I think we’re making some progress at last
Look at this example
Imagine another situation, you are playing 2 handed and have 6-6 and 7-7 against a dealer with a 10 showing, you are not the favourite under any circumstance, by splitting you lose more, you have 4 underdogs vs 1 big favourite.
If you agree that this is true, what you are basically saying is that there is no advantage to playing 2 handed, so all the millions of pro blackjack players out there who play 2 handed actually have no idea what they are doing.
Give me an example of when it is better to play 2 handed, your odds suggest that it is never better to play 2 handed, it can only be the same as playing 1 handed, but never better, meaning, your odds of winning with any one given hand will never improve.
I obviously disagree, according to your formula by playing 2 hands, the player will always lose to the house edge, only twice as much, since the bet is doubled.
There must be some advantages to playing 2 handed, or nobody would ever do it.
I am saying that a dealer with a 6 is one of those situations where it is better to have as many hands as possible in play, because the possibility of you winning are increased, and the possibility of you losing are decreased. Overall, not with any 1-2-3-4 hands in particular, there will be times when only 1-2-3 of your hands win and all 4 win, that is not really in question.
If you stand with 20, you will lose to a dealer drawing to 21 about 10% of the time, whether you are playing 1 handed or 2 handed, you will lose 10%, that doesn’t change.
Every 100 hands you play in that situation, the dealer will draw to 21 and beat you 10 times, whether it’s 1 hand or 10 hands you are playing.
By splitting your hand, the chances of the dealer drawing to 21 and beating you are 0%, technically there is no chance of it happening, even though there is, and this is going by the formula you use, so in every 100 hands you play, the dealer will still draw to 21 10 times, however, it will beat you 0 times.
The reason is that you have an even better chance of drawing to 21 yourself, this negates the dealers 10% that beats you in the hand you are standing on, by splitting to 4 hands, you will draw to 21 around 40 times with your hands, 4 hands x 100, the dealer will still draw to 21 only 10 times out of 100, the odds actually favour my draw more to hit 21, regardless, you get the point.
Your calculations factor in the probability that the dealer will draw to 21 and beat you, when really there is no chance of this ever happening. It will happen when you stand, not when you split.
I am critiquing your formula not for the sake of creating controversy, but because i find it flawed, especially in this situation, you say you will lose money by splitting to 4 hands, i say you will win 14% more money.
I also realize the fact that you have no choice but to prove yourself correct since you have a blackjack odds website that many people use, including myself on occassion, but i really think it would be in everyones best interest if you recalculated your odds for 2 handed play, it might also serve you well to have a section describing different philosophies between 1 and 2 handed play.