I know that most experts will tell me never to surrender 15 or 16 against a 2, but I have found from personal experience that it pays to do so on highly negative counts. I use Hi-LO. Has anyone run a SIM on this? Usually the game is H17 double deck or 6-deck shoe. Surrender is seldom available on S17.
You shouldn't even be playing in highly negative counts. But is you are... the choice would be between standing or HITING.
Personal experience is NOT the deciding factor!
Even at TC -1 or -2 it pays to surrender. Sometimes you're stuck in a negative count after several winning hands, and this situation can happen suddenly on DD games. Has anyone done a simulation? Of course I would hit 15 at TC-5 but I wouldn't playing at TC-5
that "it pays to surrender at -1 or -2". Of couse simulations have been done and the dealer busts 35% of the time with a 2 as his upcard. For surrender to be worthwhile the dealer would have to bust 25% of the time or less. Even at a true count of -4 the dealer busts more than 25% of the time. It would take a giant negative true count (like -20 or worse) to move a 35% bust percentage to 24% and since hitting 15 becomes the play at -5 it is irrelevant to even consider surrender.
The dealer must win 75% of the time or greater for surrender to be a positive eV play.
Thanks bigplayer, this is the first good insight I am getting.
So the dealer busts 35% of the time with a 2 showing. If this is an average, are you sure that at TC-4 it's still over 25%. I have my doubts on that. I rarely see a dealer bust at any negative count with a 2 showing. I know, I know, personal experience is meaningless, but it's meaningful to my little person here.
at TC of -4 must be > than 25% or the HiLo would tell you to surrender. At a TC of -5 or less the decision to surrender is irrelevant because hitting your 15 vs 2 is the best decision. If it was not there would be an index to surrender.
You must accept that the math for the game of blackjack has pretty much been done by now.
