Two Hands: Too Much Attention?

[Finn Dog]

I know quite a few members have expressed the view here that nothing gets the Pit's attention more these days than someone spreading to two hands when the count is rising.

But what about the method Ian Andersen uses in Burning The Tables? I'm talking about a 6D game where off the top he might open with two hands of two units. If he loses he'll scale down to two hands of one unit. If he loses again he'll drop down to 1X1.

Then when he wins (after first losing), he'll go from 1X1 to 2X1 back to 2X2 and then using his U.G. cover (with cover plays with betting cover), he'll work his way up to 2X6 (and keep chipping up as long as he wins).

All in all, his contention was it's OK to spread to two hands (as long as you do it from the start). Would you say this still holds true today (given the book was written 10 years ago)?

Best regards,

FD

 

[zengrifter]

Two hands are fine. Further - it has been shown that in general you should ALWAYS play two hands in 6D games. zg

 

[ChefJJ]

Two hands are fine. Further - it has been shown that in general you should ALWAYS play two hands in 6D games. zg

Very interesting. :cool2: Briefly, what is the rationale?

good luck :joker:

 

[Cherry7Up]

Two hands are fine. Further - it has been shown that in general you should ALWAYS play two hands in 6D games. zg

ZG, why is this advice limited to 6D games? Is it thought that two hands in a 2D game draws too much heat, or are the benefits of double hands less in 2D than in 6D?

 

[johndoe]

Two hands are fine. Further - it has been shown that in general you should ALWAYS play two hands in 6D games. zg

I'm pretty sure that is only when other players are present, and that one hand is best when playing heads up.

 

[FLASH1296]

FinnDog,

Yes, betting 2 hands off the top is very much the way to go.

Keeping the welcome mat out for you means learning that you
can drop to one hand (minimally bet) BUT at that point you have
committed yourself to finishing the remainder of the shoe playing
only one hand or wonging out.

 

[Finn Dog]

FinnDog,

Yes, betting 2 hands off the top is very much the way to go.

Keeping the welcome mat out for you means learning that you
can drop to one hand (minimally bet) BUT at that point you have
committed yourself to finishing the remainder of the shoe playing
only one hand or wonging out.

I see.

While I hear what you're saying, doesn't this pattern just mimic that of a natural gambler? Namely, if he's losing off the top, then he's down to one unit (after a series of normal 50% progression step downs after being clobbered); conversely, if he's winning, then he's back to two hands (after a series of normal progression parlays or chip ups)? Let me clarify the betting cover: only raising after a win and only reducing after a loss.

Factoring that in, if this player started with two hands, would it really be that unusual to return to two hands?

Best regards,

FD

 

[FLASH1296]

Let me explain it thusly:

Most Pit Critters cannot count cards accurately or reliably,
but they have learned a few (easy to spot) things to look for.

Chief among these clues is someone switching to betting 2 spots
AFTER a flood of small cards have hit the felt.
Even if intellectually challenged (s)he knows that all that needs
to be do next is to wait and see if you reverse course back to
1 hand or 2 hands (at the minimum) when the Face Cards litter
the table. Next: a phone call to Surveillance for a "Skills Check".

What makes the pit critters salivate at seeing this pattern is that
they have been told that it is a rather reliable behavior among Card Counters.
This provides them with a means to pat themselves on
their backs without having to learn to count cards.

 

[Martin Gayle]

Either approach is fine.

Playing two hands helps neutralise variance. Even in bad or even counts. If you play all it is a good idea to play 2 hands.

Realise that you are throwing MORE money at a losing game. You need a big BR and your unit size has to be higher than the table minimum. Therefore if you are a green chipper you can drop down to red action in bad counts.

 

[non-self-weighter]

FinnDog,

Yes, betting 2 hands off the top is very much the way to go.

Keeping the welcome mat out for you means learning that you
can drop to one hand (minimally bet) BUT at that point you have
committed yourself to finishing the remainder of the shoe playing
only one hand or wonging out.

I see.

While I hear what you're saying, doesn't this pattern just mimic that of a natural gambler?

You say that like it's a bad thing.

 

[moo321]

Spreading to two hands is much better from an EV and risk of ruin perspective. It MAY be worse from a heat perspective.

However, I'm very, very much against betting camo, especially in shoes. If you're spreading 1-10 in single deck, fine, but not if you're grinding it out in 8 deck monsters. Bet optimally, use a huge spread, wong, and play multiple hands when you need to.

I've never had serious heat on a shoe game, and I spread 1-20 or more routinely.

 

[Martin Gayle]

Spreading to two hands is much better from an EV and risk of ruin perspective. It MAY be worse from a heat perspective.

However, I'm very, very much against betting camo, especially in shoes. If you're spreading 1-10 in single deck, fine, but not if you're grinding it out in 8 deck monsters. Bet optimally, use a huge spread, wong, and play multiple hands when you need to.

I've never had serious heat on a shoe game, and I spread 1-20 or more routinely.

Totally agree. Camo in shoe games is overrated.

Unless you are playing very high stakes you should not get too much heat playing shoe games through play only. It just isn't worth most casino's resources to shake out dudes grinding out $10-$20/hr.

 

[Finn Dog]

However, I'm very, very much against betting camo, especially in shoes...I've never had serious heat on a shoe game, and I spread 1-20 or more routinely.

Moo: curious, was that on Red or Green? (PM if nec.)

Thanks,

FD

 

[moo321]

Moo: curious, was that on Red or Green? (PM if nec.)

Thanks,

FD

Red to green.