Dissing the splits – well, maybe
January 15,
2010
Dear Mark:
When my ex-girlfriend and I used to go to
Vegas, every once in a while we would have
someone at our blackjack table split tens.
This used to drive my ex absolutely crazy
and there were times when I thought that I
actually saw steam come out of her ears when
someone did that. So my question is, is
there actually any time when it is a good
idea to split tens? Keith K.
For starters, Keith, it’s wasted energy
getting hot-and-bothered when someone splits
10s. The flawed point of view of the heated
one – your split ex – is that this
blameworthy move always seems to take the
dealer's bust card. Not so, Keith, and ex
girlfriend. As long as the shuffle is
randomized, improper play by others will
just as likely help as hurt.
The person splitting 10s, nor your ex, has
no idea what the next card is, so that poor
play will have no consequence on the game in
general. It’s limited only to the splitter’s
wager. Splitter goes down in flames, but not
necessarily anyone else.
Actually one notable gaming author, John
Scarne, in Scarne on Cards (1949),
recommends splitting 10s, but that book was
first published well before computers could
analyze blackjack with multi-million hand
simulations.
There is, however,
one time when it is proper basic strategy to
split 10s and that is on a Face-up Blackjack
game. In Face-up Blackjack, all the cards
dealt are exposed, including both of the
dealer’s cards. Only here does correct
strategy call for splitting 10s against a
dealer’s 13, 14, 15, or 16.
However, Keith, before seeking out the
nearest Face-up game to part those tens, ex
might reflect on the fee involved. The
casino edge on regular blackjack, using
perfect basic strategy, is 0.4 percent. With
Face-up Blackjack, it’s five times that,
coming in at a neat 2.0 percent – reason
being, in Face-up you lose when you push
(tie).
Dear Mark: At
our twice-monthly poker game, we like to
refer to your column about poker questions.
Someone mentioned that about 15 years ago
you wrote about how the sandwich was
invented because of gambling. I couldn’t
find what you wrote online at our newspaper.
Any chance you can recall the circumstances?
Jeff B.
My God, Jeff.
Two lines of food fodder, and more than a
decade ago. Who remembers this stuff?
Someone is hereby awarded the Outstanding
Trivialist of the Month.
I
wrote that John Montagu, the 4th Earl of
Sandwich (1718-1792), loved to gamble so
much and so steadily he had his cortege
bring him meats, bread and cheese so he
wouldn’t have to abandon the gambling
parlors. Hence, the sandwich.
My source was Pierre Jean Grosley, who
penned in his travel book, Tour to London,
the popular tale that bread and meat
sustained Lord Sandwich at the gambling
tables.
Now that you have
incited a growling stomach as I close in on
lunch, I’ll share with you what I’m having
today: My favorite, a Reuben sandwich. It
also has some historical gambling
significance.
Although the
Reuben’s place of origin is somewhat
disputed, one account is that Reuben
Kulakofsky, a grocer from Omaha, was its
lead creator, along with a gang of his
gambling cronies at Kulakofsky's weekly
poker game. Nicknaming themselves "the
committee,” the group held court at the
Blackstone hotel in the 1920’s, and the
hotel's owner, Charles Schimmel, also part
of the group, decided to put their sandwich
invention on the Blackstone's lunch menu.
Bon Appetit.
Gambling
Wisdom of the Week: “Some of the
opponents you will encounter in poker games
will be more ruthless than any casino in
taking your money.” --Jean Scott, More
Frugal Gambling
|
