Variance and multiple players

I've seem to recall that when the count is good enough, one's EV can be increased by spreading to two hands, although doing so reduces variances, both good and bad, yes? So, then does spreading to 3 or 4 hands further reduce variance?
Then it just dawned on me that any player joining the table should have the same effect on variance as if I were to spread to an additional hand. So does it follow that the more players at the table, the greater that variance will be reduced?

No, because they are not playing with your money.

Quote: theoriemeister

I've seem to recall that when the count is good enough, one's EV can be increased by spreading to two hands, although doing so reduces variances, both good and bad, yes? So, then does spreading to 3 or 4 hands further reduce variance?
Then it just dawned on me that any player joining the table should have the same effect on variance as if I were to spread to an additional hand. So does it follow that the more players at the table, the greater that variance will be reduced?

Playing 2 hands and dividing your big bet over the 2 reduces variance if you compare it to aggregating the whole bet on one hand.
Think of it as not putting all your eggs in 1 hand but 2 instead.

Other players do not reduce or increase your variance since you take no part in their wins/losses.
But they do eat up a share of the good cards, which is one other reason to split to 2 hands when the count is positive and there are other players, to take a larger share of the good cards. If you are playing heads-up (alone), it is actually slightly better to stick to 1 hand.

Keep in mind 2 hands at once is not the same variance as playing a single hand twice since the dealer gets the same hand.
I recommend you read this thoroughly:
https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/variance/

Tyler writes: If you are playing heads-up (alone), it is actually slightly better to stick to 1 hand.

Why? Surely you dont mean with a deck composition worthy of large bets.

Quote: moses

Tyler writes: If you are playing heads-up (alone), it is actually slightly better to stick to 1 hand.

Why? Surely you dont mean with a deck composition worthy of large bets.

I do, 1 hand is the best way to play heads-up.

I do not remember the exact numbers, but generally speaking, between putting your max bet on one hand or splitting to 2 hands with let's say 60% or 70% of your max bet each (whatever works out to your full Kelly, considering the variance of 2 hands). Then for the same variance, you consume more cards per round (1 player + 1 dealer becomes 2 player + 1 dealer) and you have more money out. It comes out that it is slightly better to play more rounds of 1 hand on a good count than less rounds with 2 hands.

Obviously, if you know the cut card is coming and it's about to be the last hand, splitting to 2 is better.

Apologies that I do not remember the actual quote. Maybe someone with a better memory can pitch in here.

Quote: moses

Tyler writes: If you are playing heads-up (alone), it is actually slightly better to stick to 1 hand.

Why? Surely you don't mean with a deck composition worthy of large bets.

That being said, the difference is very small and shouldn't be the main deciding factor.

I'd say if you're wondering whether to split to 2 or not, pros and cons are 2 hands plays a bit faster, so you can use up the good cards before someone jumps in or you get noticed, and 1 hand draws less attention in some places.

My rule of thumb. 1 hand for minimum bets. 1 hand for high TC is a threshold. 2 hands for high TC is an advantage. Dont take advantage too much of your advantage. 3 hands is an escort .😲

I believe the Grifters Gambit calls for playing three small hands and reverting to a single large hand when the count calls for it.

The majority of higher TC's worthy of large bets occur after card 20 cards are played in single deck. Thus conventional wisdom often leads to watching quality bet opportunities get shuffled away.

Quote: billryan

I believe the Grifters Gambit calls for playing three small hands and reverting to a single large hand when the count calls for it.

Yes when able to play multiple hands for the minimum. Most places I've seen require 2X min bet for 2 hands

Quote: tyler498

Yes when able to play multiple hands for the minimum. Most places I've seen require 2X min bet for 2 hands

and 5 times for 3 hands.

Yes, but that is often up to the Pit. They can waive it and often do if they think you aren't a threat.
If you google "Grifters Gambit", the originator can explain it far better than I can. I've never played it myself. I do know when Marcus first brought it up, it was met with a lot of skepticism but the math bore him out.

Thanks to everyone for your comments!