Surrender 17 v. Ace?

From the Basic Strategy page found at blackjackinfo, I have to ask the collective wisdom of those here: Does this seem right?

On a 6D shoe, H17, DAS, LS, peek, the chart shows BS is to surrender a hard 17 v. dealer Ace. Am I crazy in disagreeing with the suggested play?

Thanks in advance.

(see URL http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bjbse.php?numdecks=6+decks&soft17=h17&dbl=all&das=yes&surr=ls&peek=yes)

Thanks, mojo. I was following that precise rule last week and got the hairy eyeball from a dealer and the rest of the table when I surrendered 17 against an Ace. The dealer had actually passed me and I had to pull him back so that I could surrender.

Appreciate the confirmation.

The key here is recognizing that the additional firepower granted the dealer under the H17 rule makes surrendering 17 vs. Ace a good idea - but NOT with S17. This is because with S17 you get to push when the dealer flips over a 6, but with H17 the dealer's hand improves more often than it busts. As this is a close decision, this factoid is enough to tip the scale in favor of surrendering in a H17 game.

Important to understand:

This issue begs the question - where can you find a shoe game with Late Surrender and H17 with penetration that makes the game playable. I for one have not seen same.

Late Surrender fails to negate the negative effect of the H17 rule, BUT to a Card Counter it more than compensates.

Well, no representations as to how playable the game is, but I found H17, DAS, DA2, LS, with 6 decks and about 65-75% penetration at San Manuel indian casino. Nothing particularly exciting to write home about, I'll admit, but I was there with a few friends and thought I'd take a shot.