MrPapagiorgio
MrPapagiorgio
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
  • Threads: 58
  • Posts: 183
December 25th, 2009 at 12:53:52 PM permalink
I was at Green Valley for a little while yesterday at a BJ table with 2 other players. I had a total of 8 vs the dealer's 2. I drew and was dealt a 4, so my new total was 12. Knowing that Michael's rule states to hit a 12 vs 2, I announced that I was going to have to take a hit, and both other players immediately looked extremely disappointed. Well, I took a 10 and busted, another player responded "well, there goes the bust card", however the dealer took another 10 and busted himself, to which the player responded with "well at least you only hurt yourself". Both players seemed to understand basic strategy, so I asked "aren't you supposed to hit 12 v 2", and they both agreed that this is only the case before the draw, and after you've taken a hit the correct play is to stand on 12. Ok, questions:

Are they right?
Why?
If so, is this true for other borderline plays (such as 16 v 10)?
So I says to him, I said "Get your own monkey!"
pocketaces
pocketaces
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 158
December 25th, 2009 at 1:54:53 PM permalink
Quote: MrPapagiorgio

I was at Green Valley for a little while yesterday at a BJ table with 2 other players. I had a total of 8 vs the dealer's 2. I drew and was dealt a 4, so my new total was 12. Knowing that Michael's rule states to hit a 12 vs 2, I announced that I was going to have to take a hit, and both other players immediately looked extremely disappointed. Well, I took a 10 and busted, another player responded "well, there goes the bust card", however the dealer took another 10 and busted himself, to which the player responded with "well at least you only hurt yourself". Both players seemed to understand basic strategy, so I asked "aren't you supposed to hit 12 v 2", and they both agreed that this is only the case before the draw, and after you've taken a hit the correct play is to stand on 12. Ok, questions:

Are they right?
Why?
If so, is this true for other borderline plays (such as 16 v 10)?



Are they right? No. That is unless the true count is greater than 3. But that's not why they told you to stand. They told you that out of the same superstitions as is usual. Of course your decision changes things - But you could have easily pulled a non-bust card, 'saving the table', or the dealer can still bust even if you bust. Over time, your hand will win slightly more often when you hit in this situation, and the dealer will bust the exact same number of times.

While a 12 made up of three cards has a lower spread in value between hitting and standing than a 12 made up of two cards, this effect is small and hitting is still the clear better play.

16 vs 10 is a bit different. In a non-surrender game, this hand is extremely borderline. Really, you can play it how you wish and it will matter little. If counting cards, this hand is so borderline that the decision can simply be made on whether the running count in negative or positive rather than the true count. Technically, on a hand made up of 3 cards it is ever-so-slightly better to stand. With two cards, hitting is better by a similar margin. Eyeballing all the cards on the table and basing your decision on that is technically the best, but again, the decrease in house edge will be small.

Interestingly 12 vs 4 is similar. It calls for a hit in any negative count, and for a basic strategy player you can play it as you wish with little change in the house edge. What's cool is hitting that hand drives the other people at the table absolutely nuts.
DrEntropy
DrEntropy
Joined: Nov 13, 2009
  • Threads: 27
  • Posts: 199
December 25th, 2009 at 1:55:06 PM permalink
Hmm... for single deck there are some exceptions like this (composition dependant strategy) but i don't think 12 vs 2 is one of them, and you are probably not playing single deck at the GVR (the only single deck I know of there is 6:5 blackjack, and if you are playing that you can gain much more ev by switching to the shoe games at GVR). In any event the composition dependant strategy only makes a tiny difference for multi deck games. Reference the wizards site on this:


See: http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/appendix15.html
"Mathematical expectation has nothing to do with results." (Sklansky, Theory of Poker).
DrEntropy
DrEntropy
Joined: Nov 13, 2009
  • Threads: 27
  • Posts: 199
December 25th, 2009 at 1:57:36 PM permalink
Quote: pocketaces



Interestingly 12 vs 4 is similar. It calls for a hit in any negative count, and for a basic strategy player you can play it as you wish with little change in the house edge. What's cool is hitting that hand drives the other people at the table absolutely nuts.



Hah! I love this. I am doing this next time I am at a table with people who like to tell me how to play my hand.
"Mathematical expectation has nothing to do with results." (Sklansky, Theory of Poker).

  • Jump to: