3+ Card Basic Strategy

Hi,

I've recently memorized basic strategy and have been playing at my local casino and have been making some decent money unexpectedly, so I'm starting to wander and question beyond basic strategy. With perfect basic strategy, the house edge at the table I play is just about 0.4%. Unfortunately, the table with the lowest edge uses a CSM. There is a single deck blackjack table, but the BJ payout is 6:5 which cancels out any advantage from the single deck, at least as far as basic strategy goes.

What I have been wondering is if there is a way to alter or reassess basic strategy based on what the cards on the table suggest about remaining cards in the deck. I know that I can't count cards per se with a CSM, but is there some inclination that a counting of the cards currently on the table could slightly alter basic strategy in some cases? For example, if I have 16, and the dealer has 7, basic strategy would be to hit even though I will more than likely bust. But if the count at the table were somewhat high, say +7 suggesting that the remaining cards are more likely rich in 10s, would it be wiser to stay knowing that my likelihood of drawing a 10 and busting is increased? Basic strategy works for basic situations and card counting for situations in which a CSM is not present, but is there a way to increase your advantage against a CSM by applying what you can from card counting and adjusting some of the statistics of basic strategy accordingly based on which cards are on the table? I know this would only apply in a very limited number of circumstances, but if there are a handful of times that it would advantageous to deviate from basic strategy based on what is on the table, I would imagine that would do something to the already relatively low house edge of 0.4%. Any insight on this besides going to a casino that does not have a CSM would be helpful.

Another example of this would be in cases where I have had something like a hand of 12 with the dealers up card being an 8 lets say, where I hit once, get and ace, hit again and get a 3, leaving me at 16 between 4 cards. Basic strategy would still be to hit, but I feel like after two additional low cards being dealt, the likelihood of me winning against the dealer with a hand of 16 would be better than my likelihood of not busting by hitting a third time. Is there any validity to this either?

Welcome to the forum. You didn’t specify how many decks are used in the CSM. I’m going to assume 6. Also, let’s assume you are the last player to act (third base) among six and have seen 18 cards. (Yes, this is an extreme situation that might happen once in a while.)

Let’s leverage the well established Hi-Lo counting system to see if knowing 18 dealt cards offers much chance of an advantage. Again assuming an unlikely extreme, suppose the known cards give you a running count (RC) of +/- 12. Roughly that’s a true count of +/- 2 for rare, extreme situations.

So maybe a more realistic working figure would be detecting +/- 1 true counts. A quick check of the Illustrious 18 table shows 6 cases where you would change a marginal play for that count. It won’t get you much, as in it won’t erase the house edge.

An interesting question, thanks for posting.

The most common and easiest change to make is if you hit and get 16 v dealer 10, then stand. If there are multiple players and the count is positive, do the same for 9 and A. 15 v 10, stand if the true count is +4.

composition dependent basic strategy is a waste of time, learn how to count instead

Awesome, thanks! I did not think that this question would be well received by more experienced players, but that was super helpful!