Just heard an online show with Garrison- and guest John Patrick. Feisty as ever - guess he' s looking for DeMango to kick his ass lol. Anyway it was nice to hear him . I had conversed with Heavy last year and he told me John was having some health issues. Sounded great and finally he endorsed Dice Setting mainly because he followed Garrisons advice and he has a craps table at home to practice on. He gives it a slight edge but does not want to be a locked in right better.Sports betting was a big part of the show and all in all a nice night!
Too bad somebody did not ask " Remember your old board when miscreants like Irish- Larry S - and DeMango used to post and you had to deal with them using a big stick approach? Yes those were the days.
DeMango that was used only when the dealer showed a weak card and he was in a position to bust. I probably would not do it but would not split 8' s against a dealer strong card.
It’s not just the 5 is weak card to build a hand on, it’s also the fact that you are giving up a hand of ten to do it. Unless the dealer shows a ten or ace, just double down. Much better play.
Losing less, and winning winning more, essentially have the same result, more money in your pocket. Philosophically, though, one is a more realistic goal than the other. I was once playing double exposure BJ, ( a game where the dealer wins a tie), and the lady sitting next to me, holding a twenty, and looking at a dealer twenty, could NOT be made to understand, that her only chance, was to “HIT” for the ace. She stood on the twenty?
The problem Dave is that since the 1950's men have used computers to work all this out, the best way to play two cards vs various dealer up cards. You split aces and eights. Period. The putz from Lutz's, (FL), bleatings notwithstanding is wrong. Period. Dave, don't be a putz!
No Dave, spitting eights, no matter what the up-card is, is your best long run option. Doing so against a strong up-card like 9; 10 or ace, is a loser, BUT, it loses less than either standing on, or hitting, a single hand of 16. Losing less, is almost as good as winning.
DeMango - Probably right in the long run dealing with million of outcomes.But let's enter the real world where players have limited bankrolls. Rather lose less! It's called playing in reality not your computer universe. Next deal!
If, Dave, you do not have the “balls” to play the hand correctly, then you are playing with “scared money”, which is absolutely “ta-boo” in gambling. What are you worried about money for anyway? You will have plenty more money, as soon as the next “stimulus” checks are issued. Just for fun Dave, guess which dealer up-card you would fare best with, when you split 8s.
Wrong Dave. Split 8s fare best against a dealer SEVEN. This is of course, as opposed to playing the hand either of the other ways. In fact, it is the biggest gain of any splitting situation, even aces, against any up-card, according to the table, in Revere’s book. The only way I would not split 8’s, is if I got a peak at the next card off the deck, and it was a 4 or a 5, in which case, I’d double down, and if I won, I’d look at the dealer like this .
