Theoretical Rules Question

I'm sorry if this has been asked before, but I have always been curious if the dealer hitting to 16 and standing on 17 is the "perfect rule". What would the effect on EV and strategy be if:
Dealer stood on 16 (draw to 15)? What about drawing to 17 and standing on 18?
In "regular" Blackjack, is soft 17 the ONLY additional draw that helps the dealer? What if the dealer drew to 16 and hit on soft 17 AND soft 18? (stand hard 17+)
If both player and dealer had to bust twice before losing (e.g. 16+9+5 is 21, 15+A+9+7 is a bust, 13+9+7 is 20), would this rule help or hurt players?
What would happen if there was a cap on the number of cards in a hand? eg 3 card cap: player and dealer must stand on 4+5+6=15
Would a suited BJ beating an unsuited BJ (and/or paying 2 to 1) change the house edge?

Where or how would I go about finding this stuff out?

Not sure what you are trying to examine, but casinos wanting to give more favorable rules do not go in these directions. The wizard has a list of variants you might want to look at

https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/rule-variations/

Quote: nvr55xx

Dealer stood on 16

IMO this would not have all that much effect. But it is well known that [hard] 17 is the best spot to stop on, thus the house has chosen it.

Here is a good place to start:

https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/1/

That page will give you a good idea of how to analyze BJ in the first place using the infinite deck assumption.

At the bottom of the page the Wizard shows his spreadsheets from which all that is derived. You can download those and then experiment with other setups for the game.

Quote: endermike

Here is a good place to start:

https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/1/

That page will give you a good idea of how to analyze BJ in the first place using the infinite deck assumption.

At the bottom of the page the Wizard shows his spreadsheets from which all that is derived. You can download those and then experiment with other setups for the game.

Basic but always Double a soft 20 against a 9 showing?

Quote: mds

Basic but always Double a soft 20 against a 9 showing?

Sorry, I don't follow. I think one should stand on a soft 20 against a nine, and I think that is what the table states. Or is that a rule you are proposing?

Quote: nvr55xx

I'm sorry if this has been asked before, but I have always been curious if the dealer hitting to 16 and standing on 17 is the "perfect rule". What would the effect on EV and strategy be if:
Dealer stood on 16 (draw to 15)? What about drawing to 17 and standing on 18?
In "regular" Blackjack, is soft 17 the ONLY additional draw that helps the dealer? What if the dealer drew to 16 and hit on soft 17 AND soft 18? (stand hard 17+)
If both player and dealer had to bust twice before losing (e.g. 16+9+5 is 21, 15+A+9+7 is a bust, 13+9+7 is 20), would this rule help or hurt players?
What would happen if there was a cap on the number of cards in a hand? eg 3 card cap: player and dealer must stand on 4+5+6=15
Would a suited BJ beating an unsuited BJ (and/or paying 2 to 1) change the house edge?

Where or how would I go about finding this stuff out?

The dealer hitting a soft 17 is the ideal situation for the house that follows a consistent procedure; the only thing better is for the dealer to follow an inconsistent procedure, which to my knowledge, has never been done. Standing on 16 would obviously be a poor move for the dealer. Any players with 17 or higher (essentially those who played correctly and didn't bust) would automatically beat the dealer when the dealer would otherwise have a roughly 1/4 chance in winning. Hitting a soft 18 would be a poor choice as well, because this is only a good move against a player's 19-21. The dealer cannot have a soft 18 with an 8, 9, or 10 showing,, so the likelihood that the player has 12-18 is significantly greater than the player having 19-21--this hit would usually give the player another opportunity to win. Hitting soft 18 and also hitting a hard 17 would turn a 7 into the best bust card, and give the average player a statistical advantage over the house.

Suited blackjacks paying 2:1, but also beating your blackjack in the case the dealer had one, would decrease the house edge because of the very low rate at which you will both have blackjacks, where the dealer's is also suited. Suited blackjacks will not in themselves be very rare.

You can obtain this information by becoming a counter, and familiarizing yourself with the mathematics of blackjack. To an advantage player, this is common sense.

Quote: endermike

Sorry, I don't follow. I think one should stand on a soft 20 against a nine, and I think that is what the table states. Or is that a rule you are proposing?

Just testing!