Do you really want to see the HOOK of Basic Strategy? (this is real stuff)

Besides the correct Surrender of 16 vs. 9,T,A and 15 vs. T
Here we have some others that many professionals are not aware of:
I have the data from Lawrence Revere and it was generated by Julian Braun and extensively used by Kenny Uston teams, me and my BJ partners.

You will get two cards 17 when the dealer gets an ACE up 483 times in 100,000
Now, When you have 17 vs. ACE you will lose 304 times out of 483.
Why not SURENDER and lose 241.5 only? saving 62.5 bets

You will get two cards 15 when the dealer gets an ACE up 579 times in 100,000
Now, When you have 15 vs. ACE you will lose 377 times out of 579.
Why not SURENDER and lose 289.5 only? saving 87.5 bets

You will get two cards total of 15 when the dealer gets an 9 up 555 times in 100,000
Now, When you have a total of 15 vs. 9 you will lose 377 times out of 555.
Why not SURENDER and lose 277.5 only? saving 99.5 bets

You will get two cards 14 when the dealer gets an ACE up 579 times in 100,000
Now, When you have 14 vs. ACE you will lose 359 times out of 579.
Why not SURENDER and lose 289.5 only? saving 69.5 bets

You will get two cards 13 when the dealer gets an ACE up 676 times in 100,000
Now, When you have 13 vs. ACE you will lose 400 times out of 676.
Why not SURENDER and lose 338 only? saving 62 bets

You will get two cards 12 when the dealer gets an ACE up 676 times in 100,000
Now, When you have 12 vs. ACE you will lose 379 times out of 676.
Why not SURENDER and lose 338 only? saving 41 bets

You will get two cards 3,3 when the dealer gets an ACE up 36 times in 100,000
Now, When you have 3,3 vs. ACE you will lose 20 times out of 36.
Why not SURENDER and lose 18 only? saving 2 bets

You will get two cards 2,3 when the dealer gets an ACE up 96 times in 100,000
Now, When you have 2,3 vs. ACE you will lose 50 times out of 96.
Why not SURENDER and lose 48 only? saving 2 bets

You will get two cards 2,4 when the dealer gets an ACE up 96 times in 100,000
Now, When you have 2,4 vs. ACE you will lose 53 times out of 96.
Why not SURENDER and lose 48 only? saving 5 bets

You will get two cards total of 7 when the dealer gets an ACE up 193 times in 100,000
Now, When you have a total of 7 vs. ACE you will lose 107 times out of 193.
Why not SURENDER and lose 96.5 only? saving 10.5 bets

There are many more for Doubling Down and some Splits but I will not go in there yet.

Only on the above moves you will be saving a total of 441.5 bets per 100,000 hands and this alone will translate in a +0.4415 bets per 100 hands that will totally make the game an EVEN proposition with flat bets only for a 6Decks game that has Surrender where the house enjoy, according to basic strategy a +0.40% advantage. By only implementing the above modifications to your BS you will take the house edge away. Implementing this in a 6 Decks game it will create a better game then any Las Vegas Single Deck.

Puiu

You're not taking into account that when you don't lose, you WIN.

As usual, your "math" makes no sense.

Why would you like to hide the truth?

Are you working for casinos?
Why would you want the people to not be aware of this fact?

Puiu

"Now, When you have 17 vs. ACE you will lose 304 times out of 483".

This is not true. You will 304 units in those 483 bets. That's not the same things as losing 304 times out of 483 wagers.

Revere's numbers were for the single-deck game:

10-7 vs A

(16/52) * (4/51) * (4/50) = .001930618

7-10 vs A

(4/52) * (16/51) * (4/50) = .001930618

9-8 vs A

(4/52) * (4/51) * (4/50) = .000482655

8-9 vs A

(4/52) * (4/51) * (4/50) = .000482655
______________________________________

(2 * .001930618) + (2 * .000482655) = .004826546 (~483 per 100,000)

So, the player really does get this hand 483 times out of 100,000. Now, how often does the dealer get blackjack? Multiply the first two numbers above by 15/49 (since a Ten was used in the player hands of 10-7 and 7-10). Multiply the last two numbers by 16/49 since no Tens were used in the player hand(8-9 and 9-8):

(16/52) * (4/51) * (4/50) * (15/49) = .000591006
(4/52) * (4/51) * (4/50) * (16/49) = .000157602

Multiply the sum by 2:

(.000591006 + .000157602) * 2 = .001497216 (~150 per 100,000 hands)

So, out of the 483 times the player will face a 17 vs A, the dealer will have a blackjack 150 times.

Now, since early surrender is seldom offered any more, subtract those 150 from the 483 times the player will face this hand. They are losses the player can do nothing about. That leaves 333 hands for which the surrender option is available. Since we know that the player loses 304 units in 483 of these bets, and 150 of those units come from losses to a dealer BJ, we know the player must lose 154 units in the remaining 333 bets. If he surrendered for all 333 bets, he would lose 166.5 units (333/2). So standing is better than surrendering (-154 vs -166.5).

I'm glad you see you have such a solid grasp of the fundamentals. Your team must be very proud of you.

�,
with surrender a positive expectation game with FLAT bets only.

