Ramond
Joined: Nov 8, 2010
• Posts: 34
March 12th, 2011 at 5:22:44 AM permalink
When I play in Holland Casino, they don't use the hole-card rule. The dealers just gets 1 card. In the afternoon most tables are empty and I play face to face, alone against the dealer.
Playing basic strategy sometimes gives me a bad feeling when the dealer is showing a '10' and I have a stiff 14,15 or 16.

It's because of this: let's say I don't bust and 'hit' a 2 on my 15.
I now have 17 against a dealers 10, which still is terrible. If I did not hit, I had a good chance because the dealer gets a stiff 12.

It's the same when I hit a 3 on my 15. 18 against a 10 is not really hopefull. A dealer with a stiff 13 is MUCH more hopefull!

And the same when I hit a 4 on my 15. 19 against a 10 is not bad, but I guess a stiff 14 for the dealer is better.

Only hitting a 5 or 6 is really good.

The same for hitting a 16 against a dealers 10. I prefer the dealer has a stiff 12,13 or 14 when the next card is 2, 3 or 4.
And hitting a 6 is really, really terrible.

Does someone has any stats or math about this? I play perfect basic strategy but in the examples above it's very hard for me to understand hitting is better then stand against a dealers '10'.

SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
• Posts: 8690
March 12th, 2011 at 6:35:18 AM permalink
The easiest way to think about it is that basic strategy has analyzed every situation given the number of decks in play and what your cards are and the dealers card is. When you say '18 is not really hopeful' that has no real meaning. Of course against a dealer 10 your 18 will lose more often than it will win. But there is nothing you can do at that time. The 18 was 'more hopeful' than your 15 was. Basic strategy just says you will lose less over time by hitting 15 against a 10 compared to standing, not that you will win more than you will lose from that starting point. (Assuming surrender not permitted). We ALL 'prefer' the dealer has a stiff 12, 13, or 14. But unfortunately they do not respond to my preferences.
PapaChubby
Joined: Mar 29, 2010
• Posts: 495
March 12th, 2011 at 7:06:31 AM permalink
I think the information you are looking for is in the Wizard's Blackjack appendix 1. Consider the case where you have a 15 against a dealer's 10. Standing on this condition will result in an average loss of .5404 betting units per hand. Hitting results in an average loss of 0.5004 betting units per hand. Playing \$10 per hand, on average you will net an extra 40 cents every time you hit this condition instead of standing. You are correct to get a bad feeling, clearly this is a bad condition for the player. Either way you will lose about 75% of the time. But over the long haul, you will win once more over every 25 such hands by hitting instead of standing.
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
• Posts: 8801
March 12th, 2011 at 9:05:52 AM permalink
The dealer has an advantage. As the game goes on you keep getting clobbered. However, Blackjack pays 3:2

That is when you get it back and have a chance to come out ahead.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
supergreg2
Joined: Mar 8, 2011
• Posts: 9
March 12th, 2011 at 10:45:44 AM permalink
Yeah those hands suck, that's why basic strategy says to surrender if possible ;). Otherwise hitting wins more often than standing.
soulhunt79
Joined: Oct 8, 2010
• Posts: 207
March 12th, 2011 at 2:18:00 PM permalink
To me the best way of thinking about those types of hands are you are expected to lose. You simply got very bad cards and need some luck for you to win. Your choices are to hit and try and get a much better hand, or to stay and hope the dealer just busts. Either situation has bad odds. Math simply says which choice makes you lose less in the long run.
Jufo81
Joined: May 23, 2010
• Posts: 344
March 12th, 2011 at 2:23:24 PM permalink
What the OP is trying to say is that the odds seem different when there is no hole card as opposed to there being a hole card. For example if you have 15 vs. 10 and the next card is Seven, you will always lose no matter whether you hit or stand, whereas with hole card there would have been a way to win the hand.
guido111
Joined: Sep 16, 2010
• Posts: 707
March 12th, 2011 at 2:47:12 PM permalink
Quote: Ramond

When I play in Holland Casino, they don't use the hole-card rule. The dealers just gets 1 card. In the afternoon most tables are empty and I play face to face, alone against the dealer.
Playing basic strategy sometimes gives me a bad feeling when the dealer is showing a '10' and I have a stiff 14,15 or 16.

Does someone has any stats or math about this? I play perfect basic strategy but in the examples above it's very hard for me to understand hitting is better then stand against a dealers '10'.

Maybe this is what you seek.

Blackjack: Basic Strategy Chart for European Blackjack
At the WoO HERE
or even
Australian Blackjack
At the WoO HERE
PapaChubby
Joined: Mar 29, 2010
• Posts: 495
March 12th, 2011 at 3:38:00 PM permalink
Quote: Jufo81

What the OP is trying to say is that the odds seem different when there is no hole card as opposed to there being a hole card. For example if you have 15 vs. 10 and the next card is Seven, you will always lose no matter whether you hit or stand, whereas with hole card there would have been a way to win the hand.

Even re-reading the post, I don't get that at all. If so, that's just silliness.
P90
Joined: Jan 8, 2011