harry: surrender against ace

[MGP]

> This is almost exactly what I was after.
> I've often referred to the BS outline on the
> previous two pages but I never noticed that
> the surrender info was on the next page.
> Thanks Don.

> One thing though - I need a total-dependent
> strategy. I'm guessing it will be the same
> as the (T,5), (T,6) and (T,7) strategy. Is
> this correct?

Not exactly... The correct strategy when late surrender is allowed for 16 vs 10 is to Surrender/Stand. This is true for any number of decks for both S17 and H17 - Cacarulo first pointed this out on the BJMath page for S17 and it's also true for H17. I don't know how the count effects this though:

2D H17 DOA NDAS LS
Total Dependent
Hard Totals 10
4 H
5 H
6 H
7 H
8 H
9 H
10 H
11 D
12 H
13 H
14 H
15 R, H
16 R, S
17 S
18 S
19 S
20 S
21 S

Total Dependent
Soft Totals 10
12 H
13 H
14 H
15 H
16 H
17 H
18 H
19 S
20 S

Total Dependent
Pairs 10
A, A P
2, 2 --
3, 3 --
4, 4 --
5, 5 --
6, 6 --
7, 7 --
8, 8 P
9, 9 --
10, 10 --

Also, for 1D H17 DOA NDAS LS the play for T,5 (Surrender, Hit) is not the same as for a Total Dependent 15 (Hit):

Total Dependent
Hard Totals 10
4 H
5 H
6 H
7 H
8 H
9 H
10 H
11 D
12 H
13 H
14 H
15 H
16 R, S
17 S
18 S
19 S
20 S
21 S

Total Dependent
Soft Totals 10
12 H
13 H
14 H
15 H
16 H
17 H
18 H
19 S
20 S

Total Dependent
Pairs 10
A, A P
2, 2 --
3, 3 --
4, 4 --
5, 5 --
6, 6 --
7, 7 --
8, 8 P
9, 9 --
10, 10 --

2 Card Dependent
Hard Hands 10
2, 3 H
2, 4 H
2, 5 H
3, 4 H
2, 6 H
3, 5 H
2, 7 H
3, 6 H
4, 5 H
2, 8 H
3, 7 H
4, 6 H
2, 9 D
3, 8 D
4, 7 D
5, 6 D
2, 10 H
3, 9 H
4, 8 H
5, 7 H
3, 10 H
4, 9 H
5, 8 H
6, 7 H
4, 10 H
5, 9 H
6, 8 H
5, 10 R, H
6, 9 R, H
7, 8 H
6, 10 R, H
7, 9 R, H
7, 10 S
8, 9 S
8, 10 S
9, 10 S

2 Card Dependent
Soft Hands 10
A, 2 H
A, 3 H
A, 4 H
A, 5 H
A, 6 H
A, 7 H
A, 8 S
A, 9 S
A, 10 S

2 Card Dependent
Pairs 10
A, A P, H
2, 2 H
3, 3 H
4, 4 H
5, 5 H
6, 6 H
7, 7 R, S
8, 8 P, H
9, 9 S
10, 10 S

2 Card Dependent
Hard Totals 10
4 H
5 H
6 H
7 H
8 H
9 H
10 H
11 H
12 H
13 H
14 H
15 H
16 S
17 S
18 S
19 S
20 S
21 S

2 Card Dependent
Soft Totals 10
12 H
13 H
14 H
15 H
16 H
17 H
18 H
19 S
20 S

Sincerely,
MGP

*Disclaimer: Strategy decisions that I give only use pre-split hands and do not yet include the post-split hands in the calculations. I believe this is also true for everyone elses strategies that are quoted as well though, and they are unlikely to change once they are included.

[Magician]

MGP, you've been very helpful. What I really need is to fill in the five ???s in the following table:

Surrender 7,7 v 9: 1 deck only
Surrender 7,7 v A: 1 deck only

Surrender 15 v T: ???
Surrender 15 v A (H17): ???

Surrender 8,8 v A (H17, DAS): 2 or more decks
Surrender 8,8 v A (H17, NDAS): 3 or more decks
Surrender 16 v 9: ???
Surrender 16 v T: Always
Surrender 16 v A (S17): ???
Surrender 16 v A (H17): Always

Surrender 17 v A (H17): ???

