convincing the boss that you are a fool and don't merit his attention.If you are betting $10,toss out an extra buck or two and proudly ask for one card only. A side benefit is that no one is likely to ask your advice after that,so its a double winner with only a slight loss of EV:devil:

This is good advice but not for ThunderWalk it isn't. He is nowhere near the level to be thinking about this type of play. Right now this is just going to give him bad ideas!

Although I wouldnt say to do this with 12 vs anything. You'd want to do it in a situation when you know you'll only want one more card, and it wont cost you very much. The play that I would use would be double for less on a 16v7. You are never going to wish you could hit again, and it won't cost you that much. You just wouldnt do it on a 12 vs 10 or something because you may want another card.

Some bad doubles are worse than others, so you want to be selective to which ones you use when using this cover strategy. They all look equally bad to people watching, but some cost less than others, so use the cheapest ones.

 

[ChefJJ]

This is good advice but not for ThunderWalk it isn't. He is nowhere near the level to be thinking about this type of play. Right now this is just going to give him bad ideas!

Although I wouldnt say to do this with 12 vs anything. You'd want to do it in a situation when you know you'll only want one more card, and it wont cost you very much. The play that I would use would be double for less on a 16v7. You are never going to wish you could hit again, and it won't cost you that much. You just wouldnt do it on a 12 vs 10 or something because you may want another card.

Some bad doubles are worse than others, so you want to be selective to which ones you use when using this cover strategy. They all look equally bad to people watching, but some cost less than others, so use the cheapest ones.

You'd think that the best bad-double-cover move would be 12 v 2/3. You have less of a chance of busting than with 16, and even if you did just hit the 12 out, you're not going to take another vs. a 2/3. Just a thought, since you're looking out for TW.

Good luck

 

[zengrifter]

You'd think that the best bad-double-cover move would be 12 v 2/3.

No, doubling FOR LESS (much less) w/ 16v7 is the best one. zg

 

[ScottH]

No, doubling FOR LESS (much less) w/ 16v7 is the best one. zg

Exactly why the example I used was 16v7, since I learned that from zengrifter himself way back in the day.

 

[ScottH]

You'd think that the best bad-double-cover move would be 12 v 2/3. You have less of a chance of busting than with 16, and even if you did just hit the 12 out, you're not going to take another vs. a 2/3. Just a thought, since you're looking out for TW.

Good luck

Somewhere out on the internet there is a chart of the cost of mistakes. Then you could see just how much each play costs you. I dont know where to find it, but all you need to know is just one. You dont want to do that play all the time, and when you do it make sure it's for as little as possible. I once had a 50 dollar bet out and I doubled for 1 dollar more. It's usually good for a laugh, and some decent cover.

 

[Preston]

No, doubling FOR LESS (much less) w/ 16v7 is the best one. zg

One time I was playing at casino that let me bet real quarters (as in 25 cent pieces). I did a few of the 'double for less' plays with almost no -EV.

The pit boss thought I was a moron, the dealer thought it was funny.

Especially when I'd yank a 21.

 

[Renzey]

Doubling on Stiffs

About the cheapest stiff-doubles-for-less as a cover play are 12 vs. 2, 3 and 4. Doubling for say one tenth of the bet costs from 2.1% to 2.5% of the initial bet. A $20 bet followed up with a $2 double costs about fifty cents total for any of them.

Doubling with 16 vs. 7 for an extra $2 costs about 80 cents.

Doubling down with 12 is such a notorious earmark of a bad player that I think it's very cheap and useful cover -- particularly since its often announced to the floor, often without the fact that it's for way less. However, it also probably requires other ploppy looking moves to fit in.

 

[ihate17]

Yes, I double 12 vs 2 or 3 sometimes

But I always double for less, exactly $1.
There are a few casinos that I play in where the procedure is for the dealer to call out "doubling a hard 12" and the pit looks for a distance but most importantly really does not look at my bet or how much I am doubling for. For the most part the dealers and players get it. I am taking only one card so for fun I am doubling my $200 bet for just another $1. If it has bought me any extra time with these pits then it has been well worth the slight hit to my EV.

ihate17

 

[ChefJJ]

About the cheapest stiff-doubles-for-less as a cover play are 12 vs. 2, 3 and 4. Doubling for say one tenth of the bet costs from 2.1% to 2.5% of the initial bet. A $20 bet followed up with a $2 double costs about fifty cents total for any of them.

Doubling with 16 vs. 7 for an extra $2 costs about 80 cents.

Doubling down with 12 is such a notorious earmark of a bad player that I think it's very cheap and useful cover -- particularly since its often announced to the floor, often without the fact that it's for way less. However, it also probably requires other ploppy looking moves to fit in.

So, you say that 12 v 2/3 is a better "bad double" than 16 v 7. Not that I am going to employ any of that with any regularity whatsoever, but why is there a difference in the "math"? Just curious.

Good luck

 

[NDN21]

I double for less on those plays when the count is high. Usually I double for two dollars more. I will lose one hand if it means I will be able to be dealt an extra 6-7 hands when the count is high.

My reason? To get rid of the ploppies so I can have those high cards for myself!!! It usually works.

And it's cover.:cool2:

I also say things like "the dealer drew a 2, everybody knows that the dealer's ace!!!". I know it is wrong but they do not know that I know it is wrong. It makes me sound like a ploppy who has no idea what to do.

"Split those four's every time" but only when someone else has the pair of 4's. They never notice when I have four's.

 

[Bojack1]

Although I agree it can be an okay cover move to double a 12 vs 2 or 3, I'm not a big fan of it. Doubling for much less than your original bet is something that draws attention to you. You will be hard pressed to find a ploppy play this way. They will double for less sometimes, but never for 1 or 2 percent of their bet. Ploppy mentality is usually one of trying to make money even when the proper play isn't there. So they try to force a double where it just doesn't belong, sometimes for less, but almost never for less than 1/2 of their bet, and usually its even closer. What a ploppy is more likely to do is double on a A,8 vs 5 or 6, and most times for the full amount. Now that is a better cover play to use when the when the count calls for it. All dealers and pit personnel know its wrong to double a soft 19, but its not an uncommon occurence with ploppys, more so than doubling for a dollar with a $20 or even a $200 bet out there. And given even a true count of 1 to 1.5 using hi lo its the right move. So its a strong play and natural cover, that to me is more like it.