Playing two hands versus one?

P

PokerJunky

Well-Known Member
Is there an advantage of playing two hands versus one?

The only thing I can think about is that bankroll fluctuations should be minimized given that in some rounds the loss in one hand offsets the other. I do understand if the dealer gets hot, two hands will magnify the affect of my losses as well as when the dealer gets cold, magnify the affect of my wins.

I am just curious to here people's opinions.
 
PokerJunky said:
Is there an advantage of playing two hands versus one?

The only thing I can think about is that bankroll fluctuations should be minimized given that in some rounds the loss in one hand offsets the other. I do understand if the dealer gets hot, two hands will magnify the affect of my losses as well as when the dealer gets cold, magnify the affect of my wins.

I am just curious to here people's opinions.
Click to expand...

This has been discussed before on this forum. I think the common opinion is that there really is no advantage or disadvantage to playing two hands. The edge the house enjoys is not altered at all.

If it adds to your excitement of playing, then go for it.

I have used this ploy in the past to make sure that I don't get a person sitting next to me who is obnoxious. If she's pretty enough (LOL) I'll pull my bet and let her sit down. Seriously, I have done this and held the spot until someone I've played at a table with before comes along.
 
My only problem with playing multiple hands is that you have to double or triple the minimums to do it. I also typically think of it as a flag that someone is counting. However, I have no idea if the pit sees it that way.

The advantages to counters are that it "eats" cards when the count is negative; and when the count is positive, they get more hands played at the higher count. For example, if there are three players on a table, each playing one hand, the one who is counting gets 1/3 of the hands dealt at the high count. However, if he spreads to two hands when the count is high, he gets 1/2 of the hands dealt at that count.

Of course the notion of "eating cards" is somewhat offset by the fact that you eat those cards at a higher minimum bet than you would if you were playing a single hand only.

The best strategy I have seen (and used a few times) is to bring someone to the table with you who will play the second hand under your direction. If I can get my wife to play, I bankroll her and "advise" her. The pit is fine with it; and I get to play two hands, both with the regular table minimum.
 
Thanks for the input...

Typically, in the casinos I have played in AC there is no requirement to double your minimum. I aware that there are some that require you to double your minimum (in these instances, I probably play one hand)...
 
PokerJunky said:
Thanks for the input...

Typically, in the casinos I have played in AC there is no requirement to double your minimum. I aware that there are some that require you to double your minimum (in these instances, I probably play one hand)...
Click to expand...

Where I've seen double minimum bets required is mostly at the very low limit $3 tables. However, many of the $5 tables also require double minimum bets for two spots.


AmeriStar in Kansas City requires double for two spots on their $3 tables. They require 5x or $15 for 3 spots. They require no additional bet at all on the $5 tables and will let you play up to 3 spots.

The $3 tables up at AmeriStar, they try to keep open for those who have never played before or who are at least learning. I find them rather fun to play at. Especially if you get a table full of folks who are just wanting to have fun. You can still bet up to $100 on these $3 tables so most folks could satisify their need for greed if they don't mind the hooting, hollering, high fiveing (and the dealer gets involved in these too!) and general nonsense. I sort of do enjoy it! One thing I'll definitely say about the $3 tables...you'll learn all about things you never though of before...things like doubling always on hard 12...splitting 5's, doubling BJs. You'll see it all there <LOL>
 
I almost never inquire about playing multiple hands; but when I have, it has been at $5 tables in Vegas. I think I remember something at one of the places about double for two spots, triple for three, etc. I'll have to check on the situation in AC in a couple of weeks. Maybe I'll try two spots there.
 
I don't play BJ in the US. I have only played in BC, Canada and only since they opened a casino in my city. Our rules are different than in the States (they aren't very good for the players). The casino in my city only has continuous shufflers (at least at the $5-$500 tables; I have not been to the higher tables). The dealer doesn't have a hole card; they take their second card after all the players have their hands done.

The thing that I have noticed since playing there is that the players who bet on two spots seem to win a lot more money than a player playing one spot. I sat beside a guy who played 2 spots and he started with $200 (same as I) and he won over $500 profit. I only had $100 profit. I took advantage of the doubles and increasing my bets as he did. The only difference that I could see was when he lost one hand he would most of the time win the second hand. Whereas, when I lost a hand, that was it, I never won or broke even on the round. The next time I go I'm going to try playing 2 spots and see what happens. But, if the game is in favour of the dealer, it won't matter how many spots you play. So, I'll only do this if the game is more favourable to us players.
 
2 Spots

If you play in game that favors casino, and using just Basic Strategy, you will lose money over the long run no matter what. If you bet 2 spots you will just lose more money in given period of time.

This is what math says

House advantage 0.4% (just example)
Every time you put bet in the circle you should lose 0.4% of your bet (this is on average) of course you can't lose 0.4% of your bet in one time. So over the long period of time you will lose .4% of wagered money. Since this obviously has accumulative effect your money will be gone. More you play more you lose.

On top of everything casino has unlimited bankroll , and yours is limited. Bad strike will kill you even when you have edge (when you count cards) if your bankroll is not big enough.

That player that was betting two spots was just experiencing positive strike, that's all.

I would avoid CSM if I were you. Internet offers same thing, so you can play from comfort from your own home, plus you get some bonus.

Read this it has something to do with CSM
http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=302
 
BJStanko said:
If you play in game that favors casino, and using just Basic Strategy, you will lose money over the long run no matter what. If you bet 2 spots you will just lose more money in given period of time.

This is what math says

That player that was betting two spots was just experiencing positive strike, that's all.

I would avoid CSM if I were you. Internet offers same thing, so you can play from comfort from your own home, plus you get some bonus.
Click to expand...

Well, I played 2 spots yesterday when the table was doing well and I made the most money I ever had in one sitting. If the table is going the players way, why not play two hands? Just because the math says not to you play one hand? I rarely lost both hands; I broke even where if I had played one hand I would have lost my bet. I know that this was luck; it doesn't happen every time. This was the first time I played two hands. I have noticed the players that won more money than I ever had, played two hands and some played three. I would only do this if I was winning often.

I think it looks similar to increasing ones bet. If things are going my way I usually increase my bet. But if things are going the dealers way, I don't increase my bet. The same with playing two spots. I don't see that much of a difference.

I do know if I only played one hand yesterday, I would maybe have made +$100 instead of +$600. If you say that I would/could with one spot, yes, I agree if I had a lot more luck. The same spot didn't get all the wins for me yesterday. So, I would have busted a lot more hands than won.

There are two sides to this issue. Everyone has their own opinions. Who's right?

I would avoid the CSM tables but that's all there are up here from my understanding. I don't count cards anyway, I just play Basic Strategy. I have tried online BJ with some luck. But, I don't really trust them; they can easily program the game to give the dealer better cards than you and who would know for sure? Sometimes I think that these online sites program the game to favour the dealer almost 100% when the site has lost a certain amount of money. Then when they recoupe their losses they then program the game to favour the player most. Paranoid, eh? I prefer playing in land based casinos because I like interacting with people. I play BJ for fun.
 
OK but how......

....do you know that table is going your way?

Playing 1 or 2 spots doesn't make any difference. If you play two spots you will just win more if you are experiencing winning strike, and of course the same thing with losing, you will lose more.

Nobody has ability to predict future, and nobody knows when table is going to go your way.

Play for one year, keep records of wagered money , your bankroll, wins and losses and at the end you will find out the truth.
 
Last edited:
BJStanko said:
....do you know that table is going your way?

Playing 1 or 2 spots doesn't make any difference. If you play two spots you will just win more if you are experiencing winning strike, and of course the same thing with losing, you will lose more.

Nobody has ability to predict future, and nobody knows when table is going to go your way.

Play for one year, keep records of wagered money , your bankroll, wins and losses and at the end you will find out the truth.
Click to expand...

You're obviously not reading my post very well.

I said I know it was luck. But, I won more money than if I had played one hand.

I can tell if the table is going the players way by how often the dealer busts or goes below most of our hands. I played today and the dealer didn't bust many hands and when I had 20 he would get 21. When I doubled my hand I would draw a 2 or 3 and the dealer wouldn't bust so he would win. Anyone could see that things were in the favour of the dealer today. So, guess what, I played one spot. I still lost all my money. But not as much as I won yesterday :) So, no, I can't predict what cards will come up but I can tell how things are going for me. I'm not one who puts 4 or 5 chips down when I'm down in hopes of recouping my losses and I wouldn't play 2 spots when the dealer often wins!

I just figure there's no real harm in playing 2 spots when the table wins more than the dealer.

I am keeping records and so far it's looking good. I plan on reviewing how things are after a year. But, if I am at a loss, I don't think it has anything to do with playing one spot or two. It's all about if luck is on my side. There's really no sense in card counting at this casino as you guys say with CSM's you can't. So I wouldn't be able to have this slight advantage; but it would still be about luck.
 
Ok

.You said: "I can tell if the table is going the players way by how often the dealer busts or goes below most of our hands".

This is what we call big time hunch.

1 or 2 spots doesn't make any difference.
Playing against CSM you just can't beat the house. Even in normal hand dealt game if odds are against you can't win. Rule, math law.

Just because you doubled down and were dealt 2 or 3 doesn't mean that table is not going your way. Or just because dealer beat you with his 21 against your 20 you assume that table is not going your way.

That theory is not valid. Just put it this way......if what you say is correct than many people would make lots of money doing the same thing

The best you can do is play accurate basic strategy and that's it.
Playing 2 spots will just drain your bankroll faster. So better even play only one spot because in that case you will definitely last longer.
 
I think we're on a different wave length here.

I'm not saying anything about playing 2 spots everytime you sit at a table. I keep getting the impression that you think I'm saying to play 2 spots every time!

