Thread Rating:

Poll

23 votes (62.16%)
3 votes (8.1%)
8 votes (21.62%)
4 votes (10.81%)
8 votes (21.62%)
2 votes (5.4%)
3 votes (8.1%)
2 votes (5.4%)

37 members have voted

Malaru
Malaru
Joined: Mar 22, 2010
  • Threads: 79
  • Posts: 274
January 21st, 2011 at 6:25:24 PM permalink
Quote: P90

I don't count standing 16v10 to be an error, it's the right move for long 16, it's the right move at ever-so-slightly positive count, so it's often just the right play by default.
Doubling 10v10 is also often the right play, depending on the rules and count.

Treating 18 as a great hand is perhaps the most common, but followed closely by passive play against 7-8 cards, which often includes even standing on 15v7.




It mentioned BASIC strat.
"Although men flatter themselves with their great actions, they are not so often the result of a great design as of chance." - Francois De La Rochefoucauld
P90
P90
Joined: Jan 8, 2011
  • Threads: 12
  • Posts: 1703
January 21st, 2011 at 7:27:03 PM permalink
Yes, but basic strategy is not a codex of laws. It's a set of suggestions that are optimal under default conditions, and there are good reasons they call it basic. With laws, you can say "no matter how little you break it, it's a crime", with systems like BS you can't. Making the right move is never an error, even if it's a non-BS move.

For what it's worth, the standard BS chart tells you to *surrender* 16v10. If you can't surrender in a game that offers it, it means you have 3+ cards, in which case you stand. As such, in any LS game, hitting 16v10 is always an error, except possibly in split hands. But you only split 88 against 10, and even in that rare case, you have 4+ cards out, limiting hitting 16v10 to very few specific compositions.

Charts that tell one to hit 16v10 are true to the methods they have been derived with, but highly misleading, which is a mild form of saying "in error", even though the error is due to the method. Any player with access to LS games should learn to stand on 16v10 if can't surrender, since that is the right play under all but exceedingly rare circumstances.
Resist ANFO Boston PRISM Stormfront IRA Freedom CIA Obama
mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
January 21st, 2011 at 8:56:28 PM permalink
Quote: P90

Yes, but basic strategy is not a codex of laws. It's a set of suggestions that are optimal under default conditions, and there are good reasons they call it basic. With laws, you can say "no matter how little you break it, it's a crime", with systems like BS you can't. Making the right move is never an error, even if it's a non-BS move.

For what it's worth, the standard BS chart tells you to *surrender* 16v10. If you can't surrender in a game that offers it, it means you have 3+ cards, in which case you stand. As such, in any LS game, hitting 16v10 is always an error, except possibly in split hands. But you only split 88 against 10, and even in that rare case, you have 4+ cards out, limiting hitting 16v10 to very few specific compositions.

Charts that tell one to hit 16v10 are true to the methods they have been derived with, but highly misleading, which is a mild form of saying "in error", even though the error is due to the method. Any player with access to LS games should learn to stand on 16v10 if can't surrender, since that is the right play under all but exceedingly rare circumstances.



??? Lacking the ability to surrender, the optimal play is to hit 16 vs. 10. The only exception is if you are playing single deck, and your hard 16 is comprised of three or more cards--then stand. In any shoe game without surrender, hitting is always the best play (assuming, obviously, that you are not counting).
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
P90
P90
Joined: Jan 8, 2011
  • Threads: 12
  • Posts: 1703
January 21st, 2011 at 9:30:25 PM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

??? Lacking the ability to surrender, the optimal play is to hit 16 vs. 10. The only exception is if you are playing single deck, and your hard 16 is comprised of three or more cards--then stand. In any shoe game without surrender, hitting is always the best play (assuming, obviously, that you are not counting).


Are you positive? While most CDE apply only to SD and fewer to DD games, the exception for S16v10 at 3+ cards is one that applies to shoe games as well, to the best of my knowledge. The relative advantage of hitting over standing under default conditions is so minuscule that it reverses with even such a small touch.

