Hitting a three-card sixteen

Is it just a "feeling" rule, or does basic strategy hold that you stand on a sixteen if it's after more than two cards? For example, 10-4 against a dealer 10. Draw a 2 to make 16. Stand on this three-card 16, or take a hit as you would if you had drawn 10-6 in the first place, assuming no surrender?

My memory tells me that any time I hit that 16, or any 16 that I have arrived at by working my 7 or 8 or 12 up to 16 with multiple hits, this 16 always draws a 10 for 26. But that's just my memory. Drawing a low card to make a 16 "improves" the count all so slightly. But enough, taken on its own, to make you stand on the 16? You'd surrender a two-card 16 against a 10 if you could, but that's not an option at this point. Standing on this 3-card 16 might be "less worse" than hitting it. So is that why you stand?

You have the right idea. Stand on a 3-card or more 16 vs dealer 10-up. Change "less worse" to "lose less" and you have the lingo. Two-card 16 vs dealer 10-up loses 67% by standing but only 65% by hitting. (2% not lost is the same as 2% won.)

Once at the Westward Ho, around 1999, I saw a player who had a two-card 16 vs a dealer 10-up ask the dealer what he should do. The dealer said, "You're in trouble."

This answer above is for basic strategy only.

The index for hitting/standing 16 vs 10 is exactly zero. What that means is if more small cards have been played you should stand, if more 10's have been played you should hit. The best way to determine this is to count cards from the beginning of the shoe. In the absence of counting cards, there are two common tricks used.

One is what you mentioned stand on 3 card 16. The assumption is that your 3 card 16 is likely made up of 3 small cards and with the dealers 10 upcard, there are more small cards showing so you should stand. But you just gave an example 10, 4, 2 where that is not the case. With 10 ,4, 2, you have two small cards and two 10 value cards (yours and the dealers) and you should hit, so the 3 card rule it advising steering you to the wrong (ever so slightly) play.

Better than the 3 card 16 rule is to use all cards on the table or as much information that is available. For example, say you have an 8, 5, 3 vs 10. The 'three card 16 rule' says you stand based on your 2 small cards and the dealers one 10 value (7,8,9 are neutral). But what if the two other players at the table have a 10, 10 and a 10, 7. Now with all the cards you see you have 2 small cards and four, 10 value cards, so even with your 3 card 16, standing is the wrong move.

Bottom line you want to use as much information about the remaining cards as you can. If you aren't counting cards, at least look at all the cards on the table If there are more 2 thru 6's than 10 value cards....stand. If there are more 10 value cards than 2 thru 6's hit.

That thing where it "always seems like" you draw a 10 to your 16 is called selective memory.

Not all multi card 16 vs 10 combos are equal.

https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/9/

just stayed twice on multi-card 16s in a 6D shoe v dealer 10
lost both hands and next card out each time was a 5 lol

Quote: aceofspades

just stayed twice on multi-card 16s in a 6D shoe v dealer 10
lost both hands and next card out each time was a 5 lol

Twice in a row. Well then...THAT settles it, because small insignificant sample sizes are what really matters. :/

Quote: kewlj

Twice in a row. Well then...THAT settles it, because small insignificant sample sizes are what really matters. :/

Kj I'm not changing the strategy - I just thought it was funny

I hate it when that next card is a 2 and the dealer reveals a 7 in the hole.

I read on blackjackinfo.com that as long as the TC remains <0 then you hit 16 v. 10, no matter how many cards make up your 16.The reasoning being that with more little cards left in the shoe, the odds are slightly better that you'll draw another little card.

Quote: theoriemeister

I read on blackjackinfo.com that as long as the TC remains <0 then you hit 16 v. 10, no matter how many cards make up your 16.The reasoning being that with more little cards left in the shoe, the odds are slightly better that you'll draw another little card.

That is correct. I didn't want to get too much into the card counting aspect of 16 vs 10, because the original poster didn't mention card counting.

Basically 16 vs 10 is a losing hand (long-term) no matter which way you play it. It is one of those situations that playing it correctly just reduces the negative expectation and that really is only a slight reduction.

But as a counter you can turn this very ugly, long-tern negative EV hand into a positive situation in the form of cover. 16 vs 10 is one of the most common hands, maybe the single most common (I forget), and as such it becomes easier to see when a player plays it one way one time and then differently the next. Also because the index for hitting/standing is right at 0, you will frequently play it one way one time and differently the next. This hand is in the top 3 of 'tells' that identify a card counter.

