Illustrious 18

Do I have these three adjustments correct? 6-deck, S17 with surrender

16 v 10 stand when +0 or greater
15 v 10 stand when +4 or greater
16 v 9 stand when +5 or greater

I normally SURRENDER all three. An increasing positive count would seem to me to make a 10 under-card more likely. Surrender seems a better idea, Do these adjustments assume a no-surrender game?

Quote: racquet

Do I have these three adjustments correct? 6-deck, S17 with surrender

16 v 10 stand when +0 or greater
15 v 10 stand when +4 or greater
16 v 9 stand when +5 or greater

I normally SURRENDER all three. An increasing positive count would seem to me to make a 10 under-card more likely. Surrender seems a better idea, Do these adjustments assume a no-surrender game?

These adjustments apply when you can't surrender when either surrender is not offered and/or when you have more than two cards.

Don Schlesinger invented the Illustrious 18, but he has another list called Fab 4, which covers surrender.

You are correct, in higher counts surrendering becomes more attractive. 15 v T is a play that is right on the index, where at 0 or higher you want to surrender but in any negative count you want to hit. 16 v 9 becomes a hit at -1 or lower. 16 v T also becomes a hit in more negative counts.

SO there are hit / stand indexes, which you have posted, but also hit / surrender indexes.

Quote: BlackjackGuy123

SO there are hit / stand indexes, which you have posted, but also hit / surrender indexes.

There really aren't hit / surrender indexes for these plays mentioned, 16 vs 10, 16 vs 9, 15 vs 10. They are basic strategy surrender, if surrender is available. You shouldn't even be at the table for any count that hitting would be more advantageous than surrender on these hands.

Surrender is one of those things that if you don't do it at low limits and mid level limits, it doesn't cost that much. But you get into higher limits and you better be surrendering those basic strategy surrender plays.

"There really aren't hit / surrender indexes for these plays mentioned, 16 vs 10, 16 vs 9, 15 vs 10."

Yes there are, and I listed them.

" You shouldn't even be at the table for any count that hitting would be more advantageous than surrender on these hands. "

15 v T is a hit at -1 running count. At any rate it is often more profitable to play all than to wong in and out and some casinos only have one shoe game. The most profitable situation for a card counter is heads up with a faster dealer (4x the hourly rate of a crowded table), and when you are in that situation you are always better off playing through negative counts than leaving the table.

15 vs T: at running count -1, hitting is more advantageous than surrender? You might want to double check that.

The index for surrendering 15 v T with hi-lo is 0. You surrender in positive counts and hit in negative counts. Please see Wong's Professional Blackjack for more on this subject.

Quote: BlackjackGuy123

The index for surrendering 15 v T with hi-lo is 0. You surrender in positive counts and hit in negative counts. Please see Wong's Professional Blackjack for more on this subject.

Well how about that, I stand corrected. 15 vs T, at a TC -1 is one of the closest plays in blackjack, with hitting being the ever so slightest better play. 16 vs 10 however, is not even close. Surrender is the better option until a very negative index number where hitting becomes the slightly better option. However knowing and implementing this is worth about a pack of Wrigley's gum over a lifetime.

We are out of the game by a negative count of -1, as far any real money. We may have a spotter playing a -1 count, but they aren't playing any index plays anyway.

"16 vs 10 however, is not even close. Surrender is the better option until a very negative index number where hitting becomes the slightly better option."

-3. The number is -3.

That would be a house advantage of over 2%, approaching single zero roulette. Are you playing a lot of these counts? If you are, I highly recommend you stop. Saving a couple cents with an index play, on a round with negative expectation of several dollars is not how you make money at this game.

Actually playing all is almost always more profitable than leaving the table in negative counts because the real way to make money in blackjack is playing heads up. You can easily get 4x as many rounds per hour heads up than you will at a crowded table, so I would much rather burn through the negative counts with a minimum bet than join a new game that will be slowed to a crawl by idiots deciding whether or not they should hit their stiff. Only a fool would quit a heads up game where conditions are optimal simply because the count has gone down. You can't be scared to take slightly the worst of it on a minimum bet if it means you will have many more opportunities to take slightly the best of it on a maximum bet in the very near future.

Count me as a fool then. Focusing on advantageous situations, has worked pretty well for me and my team for 40 years.

But you do as you like.

Neither one is a fool. Both ways work, I've had success with wonging and playing safer as well as playing all, even very negative counts, on heads up no mid shoe.
The later has lower % advantage but plays much faster.

That's a good point tyler, it is quite situational. In the area I am playing in all the casinos only have one shoe game anyway so it is kind of a moot point although I suppose I could always wong between casinos. It does depend on a number of factors. For example, you might decide to hit a game where you could not spread much for reasons of bankroll management in which case an early wong out point would be important. Or conditions can deteriorate, you get a dealer that cuts off more cards and/or some really slow playing plops join your table in which case leaving the game becomes more and more attractive.