Surrender for half of your bet when you have this hands:

3,3 vs. ACE     EV=0.002%

6,6 vs. ACE     EV=0.003%

7,7 vs. ACE     EV=0.006%

7,7 vs. TEN     EV=0.008%

8,8 vs. ACE     EV=0.003%

2,3 vs. ACE     EV=0.002%

2,4 vs. ACE     EV=0.005%

First two cards = 7 vs. ACE   EV=0.011%

First two cards = 12 vs. ACE  EV=0.041%

First two cards = 13 vs. ACE  EV=0.062%

First two cards = 14 vs. ACE  EV=0.070%

First two cards = 15 vs. ACE  EV=0.088%

First two cards = 15 vs. TEN  EV=0.087%

First two cards = 16 vs. ACE  EV=0.077%

First two cards = 16 vs. TEN  EV=0.086%

First two cards = 17 vs. ACE  EV=0.063%

That gigantic bong you're smoking will take up too much table space.

"You do not have any concept for BJ ..., (Sorry!)"

Yeah. I hear that a lot.

On what occasions surrender has a positive EV?

... but the problem is that you hardly find early surrender nowadays let alone in single deck.
The rare casinos where ES is available, you won't be allowed to surrender against the ace. So your figures remain pure theorie.
The only situation which has some practical value is 15 vs. 9 but unfortunately you got this all wrong. Surrender is only advisable here if index is higher than +2.

Francis Salmon

but you forgot 14 vs T

You only surrender if the house is expected to win 75% of the hands.
In your first example, 17 v A. You claim une is expected to lose 304/483 hands, and should therefore surrender to save 62.5 bets.

If you surrender 483 hands, you are down 241.5 bets.

If you win 179 hands, and lose 304 hands by playing it out, you are only down 125 bets.

Your calculations do not account for the hands you win (in your "bets saved", you assume 0 bets won if you played it out).

If you choose to reinvent the wheel, and stumble on an amazing discovery on the way, great. But if you are trying to make an authoritative post that could lead new players astray, and you don't even check your numbers, that is just irresponsible.

But Puiu misinterpreted Revere's numbers. The player actually loses 304 units when playing those 483 hands. He doesn't lose 304 times in 483 hands.

I attempted to point this out in my first reply to Puiu, but unfortunately omitted a key word in the sentence. :)

"But if you are trying to make an authoritative post that could lead new players astray, and you don't even check your numbers, that is just irresponsible".

Precisely.

If as example we play black and surrender 483 times we lose $2415
If we play the hand and lose 304 times that is $3040. We also win 179 times which is $ 1790 subtracted from our lose of $3040 we are down $1250. Unless I am totally incorrect how can surrender be the superior play. the difference is $2415 lost your way as against $ 1250 lost playing out the hand for a whopping difference of $1165. Please respond.

Dear Puiu,

if you will look back at my postw you sill find that I am indeed a very strong proponent of surrendering. However like many of your posts your premise does not consider all possibilities. Remember your post on permutations where you didn't realize the numbers would include thirteen card hands and not include pairs. Here you have failed to take into consideration that a surrender does not save you from the dealer having a blackjack. If the dealer already has an Ace you will pay the surrender fee of half your bet and still lose the hand. Its one thing to surrender against a hand where the dealer has to pull an ace " out of his ass " and another to surrender when his ace is already showing. In addition to this there is a surrender index for the 17 vs. A condition. The fact that I don't know what it is tells me its greater that +5. I surrender every chance I get also because I feel (opionion) that it stabilizes the game, Using mathematics I have proven to myself that there is less standard deviation in a game that encompasses expanded surrender. If I am wrong on this I would appreciate Don,Arnold,Gamemaster.or the wizard of odds correcting me,
I do have the surrender Indexes that I have worked out for an 8 deck shoe, DOA, RSA, S17, LSR. These are the results of a simulator that has run millions of hands. I have done a lot of work to incorporate as much surrender in my strategy as is mathematically correct. I post all my surrender indexes for those who play multiple deck shoes with the same conditiobns as mentioned above. I posted always on some that have negative indexes as I never play more than one losing hand below negative one. Its my out of game switch. Hope this helps someone the way the above mentioned people have helped me.

Hi-LOW

14 vs. 9 > +4
14 vs. 10 > +2
14 vs. A > +4

15 vs. 8 > +4
15 vs. 9 > +2
15 vs. 10 > 0
15 vs. A > +1

16 vs. 8 > +2
16 vs. 9 > 0
16 vs. 10 > Always
16 vs. A > Always

7,7 vs. 10 > +3
8,8 vs. 10 > 0

help me.
Posted By: Steephen <Steephen@3oaks.com> on 24 July 02, 9:31 a.m.

Dear Blackjack people.

Please help me. If you ever see me post a reply to Puiu again.
Call me on it. Ridicule me. Get my Address from me and come over and kick me right in the Ass.

Please help me.

Dear Randy,

Thank you, You aren't going to kick me hard are you? I know your right.

and any other posts that are in doubt. And please follow that advice for this post as well!

Did someone say that you also claim to be a dealer? Wow - your naivety is something to behold! You're a very naive ruse to think you can fool a whole community that is 90% smarter than you.

For a partial cube like Puiu a little toke now and then might get the good vibes flowing. I know that sometimes he lays some bad trips on us, but maybe if he lets his hair down a little he'd be cool. Leave the bummers to the casino squares and just groove on the coin flowing into your stash Puiu. Peace