will my return rate be lowered if opened more than 3 boxes?

[beyondbj]

if the same TC3 game , i get 1% return


isnt that , i open three boxes 3x $200

is the same as i opened 4x150 or 5x120 or 6x100


will my actually return less than 1% if my self opened more boxed

for the same amount of chips ?

 

[Sucker]

For the sake of argument, if you bet $600, the return will be $6, and will remain exactly the same no matter how many hands you play to get to it. It's the VARIANCE that will change.

If you want to get very technical, however; your return will be SLIGHTLY more if you play multiple hands, due to the fact that by the time you make your playing decisions for the second hand, you've often seen more cards, which will sometimes change the count enough to allow you to play the second hand more accurately.

 

[blackjack avenger]

Seems to be accepted

that playing optimal 2 hands is the best.
example:
instead of 1 hand of $600
2 hands of $438
or
1 of $400 & one of $450 would be comparable


If you are facing table max and the advantage justifies max bets on every spot; taking into consideration variance, then in theory one would do so, but in practice may be asking for lava like heat.
:joker::whip:

 

[Automatic Monkey]

For the sake of argument, if you bet $600, the return will be $6, and will remain exactly the same no matter how many hands you play to get to it. It's the VARIANCE that will change.

If you want to get very technical, however; your return will be SLIGHTLY more if you play multiple hands, due to the fact that by the time you make your playing decisions for the second hand, you've often seen more cards, which will sometimes change the count enough to allow you to play the second hand more accurately.

I don't know if that works. If it did, you could allow ploppies to play the first 5 hands and you play only the 6th one, giving you maximum information on a maximum bet. Playing multiple hands increases your win rate by allowing you to put more money on the table at an equal risk. But there is only one game I play where there is significant additional advantage on the second hand to be played, and that is because of an idiotic rule the casino came up with for their own protection.

 

[Blue Efficacy]

For the sake of argument, if you bet $600, the return will be $6, and will remain exactly the same no matter how many hands you play to get to it. It's the VARIANCE that will change.

If you want to get very technical, however; your return will be SLIGHTLY more if you play multiple hands, due to the fact that by the time you make your playing decisions for the second hand, you've often seen more cards, which will sometimes change the count enough to allow you to play the second hand more accurately.

This gives you more playing opportunities with increased information, but fewer betting opportunities with increased information. Choose wisely.

 

[beyondbj]

that playing optimal 2 hands is the best.
example:
instead of 1 hand of $600
2 hands of $438
or
1 of $400 & one of $450 would be comparable


If you are facing table max and the advantage justifies max bets on every spot; taking into consideration variance, then in theory one would do so, but in practice may be asking for lava like heat.
:joker::whip:

i know three hands is the best , u can bet 3x360 in this case

but my problem is will 4-7 hands opened by yourself lowered the return with the same amount of chips?

360x3 , is that i can bet 270x4 or 180x6 with the same return?

 

[Sucker]

i know three hands is the best , u can bet 3x360 in this case

but my problem is will 4-7 hands opened by yourself lowered the return with the same amount of chips?

360x3 , is that i can bet 270x4 or 180x6 with the same return?

Again; yes. Your RETURN (or +EV, or EARN; these terms have identical meanings) will be the same. It's only the VARIANCE (chance of being behind after x number of hands) that will be different.
Think of it like this: If you have a 1% advantage your return is exactly 1% of all the money you bet, and it does not matter how you do it. Three hands of $360 is $1080. Your return is $10.80. Six hands of $180 is ALSO $1080, for a return of exactly $10.80.

And as I pointed out earlier, if ANYTHING your return will be slightly MORE by playing multiple hands, because of the extra information gleaned. But as Automatic Monkey has ALSO pointed out, that extra info will probably be almost insignificant. Six hands of $180 might increase your return by what; maybe two or three cents.

 

[iCountNTrack]

Again; yes. Your RETURN (or +EV, or EARN; these terms have identical meanings) will be the same. It's only the VARIANCE (chance of being behind after x number of hands) that will be different.
Think of it like this: If you have a 1% advantage your return is exactly 1% of all the money you bet, and it does not matter how you do it. Three hands of $360 is $1080. Your return is $10.80. Six hands of $180 is ALSO $1080, for a return of exactly $10.80.

And as I pointed out earlier, if ANYTHING your return will be slightly MORE by playing multiple hands, because of the extra information gleaned. But as Automatic Monkey has ALSO pointed out, that extra info will probably be almost insignificant. Six hands of $180 might increase your return by what; maybe two or three cents.

