Can you give me an example of a hand where it's better to hit than to double down?

M

Mike_25

Guest
An example of hitting over doubling by dealer bust odds:

Hard 13-15 vs. dealer 7+:

• More decks: Hit. Lower bust odds mean dealer likely improves enough to beat weak hand. Gotta try to improve hand instead of doubling risk.
• Fewer decks: May double if think dealer likely to bust. Higher bust odds mean doubling could win more if dealer busts. But with more decks, odds aren't high enough to justify doubling with weak hand. Hit to try getting stronger hand.

Whether to double, hit, or take other action depends on dealer bust odds, not just hands. With more decks and lower bust odds, hit weak hands instead of doubling risk. With fewer decks and higher bust odds, doubling weak hands could gain more if dealer likely enough to bust. But specific hands the adjustment applies to vary. The key is adjusting by how dealer bust odds change by decks.
 
I think Suppose you have a hand of 6 and 5, totaling 11, and the dealer's face-up card is a 2. In this scenario, it would be better to hit rather than double down because by taking another card, there is no risk of busting, and the chances of getting a higher card are relatively high. With a double down,
 
In terms of statistics, doubling down is not as good as hitting on a hard 12 against a dealer's 10. Probabilities of drawing a card that strengthens your hand while playing this game of blackjack.
 
Back
Top