Doubling Down in Blackjack
I have a hypothetical question about doubling down in blackjack.
Suppose, for the sake of argument, that you are playing a blackjack game that does not allow doubling down. Would it be better to a) take one hit only, as you would in any double down situation or b) hit or stand as you would any hand?
Thank you in advance for your consideration.
Regards,
Kynge Rycharde
Quote: teddysIf you don't have to do it, why limit yourself to one card?
this has to be the answer.
the only thing good about not being allowed to double down would be that you have less variance, but hopefully you can find a better game somewhere
Say you have a big bet out and have the opportunity to double. You dont have enough for the full amount so you partial double with your remaining money. At what point does the partial double become small enough that the EV of the double is less than the EV of simply hitting and playing the hand as normal? EG 11 v dealer 5, you have a $1000 bet but only $50 left. Are you better off partial doubling for $50 or hitting?
Quote: AussieHere's another related question:
Say you have a big bet out and have the opportunity to double. You dont have enough for the full amount so you partial double with your remaining money. At what point does the partial double become small enough that the EV of the double is less than the EV of simply hitting and playing the hand as normal? EG 11 v dealer 5, you have a $1000 bet but only $50 left. Are you better off partial doubling for $50 or hitting?
It depends on the hand, and on the amount you can add to the bet. For 11 vs. 5, it is better to double for less, even if all you can add to your $1000 bet is just 1 cent. With something like 10 vs. 9, you'll want to hit, even if you have $600 left (but double if you got $700).
Quote: AussieHere's another related question:
Say you have a big bet out and have the opportunity to double. You dont have enough for the full amount so you partial double with your remaining money. At what point does the partial double become small enough that the EV of the double is less than the EV of simply hitting and playing the hand as normal? EG 11 v dealer 5, you have a $1000 bet but only $50 left. Are you better off partial doubling for $50 or hitting?
The answer depends on the EV of doubling vs. hitting for each hand and the ratio of the amount you can afford to double for to the original bet. Obviously for hands where you wouldn't take another card anyway under BS (10 or 11 vs. dealer 4-6) you'd double regardless of how little you can put up. For other hands, maybe the Wizard's EV charts could be helpful?
It's almost always better to double, even you have to double for less. The critical fraction is pretty small -- Grosjean says what it is in one of his articles. It only makes a difference on marginal soft doubles like A-2 v. 5 and A-4 vs. 4, etc. Maybe 10 v. 9 but I don't think so.Quote: AussieHere's another related question:
Say you have a big bet out and have the opportunity to double. You dont have enough for the full amount so you partial double with your remaining money. At what point does the partial double become small enough that the EV of the double is less than the EV of simply hitting and playing the hand as normal? EG 11 v dealer 5, you have a $1000 bet but only $50 left. Are you better off partial doubling for $50 or hitting?
Perhaps I am not reading the Wizard's EV charts correctly.
In our hypothetical game, since doubling down is not allowed, would the EV in a normal doubling down situation be cut in half (since you cannot double your bet) and if you take only one card (playing the hand as you would in any doubling down situation)?
I doubt such a game even exists, and it would be foolish to play it if it did.
Thanks you all very much for your input. I am grateful for your consideration.
Regards,
Kynge Rycharde
But since you CAN take another card after hitting, the EV at the same decision point for hitting is higher than 1/2 of the double down EV.
' rel='nofollow' target='_blank'>http://www.onlineblackjacklist.com"]http://www.onlineblackjacklist.comQuote: miltonwinstonI would you the second option – hit or stand as you would any hand. It is not wise to do double down if the dealers up card is a face card or a 10. This is because the odds are good that he will have a total of 20. If you do not your double then you will end up losing twice as much as you bet. For more information you may check this link http://www.onlineblackjacklist.com
a pet peeve of mine is getting directed to a website when it would be easy to link to the exact page you would want us to see. I am interested, so you will be forgiven after I find it. [g]
will have time to search for that later, but be advised your advice does not sound like Basic Strategy
hopefully yuo are not a spammer, but this topic is of interest to me as I have been clobbered plenty by doubling down against ten/face card with an 11. To some degree it must be true that a player is increasing variance to take advantage of a minimal edge.
https://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/appendix1.html may have the answer, bearing in mind I may be told I am not doing this right. But for hitting 11 vs 10 it says the expected return is 0.1195, vs 0.1797 for doubling. So it would seem the gain is 0.0602, a bit confusing for me since the size of the bet has changed also. So I think it is fair to say I don't totally understand what I am looking at. Anyone able to help?
Quote: odiousgambit' rel='nofollow' target='_blank'>http://www.onlineblackjacklist.com"]http://www.onlineblackjacklist.comQuote: miltonwinstonI would you the second option – hit or stand as you would any hand. It is not wise to do double down if the dealers up card is a face card or a 10. This is because the odds are good that he will have a total of 20. If you do not your double then you will end up losing twice as much as you bet. For more information you may check this link http://www.onlineblackjacklist.com
a pet peeve of mine is getting directed to a website when it would be easy to link to the exact page you would want us to see. I am interested, so you will be forgiven after I find it. [g]
will have time to search for that later, but be advised your advice does not sound like Basic Strategy
If miltonwinston is here, stinsonsmart and fabianbranson can't be far behind. You know where the flag post box is located.
Quote: odiousgambitBut for hitting 11 vs 10 it says the expected return is 0.1195, vs 0.1797 for doubling. So it would seem the gain is 0.0602, a bit confusing for me since the size of the bet has changed also. So I think it is fair to say I don't totally understand what I am looking at. Anyone able to help?
If you could only take 1 card after hitting 11 vs 10, the EV would be 0.08985, half of the EV for doubling.
But you can take more cards, and the value of being able to hit if you get a small card on 11 vs 10 is worth about 0.03. You give up this value in exchange for being able to double your bet.
(EV of hitting - lost EV for not being able to take any more cards) * 2 for doubling = EV of doubling
Quote: odiousgambitthat website is pretty much not my cup of tea, not finding this info there, your results may vary.
hopefully yuo are not a spammer, but this topic is of interest to me as I have been clobbered plenty by doubling down against ten/face card with an 11. To some degree it must be true that a player is increasing variance to take advantage of a minimal edge.
https://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/appendix1.html may have the answer, bearing in mind I may be told I am not doing this right. But for hitting 11 vs 10 it says the expected return is 0.1195, vs 0.1797 for doubling. So it would seem the gain is 0.0602, a bit confusing for me since the size of the bet has changed also. So I think it is fair to say I don't totally understand what I am looking at. Anyone able to help?
I think the way it works is that the value is .1195 if you hit, and you can hit more than once. The value is .1797 (.08985 * 2) if you double your bet and accept only one card. So you lose a little by taking only one card, but gain more back by doubling your bet.
Also, the dealer probably *doesn't* have 20. The average dealer's 2-card hand with a 10 up is a little over 18. if you have 11, your average 3 card (doubled) hand will be a little over 19. Of course, there's a chance that a very low dealer's 2 card hand will turn into a higher 3 (or more) card hand.
the question becomes, how do you factor the increased risk? In this case, seems worth it. How about if the increased benefit is only .0001 [for an exaggerated example that may not exist in BJ] , how good would anyone feel about doubling the bet then?
