16 v 10. Why?
Why does staying on 16 become good against a 10, but not a 7-9? It seems like they'd be more bustable, wouldn't they? What leads to this difference?
Quote: DeucekiesBasic strategy recommends hitting 16 v. a 7 or higher, but if the count goes even a little bit above 0, it's recommended that you stay on 16 v. a 10.
Why does staying on 16 become good against a 10, but not a 7-9? It seems like they'd be more bustable, wouldn't they? What leads to this difference?
The difference is that, with 16 v. T, it really doesn't make much difference what you do. It's a bad hand that loses money, but there is really not much difference whether you hit or stand. The difference is greater if the dealer is showing a 7 -- 9 where there is a bigger difference between hitting and standing. It also isn't just a question of bust the 16 or not. Drawing a two or three will definitely help a 16 if the dealer's got a seventeen. Doesn't help at all if the dealer has a ten with a ten under. That, too, makes a difference.
Quote: DeucekiesBasic strategy recommends hitting 16 v. a 7 or higher, but if the count goes even a little bit above 0, it's recommended that you stay on 16 v. a 10.
Why does staying on 16 become good against a 10, but not a 7-9? It seems like they'd be more bustable, wouldn't they? What leads to this difference?
I think that you are asking "why is hitting 16vT a close play, but hitting 16v7 is not a close play?".
The reason is, if you hit a 16v7 and don't bust, you have a very good chance of winning the hand. If you hit a 16vT and don't bust, you still lose a lot of the hands. Eg, if you catch a 2, 18 is a terrible hand against T, but a pretty good hand against a 7.
Since, since you lose a lot of the time even when you don't bust, hitting has less value. Of course, you are in better shape either way against a 7 than a 10, but against a 7, hitting has much more value than standing, and against a 10, it has only a little more value.
It seems counter-intuitive because normally you risk busting when the dealer has a good hand but not when he has a bad one, but, remember, the decision is comparing the value of hitting vs the value of standing in that particular situation. It is not comparing 2 different situations.
Quote: DeucekiesBasic strategy recommends hitting 16 v. a 7 or higher, but if the count goes even a little bit above 0, it's recommended that you stay on 16 v. a 10.
Why does staying on 16 become good against a 10, but not a 7-9? It seems like they'd be more bustable, wouldn't they? What leads to this difference?
Because your chances of busting, and automatically losing, are high. So against a 7, if you do not bust, you are in decent shape no matter what you get--if you get a three, you are in great shape. Against a ten, if you don't bust, you are probably in bad shape. You get an ace, you are not in decent shape like you were against a 7--you risked busting just to lose with 17. You get a 3, you are in decent shape, not great shape. Because the dealer's 10 is so much stronger than your 16, it's not worth the risk of busting. Mathematically, there is a better chance that the dealer will bust than you will get a card that will push or beat him when the count is not negative.
