I know that sixteen versus a dealer 10 is a hit, but read somewhere that a three card 16 (say a 10, 4, 2) is a stand. Is this true?
I also know that 16 vs. 10 is a close call anyway, but got to wondering if the number of cards makes any difference. Even say, a four card 16! Is the three card stand rule that I read only apply to some games? (like single deck, maybe)
My interest here is in basic strategy only. No counting involved.
quark...
I know that sixteen versus a dealer 10 is a hit, but read somewhere that a three card 16 (say a 10, 4, 2) is a stand. Is this true?
This is a refinement for the single deck game. For multiple deck games, BS is to hit regardless of the number of cards in the hand.
Thanks Parker. With you, I know I can that to the bank.
That makes me wonder on the strength of a dealer Ten upcard vs. an Ace. If the dealer does NOT have a Blackjack, do I take it to mean that a 10 is a stronger upcard? (Slightly worse for the player?)
This is a refinement for the single deck game. For multiple deck games, BS is to hit regardless of the number of cards in the hand.
No, the refinement holds true even for multideck games. For example:
10,6 vs 10
----------
Standing = -54.09544390190252%
Hitting = -53.46755624525634%
10,4,2 vs 10
------------
Standing = -54.11890134002660%
Hitting = -54.13228444089767%
That's what I get for relying on memory instead of looking it up. :-)
They say the memory is the second thing to go (I can't seem to remember what the first thing was).
Still, the multi-deck number is so close as to be a virtual toss-up.
As long as you're here, would you care to answer quark's second question, regarding the relative strength of a dealer 10 vs ace upcard, after we have established that the dealer does not have a blackjack?
I believe that the 10 is marginally stronger (my index for doubling 10 vs 10 is higher than 10 vs A), but I've already been wrong once today. :-)
Still, the multi-deck number is so close as to be a virtual toss-up.
Agree on this example but we can use another 3-card example where the difference is a little more pronounced:
10,5,A vs 10 (6D)
------------
Standing = -53.96865821256994%
Hitting = -54.13668221002755%
"I didn't answer that question because I'm not sure what he's asking.
However, this time you're right about the indices. The index for 10 vs 10 (+3.5) is a little bit higher than the index for 10 vs A (+3.3)."
I'm not sure what I'm asking either!
Ok... let me try this. My BS chart (for multideck S17) gives surrender 16 versus 9, 10, Ace. But on 15, surrender only on ten. NOT nine or Ace. Like it is stronger for the dealer to have a ten! Your "index" above tends to bear this out. Correct?
Ok... let me try this. My BS chart (for multideck S17) gives surrender 16 versus 9, 10, Ace. But on 15, surrender only on ten. NOT nine or Ace. Like it is stronger for the dealer to have a ten! Your "index" above tends to bear this out. Correct?
What you need to know is the player's advantage against each dealer upcard. For SD, the player's adv. against a dealer's TEN is -5.25% and against a dealer's ACE is -2.77%.
A TEN is stronger because it appears four times more than the other cards.
Hope this helps.
Sincerely,
Cacarulo
nt
Oh... I see. I learn something every day about this facinating game. Thanks for your insights!
"How do you feel about just counting the exposed cards for all hands. And then making the hit/stand decision. This question is just for otherwise non counting players."
Ok... here are my thoughts. I am learning KO and have it down pretty good. A little slow... sometimes drop the count, etc.
KO gives 16 vs. 10 as the number ONE "not counting insurance" strategic variation of basic strategy. It notes to stand at the key count. BUT, what about before the key count is reached, is there any benefit to using the 3 card rule. OR... am I just fussing over pennies?
Richard A Epstein, in his classic published in 1977, includes a table in the appendices (Table B, p 424) that lays out the expectations for drawing & standing for every possible 2-card, 3-card, and 4-card 16. In the text portion of the book (p226), he summarizes the results of the table this way: "We can... construct the following rule: Against a Ten, draw with 2-card 16s; draw with 3- and 4-card 16s that include two 6s or one 6 with a 7, 8, or 9, or holding 2,2,2,10; otherwise, stand."
Here are some more numbers to help answer the question (these are single-deck probabilities):
Probability of dealer obtaining a certain total:
Dealer's Up-card
A 10
--- ---
17 .13 .11
18 .13 .11
19 .13 .11
20 .13 .33
21 .05 .04
BJ .31 .08
Bust .12 .21
Further, player's expectation (with a full deck, single deck) when dealer shows an A--but does not have BJ-- is -0.085; when dealer shows a 10--but does not have BJ-- player's expectation = -0.102.
So, I would conclude that, yes, the 10 is a 'stronger' card from the dealer's perspective; i.e., worse for the player.
You all have shown that already--just thought I'd thrown in some additional data...
