rkfranke's Blog
appendix 9 repost
miplet answers the question, but not fully. I understand this is a "long run" answer, meaning you lose less per $5 bet in the long run by splitting. But, in the short run (this hand alone), it appears you lose nearly double by splitting than by just hitting. What am I missing?Appendix 9 question
Splitting 3-3 vs a dealer up-card of 2 shows a expectation of -0.1333 if splitting and -0.1421 if hitting. Does this mean, for a $5 bet, then $5 more to split, you expect to lose 10 X .1333 = $1.33 when splitting and 5 X .1412 = $0.71 when hitting?Comments
miplet
Jul 30, 2010
It's $5 X .1333= $0.67 when splitting.
dm
Aug 02, 2010
No, the computation "understands" that the bet is doubled.
Comments
The house edge is relative to the original bet of $5 in both cases. So the 13% house edge for splitting is 13% of the original $5 bet, not the total $10 bet after the split. So splitting is the best play in the short run and the long run.
Thank you papachubby. To be sure I got this thru this thick skull, pls verify the following.
If I bet $5 and get 3-3 versus dlr up of 2, I split, bet another $5 and expect to lose 67 cents (33 cents per hand).
If I hit this hand, I expect to lose 71 cents on the hand.
Yes, that is correct.
I agree, that is correct. Also, such gambling questions are not appropriate for blog entries. A blog is supposed to be like a diary.