Splitting 8s

Question for everyone. According to The Wizard's strategy card for BJ, in a 4-8 deck game where the dealer hits on a soft 17, it says to split 8s if surrender is not available. However, after looking at a few other reputable cards, they all say to hit on a pair of 8s in the same game if surrender is not available. I believe the Wizard's to be correct, but would like to know the explanation.

EDIT: I stupidly forgot to mention that everything above is against a dealer Ace.

I don' t know of any other "reputable cards" that you might be referring to.
I do know that the theory is that its not all that great to have a hand with an 8 its simply pretty bad to have a hand with a 16, so the rule is always split Aces and Eights.
I really don't know of any author who advocates a player treating it as a hand of 16 and hitting it.

Quote: Tryclyde

Question for everyone. According to The Wizard's strategy card for BJ, in a 4-8 deck game where the dealer hits on a soft 17, it says to split 8s if surrender is not available. However, after looking at a few other reputable cards, they all say to hit on a pair of 8s in the same game if surrender is not available. I believe the Wizard's to be correct, but would like to know the explanation.

Most decisions depend on the dealer's card - only against A would you surrender if allowed.

Quote: FleaStiff

I don' t know of any other "reputable cards" that you might be referring to.
I do know that the theory is that its not all that great to have a hand with an 8 its simply pretty bad to have a hand with a 16, so the rule is always split Aces and Eights.
I really don't know of any author who advocates a player treating it as a hand of 16 and hitting it.

Even Lucky Ned splits 8's. Realy funny website if you haven't seen it before.

Oh jeez, I forgot to write a pretty crucial piece of info. This is in regards to playing against a dealer Ace.

Quote: miplet

Even Lucky Ned splits 8's. Realy funny website if you haven't seen it before.

http://filthycritic.com/vegas/images/nedchart.jpg

Comic sans, even. Nice.

Quote: Tryclyde

Oh jeez, I forgot to write a pretty crucial piece of info. This is in regards to playing against a dealer Ace.

You only hit 88 vs Ace in no peek blackjack when you can lose more than one bet to a dealer bj.

Quote: miplet

You only hit 88 vs Ace in no peek blackjack when you can lose more than one bet to a dealer bj.

Probably still surrender if allowed.

In European rules blackjack, where the dealer doesn't look under Aces/tens, but unlike American blackjack, if you double or split, you lose your entire bet if the dealer has a blackjack, basic strategy dictates that you play extremely conservatively against an Ace, and that includes NOT splitting 8's.

I would NEVER play European BJ for this reason, by the way. It seems like such a total ripoff to modify the rules this way--the only justification for it is that it pumps up the house edge.

Thanks for the clarification guys. I've never played European style so I had no idea about that specific scenario; it is definitely an abominable rule.