Multiple hands bet sizing for risk/win rate...

M

meteomonk

Member
#1
#1
I'm curious what the general rules of thumb are for spreading onto multiple hands and the bet size of each. It is probably a difficult topic with many aspects but if anyone could answer these questions it would be much appreciated. I've been told that it decreases risk as well as win rate due to pushing more as one hand cancels out the other. but i'm sure this varies depending on the bet size alterations.

-----Spreading from one to two bets, bet size of each to maintain risk but increase win rate

-----Spreading from one to two bets, bet size of each to reduce risk but maintain win rate


-----Spreading from One to Three hands, bet size of each to maintain risk but increase win rate I know flash mentioned 2/3rds of you bet size for this instance in another post.

-----how would spreading to Two hands with the same bet spread say 10 units during high counts on both hands affect your win rate and risk??

Do any of you ever increase your number of hands during high counts or do you find that to be to much of a signal to surveilance and not worth the risk of attention?

How would the concept of bet sizing for multiple hands change if you started with that number of hands initially? Which would mean playing the same number say two or three hands during negative and positive counts, would you do the same spread??

Sorry about the many questions but i might as well ask them all on one post.

I've been doing a 1-10 spread on a 6 deck game and occasionally spread to two hands during high counts. I don't do it very often but i feel like i'm doing something rather risky and beneficial to my advantage. I do the full 10 units on both hands just because i feel like it isn't any more obvious to surveillance since i'm spreading to two hands anyway, but i was wondering how that would affect things, and if I should be doing this at all or more often.

thank you people and good times taking money!
 
SleightOfHand

SleightOfHand

Well-Known Member
#2
#2
Rule of thumb

Add 50% of the bet and spread to whatever you want to keep the same risk.
Example: Spread $100 to 2 hands of $75 or 3 hands of $50

Keep the bet and spread to whatever you want to keep the same win rate.
Example: Spread $100 to 2 hands of $50 or 3 hands of $33

Im not positive about the last one, but I'm fairly sure.
 
FLASH1296

FLASH1296

Well-Known Member
#3
#3
Actually 1 hand of X = 2 hands of .75X = 3 hands of .67X

This is not absolutely precise but certainly correct enough for everyday use.

Be forewarned: Every Pit Boss who has been on the job more than a week knows to have surveillance
run a "skills check" on you when you only seem to have 2 or more bets out a minority of the time.

Better, (by far), is to bet 2 hands all of the time and back down to one hand
only if you must, a quasi "wong-in-place" one might say.
 
FLASH1296

FLASH1296

Well-Known Member
#4
#4
"I've been doing a 1-10 spread on a 6 deck game and occasionally spread to two hands during high counts. I do the full 10 units on both hands just because i feel like it isn't any more obvious to surveillance since i'm spreading to two hands anyway, but i was wondering how that would affect things, and if I should be doing this at all or more often."

You are making huge errors on one or two fronts.

If you are bankrolled for a spread of 10-1 by betting 2 hands of 10 EACH, you are spreading 20-1, with only a partial INCREASE in "Risk Of Ruin"; BUT it is an increase in RISK nonetheless.

My suggestion is that you give us the grimy details of your game and we will compute your RISK for you. That means all of the rules, no. of decks, the count that you employ, typical penetration, and most importantly, your actual bankroll - meaning all of the money that you are ready, willing and able to LOSE, without it affecting you emotionally. Also, include where your home base is e.g. Las Vegas, A.C., Biloxi, etc.

The other problem, is that the Pit Critters and the EYE see a 20-1 spread and it is no leap of logic to see that you are only spreading that large when you have a nice clean advantage of perhaps 2%. Doh'

You are jeopardizing your BJ career for certain, and unless you are really flush with "benjamins", your bank account as well.
 
EasyRhino

EasyRhino

Well-Known Member
#8
#8
SleightOfHand said:
Actually, BJA3 pg 25, the optimal for 3 hands is 57%. Perhaps 67 was a typo? Either way, the 150% of bet/hands works fine ;)
Click to expand...
.70-.75 for two hands
.50-.60 for three hands

Yep, that's the rough number I operate with. The idea is that Risk of Ruin is kept about the same. So variance is increased, but win rate is increased to buttress it.

I don't usually end up playing three hands unless I'm in extreme card-eating circumstances. At most places I'm at, their either don't allow 3 hands, or the min bet is so high that it would be an overbet.
 
K

Kasi

Well-Known Member
#9
#9
FLASH1296 said:
...However, remember playing in real time requires quick estimations.
Click to expand...

Or, take as much as time as you need to get it right before you play.

What's "Better, (by far), is to bet 2 hands all of the time and back down to one hand only if you must, a quasi "wong-in-place" one might say. " mean?

Always spread in high counts as opposed to occasionally? Always spread when even at a 1 or 2 unit bet?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top