Austrilian/macau blackjack strategy confusion

i am confused for a long time, i know there is only an answer in the great United State of America. like Wizard, Eliot, Romes...

it is blackjack hands: 16(88)VS 10, 15VS 10, 14vS10.

European no hold card, OBO (Dealer takes original bets only),

strategy of the 3 situations of this link: https://wizardofmacau.com/games/blackjack.html
all surrender.

by wording of this link: https://wizardofodds.com/games/australian-blackjack/
'Mathematically speaking, this is equivalent to the American rule where the dealer peeks for blackjack. '

then i tried to check Blackjack Hand Calculator https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/hand-calculator/
using the option of 'dealer peeks blackjack(us)', only change 8 decks into 6 deck.
when 16(88) vs 10
Surrender -0.500000
Stand -0.536853
Hit -0.535361
Double -1.070722
SPLIT -0.475705
then split should be best instead of surrender.


when 15 vs 10,
Surrender -0.500000
Stand -0.536220
HIT -0.499763
Double -0.999525
then hit should be best instead of surrender.

when 14 VS 10,
Surrender -0.500000
Stand -0.539818
HIT -0.466098
Double -0.938057
then hit should be best instead of surrender.

is it public question or do i have to pay for the answer?

Quote: tomchina123

when 15 vs 10,
Surrender -0.500000
Stand -0.536220
HIT -0.499763
Double -0.999525
then hit should be best instead of surrender.

Macau has early surrender, and it is better to surrender on 88vs 10, 14vs 10 and 15 vs 10 with early surrender. You are calculating for late surrender rule.

By the way, with late surrender (6 decks, S17)
8-7 vs 10 Hit = - 0.4998
9-6 vs 10 Hit = - 0.5053
10-5 vs 10 Hit = - 0.5039
6-6-3 vs 10 hit = - 0.5138

So, it is usually better to late surrender on 15 vs 10, but when your 15 is an 8-7, it is slightly better to hit.

Quote: gordonm888

Macau has early surrender, and it is better to surrender on 88vs 10, 14vs 10 and 15 vs 10 with early surrender. You are calculating for late surrender rule.

By the way, with late surrender (6 decks, S17)
8-7 vs 10 Hit = - 0.4998
9-6 vs 10 Hit = - 0.5053
10-5 vs 10 Hit = - 0.5039
6-6-3 vs 10 hit = - 0.5138

So, it is usually better to late surrender on 15 vs 10, but when your 15 is an 8-7, it is slightly better to hit.

thanks, Gordonm888.

from the numbers, i can see you are a big professional.
by surrender, we lose 50%. so no difference from early or later. and when checking the number of hitting or splitting, the same?
and what are other numbers?
like 88VS10, the split?
and the 14VS 10?

Quote: tomchina123

...by surrender, we lose 50%. so no difference from early or later...

but there is a difference in strategy compared to early or late surrender...

For Early Surrender vs 10, the probabilities include the scenario in which the dealers second card is an Ace giving the dealer blackjack. So, given 6 decks, S17, DAS

10-4 vs 10: Early surrender = - 0.50 Hit = -0.5048

10-5 v 10: Early surrender = - 0.50 Hit = -0.5434

8-8 v 10: Early surrender = - 0.50 Hit = -0.5714 Stand = -0.5728 SPLIT = -0.5233

Remember that all of the above EVs for Hit, Split and Stand include the scenario in which the dealer has blackjack. That is what early surrender means - it means you can surrender before it is known whether the dealer has blackjack and avoid losing your full bet when dealer does have blackjack.

thanks, i almost got what i need.

one more:

for 8-8 v 10: SPLIT = -0.5233

is it considered?

European no hold card, OBO (Dealer takes original bets only),

When early surrender is an option, basic strategy is to surrender, not split, 88 v T.

The important question though is, is there a negative index where splitting 88 v T becomes more attractive? What about 15 v T?

The reason why the value of hitting changes is because in one instance you are examining the situation before the dealer has checked for blackjack, and in the other you are looking at it after he has checked. Obviously if there is an additional 1/13 chance that you lose this worsens the odds.

thanks for the interest in talking about this.

here i copy more again from this link:

''''Australian blackjack is played much the same way as in the rest of the world. As in Europe and Asia, the dealer does not take a hole card in Australia. If the player doubles and/or splits, and the dealer gets a blackjack, then what happens next in Australia depends on the particular casino. There are four for possibilities for this hole-card rule, as follows:
OBO (Dealer takes original bets only): Under this rule, the dealer will take the player's original bet only, regardless of what the player did. The player may split and/or double under this rule, without fear of losing more than the initial bet. Mathematically speaking, this is equivalent to the American rule where the dealer peeks for blackjack. My main blackjack page is based on the U.S. rules.
...
...
....''''''

if it is equivalent to the American rule where the dealer peeks for blackjack, in USA, 88VS10, split, why not split?

Quote: tomchina123

thanks for the interest in talking about this.

here i copy more again from this link:

''''Australian blackjack is played much the same way as in the rest of the world. As in Europe and Asia, the dealer does not take a hole card in Australia. If the player doubles and/or splits, and the dealer gets a blackjack, then what happens next in Australia depends on the particular casino. There are four for possibilities for this hole-card rule, as follows:
OBO (Dealer takes original bets only): Under this rule, the dealer will take the player's original bet only, regardless of what the player did. The player may split and/or double under this rule, without fear of losing more than the initial bet. Mathematically speaking, this is equivalent to the American rule where the dealer peeks for blackjack. My main blackjack page is based on the U.S. rules.
...
...
....''''''

if it is equivalent to the American rule where the dealer peeks for blackjack, in USA, 88VS10, split, why not split?

Because the surrender offered is EARLY surrender - which is more valuable then LATE surrender (with the former it's better to surrender than to split, while with the latter surrender isn't worth quite enough to be more valuable than splitting).

From a strategy viewpoint, the "no peek-OBO" rule is equivalent to the U.S. "dealer peeks" rule.

The EV = O.5233 for SPLIT 8-8 vs 10 is pertinent to a late surrender decision - it does indeed factor in the possibility that the dealer has blackjack. The fact that there is roughly a 1/13 chance that the dealer has blackjack tips the scales in the direction of surrendering and settling for an EV = -0.50.