Return/earn is usually defined as a winrate, which would be total actionxExpectation Value, your winrate will not be affected (ignoring playing decisions improvements) if insteat of one $600 you play 6 boxes $100 dollar each however IT IS NOT MAXIMIZED FOR THE SAME RISK YOU ARE TAKING with one $600 bet, in order to maximize your return while maintaining th esmae risk you will need to place a bet of about $155 on each hand.

 

[blackjack avenger]

No One Has Commented

If the bet is mathematically sound.
betting one had of $1200 is better then 2 hands of $600 which is better then 3 hands of $400.
Because
with the multiple hands you are eating your own cards while receiving the same ev per round, the problem is you will have fewer rounds as you add hands. The extra EV gained through strategy does not make up for this in shoes.

The standard; if you belive Schlesinger, is 2 hands in positve counts in shoes whether alone or with others while considering variance. In his book he says 1 hand when alone, but I understand he now states 2 hands when positve at all times.

refere back up to my first post for details

:joker::whip:

 

[zengrifter]

If the bet is mathematically sound.
betting one had of $1200 is better then 2 hands of $600 which is better then 3 hands of $400.
Because
with the multiple hands you are eating your own cards while receiving the same ev per round, the problem is you will have fewer rounds as you add hands. The extra EV gained through strategy does not make up for this in shoes.

That is the correct answer.
Correct EVEN IF you adjust the optimal bet amount - 1200 - 2x850 - 3x650 (approx) zg

 

[David Lane]

I understand you are eating your own cards on the multiple hands (let's say 3) but isn't that OK (in a high count) since you are receiving the majority of them, e.g. your 8-12 cards, say vs. the dealer 2-4. Help me on this one.

 

[Sucker]

If the bet is mathematically sound.
betting one had of $1200 is better then 2 hands of $600 which is better then 3 hands of $400.
Because
with the multiple hands you are eating your own cards while receiving the same ev per round, the problem is you will have fewer rounds as you add hands. The extra EV gained through strategy does not make up for this in shoes.

The standard; if you belive Schlesinger, is 2 hands in positve counts in shoes whether alone or with others while considering variance. In his book he says 1 hand when alone, but I understand he now states 2 hands when positve at all times.

This definitely IS 100% correct, but it's not the answer to the very specific question that was posed here by the OP:

will my actually return less than 1% if my self opened more boxed
for the same amount of chips ?

The correct answer to this question is, of course; no - the return will NOT be less than 1%. (And the OP DOES admit that it's not the best way to play the hand, so I'm going to assume that he has his reasons for posing the question the way he did.)

 

[Sucker]

I understand you are eating your own cards on the multiple hands (let's say 3) but isn't that OK (in a high count) since you are receiving the majority of them, e.g. your 8-12 cards, say vs. the dealer 2-4. Help me on this one.

If for example, your bet is one hand of $600 (1% advantage), you earn $6 per round. If you instead play three hands of $200, your earn is $2 per hand but still only $6 per round. So you'll make more money playing one hand because of the fact that you'll get more of these $6 ROUNDS in.

The only time it would be better to "eat" your own cards is if your BR is large enough so that the table max gets in the way. Supposing the max is $500; if you play one hand at 1%, you earn $5 per round, but if you can play three hands of $500, your earn will be $5 per HAND, or $15 per round. In this case you're obviously better off playing three hands, because even though you're getting less rounds in, you'll get a higher total number of HANDS in, in the same rich section of the deck.

 

[Ferretnparrot]

While if you reduce your bet size exactly as you suggested, the above statemwents are absolutely true, in terms of what your asking. however, there is another angle of attack for playing multiple hands

With a fixed amount of cards to be dealt, its in your interest to play multple hands to increase gain/time For simplification of concept ***Im going to use 2 cards per round as an example.***

If you play head up, you and the dealer consume 2 cards, for a total of 4 cards/round. Ultimately you consume 4 cards per Hand dealt to you

If you play three spots, you would be consuming 8 cards per round. But since you are receiving three hands, you only consume 2.66 cards per hand dealt to you.

You will play and receive more hands before the shuffle if you play multiple hands. If they are at a player advantage this is a good thing since monster counts are less common. Playing in this manor should improve your win rate vs time, but depending on how you bet not neccessary your win percentage per dollar as your asking about.