resplit 88s

Today I think I misplayed a hand and it bothers me. I resplit 88s three times against the dealer's seven. On the first two hands, I got tens. On the third hand I got a six and broke after drawing. The dealer drew out to beat my two 18s. I get the feeling that it may not have been correct to hit the stiff because of the fact that I was playing three hands. And of course had I stood pat instead of drawing, the dealer would've have busted. I've never seen this point addressed in any basic strategy manual. Would this be a case of reinventing the wheel or thinking too far outside the box?

...the removal of the three 8s would have reduced the probability of breaking that 14.

If my memory serves me correctly, failing to split 8s vs. a 7 was considered the most costly mistake in BJ by Peter Griffin in ToBJ. This not anywhere near a close play.

The overwhelming majority of the time, if it is correct to split once, then it is correct to re-split as often s possible. If your goal is to maximize EV and you are playing from an infinite deck, then it is definitely true. There are some situations in single and double deck where there are splits that are very lose, and it is BS to split once but not to split again. These plays are anomalies, and they come up only in close situations. I would not worry about the,
And more important, this consideration does NOT apply to 8s vs 7, because that is not anything like a borderline play.

Finally, for very close plays, Risk-Aversion can be a factor. If the EV is close, there are sound reasons to minimize variance. However, in split situation, hitting on stiffs reduces variance; standing on them increase variance.

That is, in very close plays with big bets out, you would be justified in hitting a bit more often after a split. Here you were doing the opposite.

And again, this consideration only comes into effect for close plays, and splitting 8s v 7 is NOT one of them.