dickwilliams
dickwilliams
Joined: Mar 23, 2010
  • Threads: 4
  • Posts: 13
March 24th, 2010 at 10:39:15 AM permalink
Do you think there is a difference? Surely if you play 1 hand, the dealer's hand will always change per hand played, while playing multiple hands you may win big on dealer bust and lose big on dealer blackjack. What's your opinion on when to play 1 hand and when to play multiple hands (and how many). Thanks!
Croupier
Croupier
Joined: Nov 15, 2009
  • Threads: 58
  • Posts: 1258
March 24th, 2010 at 10:47:55 AM permalink
If you are a counter, then you could play more hands when the deck is favourable.

In my opinion If you are a non counter then the only reason to increase* the number of hands played is to increase your varience, and so a greater chance of a win or a loss.

*[EDIT-or decrease forgot that earlier and was reminded by the later post. thanks for reminding me toast.]
[This space is intentionally left blank]
toastcmu
toastcmu
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 292
March 24th, 2010 at 2:46:11 PM permalink
I think it depends here - if you are normally a $10 bettor, and you "spread" to 2 $5 hands, then you reduce the variance just slightly - you end up not winning or losing as much as if you played a single hand of $10. On the other hand, as Croupier says, you're talking about 2 hands of $10 - you're going to increase your variance because you're betting more, but you'd be 'losing' less than a $20 a hand bettor at the same time. I seem to remember an Al Krigman article about this a few years ago....

-B
cards247
cards247
Joined: May 6, 2010
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 5
May 10th, 2010 at 1:25:05 PM permalink
Quote: toastcmu

I think it depends here - if you are normally a $10 bettor, and you "spread" to 2 $5 hands, then you reduce the variance just slightly - you end up not winning or losing as much as if you played a single hand of $10. On the other hand, as Croupier says, you're talking about 2 hands of $10 - you're going to increase your variance because you're betting more, but you'd be 'losing' less than a $20 a hand bettor at the same time. I seem to remember an Al Krigman article about this a few years ago....

-B



Interesting, that's good to know! If and/or when possible, I would perfer to play two lower value($) hands over one higher value($) hand (two hands = total of one hand). Two hands are just that much more fun!
It's in the cards.
toastcmu
toastcmu
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 292
May 10th, 2010 at 2:45:04 PM permalink
Quote: cards247

Interesting, that's good to know! If and/or when possible, I would perfer to play two lower value($) hands over one higher value($) hand (two hands = total of one hand). Two hands are just that much more fun!



The caveat here is that in Vegas, they will require 2x your bet for each spot. For example,if there is a $5 minimum, they'll require you to bet $10 per spot. Here on the East Coast, no such rule is enforced, so I usually play two hands if I feel like it.

-B
CFTCFT
CFTCFT
Joined: May 22, 2010
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 21
May 23rd, 2010 at 9:17:09 PM permalink
Quote: toastcmu

The caveat here is that in Vegas, they will require 2x your bet for each spot. For example,if there is a $5 minimum, they'll require you to bet $10 per spot. Here on the East Coast, no such rule is enforced, so I usually play two hands if I feel like it.

-B



I noticed a year or so ago that at the venetian on their $25 tables they will let you play up to 3 hands at $25 each. Maybe it has changed now but it was alot of fun me and another guy had the table full.

I try to play 2 hands whenever I can. It works better for my strategy which is usually to try and hang out as long as I can until a killer shoe comes along and press my bets. If the dealer is being predictable (busting on 2-6 showing) then it usually works out quite well.
BigTip
BigTip
Joined: May 25, 2010
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 67
May 31st, 2010 at 12:54:43 PM permalink
I have never understood this concept. We all know that blackjack is a negative expectation game. The longer we play, the better chance we have of falling in to the EV of the game. Playing multiple hands means you are getting there twice as fast.
joenunz
joenunz
Joined: Nov 18, 2009
  • Threads: 6
  • Posts: 68
May 31st, 2010 at 2:09:19 PM permalink
When someone is playing two hands I avoid that table like the plague. I have found multiple hands players to feel entitled...like they "own the table". And I'm talking about $10-$15 tables, not $100 tables...which me and my bankroll don't patronize anway.

Last year at the Venetian, we had a half-hour to kill before seeing "A Bronx Tale". We sat down at a $15 table not realizing the sole player (at third base) was playing two hands. He said "why don't you guys wait until this shoe is done. I'm playing heads up here." I muttered "what an ***hole" and walked away.
Insurance is closed.
7winner
7winner
Joined: May 31, 2010
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 198
May 31st, 2010 at 2:22:01 PM permalink
Quote: joenunz

We sat down at a $15 table not realizing the sole player (at third base) was playing two hands. He said "why don't you guys wait until this shoe is done. I'm playing heads up here." I muttered "what an ***hole" and walked away.


good going! I hope you said it loud enough so everyone heard.
7 winner chicken dinner!
toastcmu
toastcmu
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 292
May 31st, 2010 at 7:08:19 PM permalink
Quote: BigTip

I have never understood this concept. We all know that blackjack is a negative expectation game. The longer we play, the better chance we have of falling in to the EV of the game. Playing multiple hands means you are getting there twice as fast.



The idea here is that if you're "comfortable" always playing $10 a hand, then playing 2 hands of $5 a piece will reduce the variance. from playing one hand of $10. If $5 is all you're comfortable with, then yes, putting $10 out on the table instead of $5 will get you to the long run faster. The gambler has to look at all the factors in making that decision.

-B

  • Jump to: