BS for pair of 8's against Ace in BB+1? OBBO?

[Goodboy]

Hello there guys

Wondering if someone can help me out with this doubt. Where I play we have these rules (not all of them, just the ones relevant to the question):

- No Hole card dealt
- DAS
- One card per A when you split, nRSA
- If dealer gets a BJ you lose only your original bet. No splits or doubles lost....

....that sounds like american BJ where they check first and you can lose 1 bet only, right? But wait, there's a catch!. This applies to the bets standing on the table, since busted hands were already lost. Which busted hands, you say? You can't bust on doubling 11 or 10 against A or 10, or splitting A against A

But what about the pair of 8's or even pair of 9's if you get the right index according to your count system?

If you split pair of 8's you can lose all the hands due to busting or only one bet or two....

Whatever is left on the table when the dealer gets a BJ, they check if your ORIGINAL BET is still on the table. If it is, you lose only that one. If it's not on the table since you busted, you lose nothing.

The closest BJ handling type I've found to met these rules is BB+1, but it's not exactly the same. Why? Because if I split pair of 8's, got a 7 on first hand, hit and busted, then got a 10 on second hand and stay with 18 and the dealer gets a BJ, I don't lose anything more, since my original bet is already gone from the table. And BB+1 would mean that they would have to take one aditional bet besides the ones I already lost.

Is this OBBO?

To be more clear, let's take this example. Pair of 8's split to 3 hands

1st hand: 8, 7, 7 busted
2nd hand: 8, 3, double, 6 = 17 doubled down
3rd hand: 8, 10 = 18

In this casino I would lose only the busted hand (1 unit from 1st Hand). They won't even look at hand 2 or 3
OBBO from what I understand means I will also lose the original bet from hand 2.

I'd appreciate the help, thanks!

[bigplayer]

In your example you would lose only the bet on the first hand. Everything else (splits and doubles) would be returned to you if the house only takes your Original Bet. Whether the house would take a busted bet on a split is up to house policy, but many casinos would just put the chips on top of the cards and wait for the dealer to take a hole card, if the dealer has a BJ your chips would be returned on busted splits. If the dealer does not have a BJ your busted split would lose.

[Goodboy]

In your example you would lose only the bet on the first hand. Everything else (splits and doubles) would be returned to you if the house only takes your Original Bet. Whether the house would take a busted bet on a split is up to house policy, but many casinos would just put the chips on top of the cards and wait for the dealer to take a hole card, if the dealer has a BJ your chips would be returned on busted splits. If the dealer does not have a BJ your busted split would lose.

Well in this particular case they will take away any busted bets.

So the question is, should I split pair of 8's against A under this rules? (considering there's DAS involved)

[Dog Hand]

<snip>To be more clear, let's take this example. Pair of 8's split to 3 hands

1st hand: 8, 7, 7 busted
2nd hand: 8, 3, double, 6 = 17 doubled down
3rd hand: 8, 10 = 18

In this casino I would lose only the busted hand (1 unit from 1st Hand). They won't even look at hand 2 or 3
OBBO from what I understand means I will also lose the original bet from hand 2.

I'd appreciate the help, thanks!

Goodboy,

So, when you bust hand 1 (in the example above), does the dealer immediately remove your busted hand and the wager? If so, what visual cue remains on the table to remind the dealer (and the PC & EITS) that you've already lost one wager, so on a dealer BJ you don't lose anything else?

From my understanding, what you describe is not OBBO, or "Original plus Busted Bets Only", since in that case you lost ONLY your busted bet. If it were OBBO, the dealer would ALSO take one of your remaining wagers. Neither is it BB+1, for the reason you specified.

Maybe it's BOOB: Busted OR Original Bets. ;-)

Dog Hand

[Goodboy]

Goodboy,

So, when you bust hand 1 (in the example above), does the dealer immediately remove your busted hand and the wager? If so, what visual cue remains on the table to remind the dealer (and the PC & EITS) that you've already lost one wager, so on a dealer BJ you don't lose anything else?

From my understanding, what you describe is not OBBO, or "Original plus Busted Bets Only", since in that case you lost ONLY your busted bet. If it were OBBO, the dealer would ALSO take one of your remaining wagers. Neither is it BB+1, for the reason you specified.

Maybe it's BOOB: Busted OR Original Bets. ;-)

Dog Hand

When any hand busts in a split, they remove the wager and the cards inmediatly. They don't take any other bets from you, since they keep all the bets remaining that are outside the original circle where you put your original bet (that means those hands didn't bust). Those are safe so I guess that's the visual cue you are talking about. (

In any case, which would be the right decision to play a pair of 8's against an Ace? Since the basic strategy for regular american blackjack, where you know the dealer doesn't have a BJ cause of the peek device, is to split, I guess it should be the same in this case.

Because in both scenarios you still can lose both (or all split) hands if you get stiffs and then hit and bust, since you are facing an Ace.

But again I am not sure

[Dog Hand]

<snip>To be more clear, let's take this example. Pair of 8's split to 3 hands

1st hand: 8, 7, 7 busted
2nd hand: 8, 3, double, 6 = 17 doubled down
3rd hand: 8, 10 = 18

In this casino I would lose only the busted hand (1 unit from 1st Hand). They won't even look at hand 2 or 3
OBBO from what I understand means I will also lose the original bet from hand 2.

I'd appreciate the help, thanks!

When any hand busts in a split, they remove the wager and the cards inmediatly. They don't take any other bets from you, since they keep all the bets remaining that are outside the original circle where you put your original bet (that means those hands didn't bust). Those are safe so I guess that's the visual cue you are talking about. (

In any case, which would be the right decision to play a pair of 8's against an Ace? Since the basic strategy for regular american blackjack, where you know the dealer doesn't have a BJ cause of the peek device, is to split, I guess it should be the same in this case.

Because in both scenarios you still can lose both (or all split) hands if you get stiffs and then hit and bust, since you are facing an Ace.

But again I am not sure

What if, in the above example, you reverse hands 1 & 2, so you DON'T bust the original hand, but you DO bust one of the split hands. If the dealer subsequently gets a BJ, does she then take your ORIGINAL bet, since it is still in the circle? Or are your remaining bets immune, since you have already lost one?

I'm still trying to understand the rule, before I can attempt to determine the proper B.S. strategy.

Dog Hand

[Goodboy]

What if, in the above example, you reverse hands 1 & 2, so you DON'T bust the original hand, but you DO bust one of the split hands. If the dealer subsequently gets a BJ, does she then take your ORIGINAL bet, since it is still in the circle? Or are your remaining bets immune, since you have already lost one?

I'm still trying to understand the rule, before I can attempt to determine the proper B.S. strategy.

Dog Hand

Good question, in the case you mention, she WILL take my original bet.