Re split any card 4 times
Blackjack pays 6:5
Dealer hits S17
Late Surrender pays 3:5
I found a hand by hand software where I figured out it was optimal to surrender 13 to 10 showing ect ect, but a Strategy chart would be nice too.
- Threads: 1374
- Posts: 22928
Here the surrender strategy chart (late surrender pays 3:5). It's not from a simulation; it's from the infinite-deck model. Please verify it with the hand by hand software you found.
HAND 7 8 9 10 A hard17 sur. sur. sur. hard16 sur. sur. sur. sur. sur. hard15 sur. sur. sur. sur. hard14 sur. sur. sur. hard13 sur. sur. 8s sur. sur.
Using the WoO's Blackjack Appendix 9 - 6 Decks, Dealer Hits Soft 17
(available at https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/9/6dh17r4/)
I concur that all the hands you posted should be surrendered.
However, I also found that 7,7 should be surrendered vs. a dealer's 9, X, or A as well. In each case, without the 3:5 LS, the BS play is to Hit, and the Hit EV's are -0.437912, -0.474064, and -0.477592, respectively: all lower than the -0.4 for 3:5 LS.
Hope this helps!
I got the same as you except I get 77 should have some surrenders as well.
I just spent 25 mins trying to figure out how to post pictures of a basic strategy since my picture wasn't posting. Then I realized "New members are not allowed to post links until they reach 20 posts." DOH!
Anyway the extra hands I got for surrender is
77 SURENDER TO 9, 10, A
Given how many hands that basic strategy says you should surrender on with a 3:5 surrender rule I think that such a rule would change the nature of the game too much. Also, it would slow it down - the dealer would be constantly making change.
I mean, its not a lot of fun hitting stiff hands vs 9, 10, A but sometimes you hit a 14 and draw a 7 and it is a bit of a thrill. But surrendering all those hands - no fun in that.
Also, "card consumption" would go down - meaning that card counters would get more hands out of a shoe -particularly when the TC is + and dealer is more likely to get a Ten, lol.
The house should love any surrender option. Every table I've EVER PLAYED AT EVER that has surrender has people surrendering ALL KINDS of hands they should not be surrendering. The house makes a killing on these people that don't know how to surrender, and I would be willing to wager much more than the few hands per hour they'd lose for the dealer making change.Quote: gordonm888
Welcome to the forum, happahero. Always nice to see new members that can think about game changes in a logical way.
Given how many hands that basic strategy says you should surrender on with a 3:5 surrender rule I think that such a rule would change the nature of the game too much. Also, it would slow it down - the dealer would be constantly making change...
I once had a woman HATE surrender so much (changed the flow of the cards) that she purchased my hand at FULL value when I wanted to surrender, then she'd play the horrible hand. This went on for almost 2 hours until she just simply kept busting on my 15's and 16's and cried uncle.
Been a lurker for years but I have made it my resolution to start contributing more from now on :)
...Anyway the extra hands I got for surrender is
77 SURENDER TO 9, 10, A
By the way, once my friends and I happened on a table of all inexperienced players and an inexperienced dealer who would pay 1 for 1 on late surrender.
My friends sat at the table but then the relief dealer arrived. When the relief dealer paid 1 for 2 on the first surrender, the player said something like, "You paid me wrong."