So for cover purposes, if you decide to stay on this hand all the time rather than hit some stay some, you are playing it correctly 100% of the time that your larger wagers are out and only playing it incorrectly when your smallest or 'waiting' wager is out, so this has minimal cost and you have eliminated one of the bigger ''tells' that identify card counters. And if you do any kind of wonging out or sitting out (bathroom breaks, phony phone calls) of some of the negative counts, the cost is even less.

There are several plays know as "counters basic strategy" that have this effect. Minimal cost, but has a beneficial effect for card counters.

OK, so stand on 16 v 10 all the time is the correct play on a positive count, and even if not correct, not so bad on a negative count when you have a lower amount at risk. That's easy enough to remember.

But now (and to save me doing my own homework by RTFM), how about 16 vs 7 8 9? (I assume what holds for a dealer 10 is true for a dealer Ace - you're in an even deeper hole against that Ace). Obviously the 16 is just as weak in and of itself, but the dealer card is less beneficial to the dealer. Just thinking in general terms, you would maybe want to err on the side of still being in the game when the dealer flips his hole card, so therefore stand on a 16 on a dealer 7-8-9-10-A is a good play all the time? Runs counter to what I have memorized as basic strategy, but now that I think about it, it might make sense: never hit a 16. I've heard people say that...

With a 16 vs. a dealer 7,8, or 9 (in decreasing order of relevance) you're more likely to win if you do draw a non-bust card (keeping in mind the dealer is more likely to have a 10 than any other value in the hole). Against a dealer 10 there's a good chance of that being a 20, tilting the odds more towards standing and hoping for a bust. An Ace behaves differently (remember if there were a 10 in the hole there it'd be a blackjack) - there you would typically draw to any hand 16 or under because the dealer is far less likely to bust with an Ace up than any other upcard (given there is the fallback of the hand being soft).

Quote: racquet

OK, so stand on 16 v 10 all the time is the correct play on a positive count, and even if not correct, not so bad on a negative count when you have a lower amount at risk. That's easy enough to remember.

But now (and to save me doing my own homework by RTFM), how about 16 vs 7 8 9? (I assume what holds for a dealer 10 is true for a dealer Ace - you're in an even deeper hole against that Ace). Obviously the 16 is just as weak in and of itself, but the dealer card is less beneficial to the dealer. Just thinking in general terms, you would maybe want to err on the side of still being in the game when the dealer flips his hole card, so therefore stand on a 16 on a dealer 7-8-9-10-A is a good play all the time? Runs counter to what I have memorized as basic strategy, but now that I think about it, it might make sense: never hit a 16. I've heard people say that...

Kellynbnf has already answered this question, and appropriately for a lot of circumstances, counting or not.

Let me just add, as another way of looking at it. Your 16 vs Dealer 17... There are quite a few cards in the shoe that you can draw to make a really good hand. Your 16 vs Dealer 18, now there are less cards you can draw to make a good hand. Even less with Dealer 19, less again with Dealer 20. Possibilities with Dealer Ace get long winded quickly.

In short, your 16 vs Dealer 10 ( or Ace, 9, 8, or 7) is a bad hand, a losing hand. Playing it correctly and consistently, counting or not, will see you losing less. And that is the same as winning more for the session. Basic strategy for non-counters is correct, the way you imply you have it memorized. It is a starting point for counters. I will assume you know the differences in the strategy based on number of decks, and S17 vs H17 rules, and surrender or no, etc, etc. Learn all that first...

I don't count, yeah I know, pooh on me. The only games I'm lucky enough to play (almost always) are H17, 6 or 8 deck, no surrender. I hit a 2 card 16 vs a Dealer 10. I stand on a 3(or more) card 16 vs a Dealer 10. My 16 vs Dealer 7, or 8, or 9 is always a hit. That is not perfect, it's not composition dependent, but it is very easy to remember. For me at least, even when I'm drinking moderately heavy. I don't play when I'm drinking heavy ;-)
I don't play 6:5 Blackjack, I'll go celibate first.......

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Not all multi card 16 vs 10 combos are equal.

https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/9/

I gave the optimal strategy based on that index in a previous thread:

Three-card 16 vs. 10: Hit when you have a 10 or 6 except when you also have a 5. Expected return -0.539615

Choosing to hit or not is basicly a coin toss if you are not counting. But, if you want every razor thin advantage you can muster, there you have it.