Some of the more detailed basic strategy chart calculators even suggest to stand on 16v10 outright if can't surrender (while hitting in no-surrender games).
Resist ANFO Boston PRISM Stormfront IRA Freedom CIA Obama
mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
January 22nd, 2011 at 2:53:28 AM permalink
Quote: P90

Are you positive? While most CDE apply only to SD and fewer to DD games, the exception for S16v10 at 3+ cards is one that applies to shoe games as well, to the best of my knowledge. The relative advantage of hitting over standing under default conditions is so minuscule that it reverses with even such a small touch.



Yep, positive. The 3-card rule only applies to single decks. Which makes sense, since the third card isn't enough to change the composition of a six-deck shoe to a point where you should change the play from "hit" to "stand".

If you think about it, you should be MORE inclined to hit hard 16 against a 10 in a shoe game, all other things being equal. That "strategy calculator" you are using is flawed---particularly, as you point out, when it recommends standing in one instance and hitting in another, identical instance.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
P90
P90
Joined: Jan 8, 2011
  • Threads: 12
  • Posts: 1703
January 22nd, 2011 at 3:24:32 AM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

Yep, positive. The 3-card rule only applies to single decks. Which makes sense, since the third card isn't enough to change the composition of a six-deck shoe to a point where you should change the play from "hit" to "stand".


I respect the practice of replying from memory alone. But this is a relatively obscure point where it might be worth the while to check with hard data. On this particular matter I've heard of this CDE applying to multi-deck games from every single source I've consulted.

Even Wizard's lists extend the stand long 16v10 exception past SD: http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/appendix3b.html



Quote: mkl654321

That "strategy calculator" you are using is flawed---particularly, as you point out, when it recommends standing in one instance and hitting in another, identical instance.


Actually it recommends always standing when can't surrender in surrender-enabled games, and hitting on two cards only in no-surrender games. Since you will rarely face 16v10 H/S choice in surrender-enabled games, and in almost all of those cases standing is better, it's the right recommendation, ignoring the exceptionally rare case for several common ones.
Resist ANFO Boston PRISM Stormfront IRA Freedom CIA Obama
miplet
miplet
Joined: Dec 1, 2009
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 2036
January 22nd, 2011 at 4:05:28 AM permalink
From Here
Quote:

*One exception is 16v10 with surrender. If surrender is allowed and you have a two-card 16 versus a 10 up, you surrender the hand and never reach this table. So, if you do reach this table, your 16 must be made up of three or more cards or the product of a split, and the other cards are probably small cards. With fewer small cards left, the dealer is more likely to bust. So you stand and hope the dealer busts. The difference is tiny, about .002%. The fact is, if you have 16 against a ten, you are probably going to lose no matter what you do.

“Man Babes” #AxelFabulous
dm
dm
Joined: Apr 29, 2010
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 699
January 23rd, 2011 at 8:27:53 AM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

Actually, in most casinos, it isn't allowed. Anyone who normally played in a casino that didn't allow it would probably not even realize it if it WAS allowed.



DAS not allowed? It sure is in Vegas. Don't know about the "most". No telling what rules might exist at the NAC's (NA is short for those guys that kicked Custer's butt).
Yoyomama
Yoyomama
Joined: Oct 11, 2010
  • Threads: 44
  • Posts: 202
January 23rd, 2011 at 8:39:14 AM permalink
Quote: rdw4potus

not hitting/doubling A7 is very high on my list. So is not hitting 12 against a 2 or 3.



I agree. Especially the 12 against the 2 or 3. Because if they do (like I always do) everyone else will say "it's a bad move." Seems to bring out the most comments from others. Shows everyone else's ignorance.
boymimbo
boymimbo
Joined: Nov 12, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 5994
January 23rd, 2011 at 8:48:25 AM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

Actually, in most casinos, it isn't allowed. Anyone who normally played in a casino that didn't allow it would probably not even realize it if it WAS allowed.

.

In the Wizard's blackjack survey, DAS is allowed in all but 27 of his 186 rows. It is far more prevalent to be able to Double after split than not.
----- You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!

  • Jump to: