1 vs multiple BJ hands

[Saborion]

If I can bet a total maximum of 2k $ / day on BJ on an online casino, then surely the only difference between playing 1 hand and playing multiple, say 3, must be the speed at which I reach this 2k $ / day limit? It shouldn`t increase my risk of ruin or anything like that, right? If the dealer gets T and I play 3 hands, well, then it should just be the same as if I play 1 hand vs a T three times, right?

Summary: The speed at which I reach my goal is the only difference between playing 1 hand vs multiple hands?

[lunchmeat]

Playing multiple hands will decrease your variance and risk of ruin from playing 1 hand with the same total ammount wagered. But it will increase your variance and risk of ruin over a single hand if the single bet is the same size as each bet mutihanded. It's a little easier to explain this in an example.

1 hand with $5 bet= most variance and risk
5 hands with $1 bets= less variance and risk
1 hand with $1 bets= least variance and risk

It sounds like you're going after the Intercasino bonus. If so, I like 5 $1 bets because it has relatively low risk and it doesn't take too much time to wager $2000. IMO single bets of $5 have too much risk attached (you only have to be down 16 units to lose your bonus). Wagering single $1 bets provides the least risk, but it would take so long to wager $2000 that you'd go insane before the wager requirement is fulfilled.

[Saborion]

[ QUOTE ]
1 hand with $5 bet= most variance and risk
5 hands with $1 bets= less variance and risk
1 hand with $1 bets= least variance and risk


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but isn`t 5 hands with $1 bets the same as playing 1 hand with $1 bets 5 times? ie, you just speed it up?

[doormat]

Saborion,
Playing 5 hands of $1 is not the same as playing $1 five times because of covariance. When you play five spots at once, you are more likely to have all five hands have the same result - in other words, if the dealer makes a blackjack you will probably lose all five hands, and if she busts you will likely do better than if you played them one at a time. So your fluctuations will be much higher. If, however you played $1 at five different tables at the same time then your supposition would be correct. It is this principle that allows professional bj team members to all play out of the same bankroll as if each had the bankroll independently, so long as they play at different tables.

doormat

doormat

[Saborion]

[ QUOTE ]
if the dealer makes a blackjack you will probably lose all five hands, and if she busts you will likely do better than if you played them one at a time.

[/ QUOTE ]
Which sounds to me as though it`ll even out in the long run?
I thought about it the way you said, but I still cannot really understand why it would differ from playing five times longer. Sure, you lose more when the dealer has a BJ, but you also win more when he busts. So sure, the variation should be higher, but if I live through the swings...?

Say you want to bet as much as possible per hour in terms of total amount wagered, while you still had to give a though about RoR. Which option would you choose?

1: Play 220 hands in one hour, wagering 2$ each time, for a total of 440$ / hour.
2: Play 110 * 3 hands in one hour, wagering 2$ on each hand, for a total of 660$.

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
So sure, the variation should be higher, but if I live through the swings...?


[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't this the point he made that you were arguing against?

[bernie]

the longrun depends on the deck odds which change as every card comes out.

2 reasons to play multi hands

1) to bet less, though it looks like more, and eat cards in a minus deck to force a shuffle quicker.

2) to bet more, though it looks like less, trying to maximize profit. primarily when getting a little heat from a pit boss. otherwise, in a great + count, you want to keep the deck in play as long as possible by playing 1 hand at a time.

i'd suggest reading a few books on BJ to gain a full grasp of the game and why some moves, such as spreading multiple bets, are done.

btw...

i would never play BJ online and expect to get a beatable game. the house has way too much at stake to offer it. and theyd be busted out in a week. when/if you really learn how to beat this game, youll know why this is true.

good luck

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
It is this principle that allows professional bj team members to all play out of the same bankroll as if each had the bankroll independently, so long as they play at different tables.


[/ QUOTE ]

this isnt exactly how they do it. they use the 'big player' tactic. the members all go to different tables and bet low til the count goes up. then they signal the big player who comes and lays a big bet down while the other guy either goes to the bathroom or keeps betting a low amount. this decision can depend on how many players are at the table with the initial member.

saying that playing 220 hands for $1 each will only put $220 in action is leaving out the double down and splits that can occur which ups your variance also.

you cant just put time in and expect an hourly rate. you have to know what you're doing. which really isnt that hard to do as many people think.

b

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
this isnt exactly how they do it. they use the 'big player' tactic. the members all go to different tables and bet low til the count goes up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't played a lot of BJ recently, but haven't most casinos disallowed joining mid-shoe to prevent the "big player" strategy.

Either way, thats still a different sort of BJ team. I think there are plenty of "teams" that are simply groups playing individually off of the same bankroll.

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
i would never play BJ online and expect to get a beatable game. the house has way too much at stake to offer it. and theyd be busted out in a week. when/if you really learn how to beat this game, youll know why this is true.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think anyone here is claiming to be able to beat online Blackjack. They just want to be able to bonuswhore without busting out before they clear the bonus.