Griffin gives the following composition-dependent strategy:

Surrender 8,7 v T: 7 or more decks
Surrender 9,6 and T,5 v T: Always
Surrender 8,7 v A (H17): 4 or more decks
Surrender 9,6 and T,5 v A (H17): Always

Surrender 9,7 v 9: 3 or more decks
Surrender T,6 v 9: 4 or more decks
Surrender 9,7 v A (S17): 2 or more decks
Surrender T,6 v A (S17): Always

Surrender 9,8 v A (H17): 2 or more decks
Surrender T,7 v A (H17): Always

I expected that the (T,5), (T,6) and (T,7) rows would match the total-dependent strategy, but it seems I'm wrong, at least for 15 v T. I can't find a proper LS strategy for 1 or 2 decks in any of my books or software.

[Don Schlesinger]

> MGP, you've been very helpful. What I really
> need is to fill in the five ???s in the
> following table:

I'm not following the confusion. When you refer to total-dependent, you're really talking about two-card total-dependent, for which there is no problem.

> Surrender 15 v T: ??? All the time
> Surrender 15 v A (H17): ??? All the time
> Surrender 16 v 9: ??? 4 decks or more
> Surrender 16 v A (S17): ??? All the time
> Surrender 17 v A (H17): ??? All the time

Don

[MGP]

> MGP, you've been very helpful. What I really
> need is to fill in the five ???s in the
> following table:

> Surrender 7,7 v 9: 1 deck only
> Surrender 7,7 v A: 1 deck only

> Surrender 15 v T: ???
> Surrender 15 v A (H17): ???

> Surrender 8,8 v A (H17, DAS): 2 or more
> decks
> Surrender 8,8 v A (H17, NDAS): 3 or more
> decks
> Surrender 16 v 9: ???
> Surrender 16 v T: Always
> Surrender 16 v A (S17): ???
> Surrender 16 v A (H17): Always

> Surrender 17 v A (H17): ???
> Griffin gives the following
> composition-dependent strategy:

> Surrender 8,7 v T: 7 or more decks
> Surrender 9,6 and T,5 v T: Always
> Surrender 8,7 v A (H17): 4 or more decks
> Surrender 9,6 and T,5 v A (H17): Always

> Surrender 9,7 v 9: 3 or more decks
> Surrender T,6 v 9: 4 or more decks
> Surrender 9,7 v A (S17): 2 or more decks
> Surrender T,6 v A (S17): Always

> Surrender 9,8 v A (H17): 2 or more decks
> Surrender T,7 v A (H17): Always
> I expected that the (T,5), (T,6) and (T,7)
> rows would match the total-dependent
> strategy, but it seems I'm wrong, at least
> for 15 v T. I can't find a proper LS
> strategy for 1 or 2 decks in any of my books
> or software.

I got lazy so I checked the Wizard of Odds site and sure neough he already has that all laid out for you at:

http://www.wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/bjapx6.html

The only correction that jumps out at me is that after you surrender a 16 vs 10 you should stand not hit.

Sincerely,
MGP

[Don Schlesinger]

> The only correction that jumps out at me is
> that after you surrender a 16 vs 10 you
> should stand not hit.

Huh?? Stand on what?? After you surrender, you have no hand to hit or stand on!

Don

[MGP]

> Huh?? Stand on what?? After you surrender,
> you have no hand to hit or stand on!

> Don

Stand on the remaining 3 or more card totals of 16 since he asked for the total-dependent strategy not just the initial strategy.

As was discussed on the CompuSim page for BJMath, if you take out the 2-card hands from the strategy calculations, the strategy for 16 vs 10 is Stand. Since the Wizard's tables suggest hitting when not surrendering - they are incorrect if surrender is allowed.

MGP

p.s. Sorry about that last post Don - you caught me right after I got some upsetting news.

[Don Schlesinger]

> Stand on the remaining 3 or more card totals
> of 16 since he asked for the total-dependent
> strategy not just the initial strategy.

You're confused. "Total-dependent" means adding up the two crads without respect to which cards they are. My not distinguishing 10-3 from 9-4 from 8-5 from 7-6, but rather calling everything 13, is using total-dependent strategy instead of composition-dependent strategy -- and I'm still on the original hand!