At the table I was at yesterday, the dealer was not busting many hands; not even her 3-6's. And she would get many BJ's when her 10 is up. So, by MY standards this means that the table is not going my way. If you think that the table is going your way in this situation, I guess that's your right to think it. So, I for sure will only play one hand and usually place only one bet. But, on Saturday, the dealer I had was busting left right and centre. Then I decided to play 2 spots and did very well. Near the end of my play things were going the dealers way (she wasn't busting anymore) so I played 1 spot until I played out the chips I left on the table (I pocketed my winnings in 100's so I wouldn't touch them) and then went home. I don't see anything wrong with this kind of play. I wouldn't play 2 spots if the dealer wasn't busting at all (as was the case yesterday). I don't get why you don't understand what I'm getting at. It must be the "Venus and Mars" thing. Card counting isn't a 100% sure thing either.
 
Assuming no card counting

I think BJStanko's point is that there is no way for you to know that things will continue to go your way.

The cards are in random order. The past does not predict the future.

Lots of people have trouble with randomness, so they try to impose some kind of order on it. This is where the "flow of the cards" comes from, for example. And the feeling that things are going your way, so they will continue to go your way.
 
Martian Men Vs. Venetian Women

I think you put it best cyclingimpie when you said:

"It must be the "Venus and Mars" thing

I'm sorry to say but women just seem to go off hunches more than men. I don't understand the idea of "things seem to be going my way, so I should put more money on the table now" philosophy. That is a quick and easy way to lose a lot of money at this game. The reality of it is that cards don't have personality or care whether you just lost 8 in a row or won 8 in a row. Some nights it may seem that you just can't go wrong and every double down is coming up roses, and every fourth hand is a BJ, but there is no way to predict that your string of good luck will continue. The only sure-fire thing we have is card counting where it is proven we have a mathematical advantage over the house in certain situations. Does this mean that we will always win? Hell no... but its a lot more proven winning strategy than using hunches and voodoo magic to dictate your betting schemes.
 
<<<<LOL>>>>

First of all, I think there is some merit in virtually all the comments made in this thread. It is true of course, you cannot base future events based on what has happened in the past when it comes to the fall of cards from a randomly shuffled deck.

But WAIT.....isn't that exactly what Card Counting is based on? :laugh: The difference is that Card Counting is Objective. It is based on the KNOWN composition (or decomposition!) of the deck....a premise that cannot be employed with CSMs.

I've seen a lot of money both won and lost using various streak betting systems and that is what they are based on.....the determination of the next bet being based on what happened in the previous hand(s).

Where Cyclinggimpe plays, CSMs are all they have.

So with advantage play out of the equation, that leaves Basic Strategy as the only weapon. This pretty much dictates that one should pick a number and bet that amount FLAT for the entire session depending on the blackjacks and good double and split opportunities to keep them close to even according to the percentages and pray that variance falls in favor of the player.

I personally have no trouble doing that and not getting bored, but for many people, Flat betting is something that will cause them to loose the thrill of playing. So, they will find a way to vary their betting to get more adrenalin flowing and hope that they get more money out at the right time. Nothing wrong with that and they MIGHT catch Lady Luck smiling on them.

Is that a wise move? Probably not, but if it works, they certainly will win more money.....or loose more <smile>. I doubt seriously that anyone playing for anything other than the recreational aspect of the game would play in this mannor. Seriously doubt that any professional BJ player would adopt this strategy.

In my opinion, Flat betting is about the only way to play this game without pursueing skills in counting cards and if you go the Advantage Play route, you are accepting all the negatives that go with it.....and, I'm speaking of the adversity you incur from the casinos.
 
Long term expectations will deviate in the short-term

With regards to playing two hands versus one, I agree with BJStanko that there is an inherent LONG-TERM disadvantage when you play basic strategy with CSMs. In the short run, there will be deviations from the long term expectation (either postive or negative). A player with the proper discipline and bankroll could manage to play two hands, as long as, you quit while your ahead (positive - meaning that the short term deviation is in your favor and you know that as you continually play, you will approach the long term disadvantage inherent in the rules of BJ).
 
Last edited:
PokerJunky said:
With regards to playing two hands versus one, I agree with BJStanko that there is an inherent LONG-TERM disadvantage when you play basic strategy with CSMs. In the short run, there will be deviations from the long term expectation (either postive or negative). A player with the proper discipline and bankroll could manage to play two hands, as long as, you quite while your ahead (positive - meaning that the short term deviation is in your favor and you know that as you continually play, you will approach the long term disadvantage inherent in the rules of BJ).
Click to expand...

Truth!
Agree!

But, there is a long-term disadvantage in playing Basic Strategy alone no matter whether it is against a CSM or a hand shuffled deck.
 
My only point is....

.... some people think that they are doing right thing, but all those fake theories drain their walet very fast.

Cardc Couning has to do with probability and yes it takes long long time to see it effect.

Raising your bets when you are winning, or playing 2 spots when you are winning instead of one doesn't change the odds. Playing with more money, you just end up losing your money faster.

Theory "table going my way" or "table not going my way" are not valid and everybody knows that they are hunches. You can't prove them. They are prediction of future, and as far as I know nobody is able to do it except maybe Nostradamus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top