Now, if my original two cards add to 16, I should surrender. If surrender is not permitted, I should hit my two-card 16.

> As was discussed on the CompuSim page for
> BJMath, if you take out the 2-card hands
> from the strategy calculations, the strategy
> for 16 vs 10 is Stand. Since the Wizard's
> tables suggest hitting when not surrendering
> - they are incorrect if surrender is
> allowed.

One of us must be very confused. You say the wizard suggests hitting when not surrendering. I assume we don't surrender because we aren't allowed to surrender -- otherwise we would surrender!!

So, how can they be incorrect when "surrender is allowed," since we'd be surrendering in that case??

Don

[MGP]

> You're confused.

Not really. As usual we are just talking about different things...

> "Total-dependent"
> means adding up the two crads without
> respect to which cards they are. My not
> distinguishing 10-3 from 9-4 from 8-5 from
> 7-6, but rather calling everything 13, is
> using total-dependent strategy instead of
> composition-dependent strategy -- and I'm
> still on the original hand!

> Now, if my original two cards add to 16, I
> should surrender.

Agree.

> If surrender is not
> permitted, I should hit my two-card 16.

> One of us must be very confused. You say the
> wizard suggests hitting when not
> surrendering. I assume we don't surrender
> because we aren't allowed to surrender --
> otherwise we would surrender!!

As you know, there are 2 situations in which you're not allowed to surrender - a game in which no surrender is allowed at all, which is what you are referring to, in which case you should hit.

You're also not allowed to surrender 3 card hands, which is what I was referring to... So what do you do when you get a 3 or more card 16 vs 10? Most people I assume default to the total dependent strategy listed for their remaining hands.

> So, how can they be incorrect when
> "surrender is allowed," since we'd
> be surrendering in that case??

Hopefully to clarify my comments once and for all, for 16 vs 10, if you are playing a total dependent strategy and surrender is not allowed at all for the game, then hit. If surrender is allowed then surrender all your 2-card 16's (i.e. because it's allowed) and stand on the remaining hands with a total of 16 vs 10 (for which surrender is not allowed).

If you are playing a 2-card dependent strategy - then play as directed for each of the 2-card 16's. For the remaining 3 or more card hands which I assume are played according to a total dependent strategy and not a composition strategy, you should stand on 16 vs 10, whether or not surrender is allowed.

Since I don't really play, then I may be misunderstanding how people use the strategies and how many cards they allow surrender on. If I'm wrong then you're right I am confused and just disregard my comments.

Thanks,
MGP

[Don Schlesinger]

... all you've done is restate c-d strategy for 16 vs. 10. The surrender aspect is a canard -- it has nothing to do with the other part of the strategy.

And, just reiterating my opinion -- when you make a chart such as 16 vs. 10 and then say, "surrender if you can; if you can't hit," it is pretty much understood that you're talking about the original hand.

Don

[Cacarulo]

> You're confused. "Total-dependent"
> means adding up the two crads without
> respect to which cards they are. My not
> distinguishing 10-3 from 9-4 from 8-5 from
> 7-6, but rather calling everything 13, is
> using total-dependent strategy instead of
> composition-dependent strategy -- and I'm
> still on the original hand!

Sorry Don, but I believe "Total-dependent" means adding up any number of cards (2, 3, 4, etc.).
This is probably why you are not understanding each other.

The correct "overall" strategy for 16vT (averaging through all totals of 16) is to "HIT" when Surrender is not allowed. Now, when Surrender is allowed the correct "overall" strategy is to STAND. I did a study a while back which was posted on BJMath.

Sincerely,
Cacarulo

[Don Schlesinger]

> The correct "overall" strategy for
> 16vT (averaging through all totals of 16) is
> to "HIT" when Surrender is not
> allowed. Now, when Surrender is allowed the
> correct "overall" strategy is to
> STAND. I did a study a while back which was
> posted on BJMath.

Yes, I understand this. What I'm trying to point out is that when you surrender 16 v. 10 it is always a two-card 16. So, it goes without saying that, if surrender is permitted, you will always be making a hit/stand decision on multi-card 16s, and we all know that now you stand.

I think t-d and c-d designations become confusing in this sense, but I realize that what you're saying is true.

Don