16v10 at TC=0: Hit or Stand Confusion. Here is Why…

[Gronbog]

There are a few points to address in this thread.

First of all, while the overall value of 16 vs T as an index may be high, its value at precisely TC=0 is tiny. From a practical point of view you could choose to do whatever you want and it won't affect your bottom line.

From a precise technical point of view, the index is to stand at TC >= 0 or, for simplicity RC >= 0.

To address the notion of hitting with two cards and standing with three or more cards, this is a well-known basic strategy improvement and applies only to basic strategy players or at the top of a new deck/shoe only. It works because you can not have a 2 card 16 vs T at the top of the shoe/deck without the running count being negative. This is why it is a basic strategy hit even though the index to stand is zero. It is a common misconception that basic strategy is the same as playing at TC=0. There are some 3+ card compositions of 16 vs T for which the running count is negative (e.g. 9,6,A vs T), but for the vast majority of them, the running count will be zero or positive. So standing based on 3 or more cards is also mathematically correct at the top of the shoe/deck. Once again, the gain is negligible. If you are counting you should be using the count alone and forgetting about this rule.

A similar situation exists with 12 vs 4.

[kelg21]

There are a few points to address in this thread..

First of all. Very informative post Mr. Gronbog.

First of all, while the overall value of 16 vs T as an index may be high, its value at precisely TC=0 is tiny. From a practical point of view you could choose to do whatever you want and it won't affect your bottom line.

From a precise technical point of view, the index is to stand at TC >= 0 or, for simplicity RC >= 0...

First hand of a deck. You have 10,6 vs 10. You have 10,3,3vs 10. 9,7 vs 10. Alot of decisions could be made based on the RC employed. But you're correct IMO. It makes very little difference. However, for instance, a negative count on the last hand of a single deck can make a great deal of difference. The more negative the better to hit. Correct?

A similar situation exists with 12 vs 4.

True. Just far far less frequency.

[DSchles]

"Don S word is not the Gospel. But pretty damn close IMO."

You mean you never read "The Gospel According to Don"? :-) Must be too young.

"There is reason Insurance is #1 and 16 vs 10 is #2 and the numerical answer is defined by SCORE. Hopefully, he will provide words to elucidate this confusion."

As in the original article, which, by the way, was titled "Attacking the Shoe," a value for each departure can be given based on the assumption of a certain bet spread, such as the one I chose to do the research. But the value to YOU, or to any individual, will clearly be a function of the games you play, bet spread, etc.

Don

[ZenMaster_Flash]

SCORE is reduced by a little over 10% by always standing
vs TC0 according to CV Data Sim for pitch.

10% sounds absurdly high, even for pitch games.

What is clear is that, in dollars and sense, your loss
via by standing on 16 vs. 10 is absolutely minuscule.

Equally clear is that every pit critter knows that
ploppies either hit them all or stand on them all.
Ergo, you are all but outing yourself by switching
back and forth to earn an extra 9¢ cents per day.

[Gronbog]

However, for instance, a negative count on the last hand of a single deck can make a great deal of difference. The more negative the better to hit. Correct?

Technically speaking correct.

[Three]

Gronbog said what needed to be said in post #16. If that is not clear two things should be added. First the casino uses a short list of plays to spot AP's playing them differently according to the deck composition. What they look for is a frequent matchup with an index that is near neutral. This will have them seeing you play it on both sides of the index often. If you use an index between -1 and +1 (TC 0 is the index) you have the most frequent matchup being played differently at close to 50% each way. This makes 16vT be at the top of the list of plays to watch how you play to stereotype you as a counter.

That said the cost of not hitting near neutral needs to be examined. This great link shows the rate of gain around the index. Just pick 16vT as the hand with the rule set you would like:

https://www.card-counting.com/cvcxonlineviewer3.htm

What you see is almost no difference in EV between hitting and standing for TC -2 thru 0. Moving the index to -2 will have you playing the hand the same the vast majority of the time without giving up much EV. If you are wonging out of negative counts you will probably never hit 16vT. What makes 16vT such a valuable index is the basic strategy is to hit, which is a very close decision. Some might call the difference a RCH. If basic strategy were to stand, the play probably wouldn't make the I18. Think about what that says about 16vT.

I hope that helps clear things up for those struggling to put things in the proper perspective.

[tater]

10% sounds absurdly high, even for pitch games.

What is clear is that, in dollars and sense, your loss
via by standing on 16 vs. 10 is absolutely minuscule.

Equally clear is that every pit critter knows that
ploppies either hit them all or stand on them all.
Ergo, you are all but outing yourself by switching
back and forth to earn an extra 9¢ cents per day.

The difference in Winrate was 6% lower by standing. Far more significant than 9 cents per day.

[Three]

The difference in Winrate was 6% lower by standing. Far more significant than 9 cents per day.

If you are losing this much to always standing. You aren't a very good AP. This is because you are giving way too much money away playing negative EV situations. Have you considered how much money you give up getting banned a lot faster by hitting all those coin flip decisions between TC -2 and 0? The computer can tell you how much it costs if you play on a computer but if you play for real you will soon find out that the real cost comes when you no longer can play.

[Three]

FWIW, the end of a deck comes far more frequently in pitch and it's wrong to wong.

Yes. I know this. But you should still use wonging out as a part of your day end exit strategy. If you combine that with short sessions the wong out becomes more significant. I prefer games with less heat.

[tater]

If you are losing this much to always standing. You aren't a very good AP. This is because you are giving way too much money away playing negative EV situations. Have you considered how much money you give up getting banned a lot faster by hitting all those coin flip decisions between TC -2 and 0? The computer can tell you how much it costs if you play on a computer but if you play for real you will soon find out that the real cost comes when you no longer can play.

The point has nothing to do with the ability of the AP. But everything to do with the Sim results. So since you are throwing out ill 18 item #2. Should you throw out #1 as well? That's a biggie. As I said earlier, I hit at RC -2 or lower, Stand at 1+ or higher and flip/stand at 0,-1. (Sometimes used as a conversation piece.) But to "always" stand? You'd be leaving money on the table according to sims and fooling no one.

[ZenMaster_Flash]

The difference in Winrate was 6% lower by standing

This makes NO sense whatsoever.

Let us look at this from the proper perspective.

The only time that standing on 16 vs. 10 is correct

is at a positive Count, but the "cost" to the player

at T. C. -1 or -2 is truly minuscule - especially since

you are betting minimally at that T.C. ~ so it is

always right to stand with 16 vs. 10 at a positive T.C.

if you have other than a minimum bet out. If you really

think that squeezing every penny's worth of e.v. is somehow

important then you are playing the wrong game.

THIS is a good example of our time-honored saying:

"Counting Cards is easy. Winning money is hard."

[Stealth]

Single digit and 1/2 point counts in pitch games with No Surrender. SCORE doesn't change much at 1 or 0. Truly a flip of the coin at 0. But it changes a great deal between hit or stand. At RC-2 there are three options worth consideration. 1.) Increased chance of winning the hand. 2.) Taking a low card out of the deck. 3.) Maintaining a high SCORE.

What count are you using for this?

This is a key index for all and when statements are made regarding an absolute answer then they need to be properly qualified.

For example, the Illustrious 18 says "hit if less than 0" is the index for this play.

Not arguing with your answer, just want to be clear.

[kelg21]

This makes NO sense whatsoever.

"Counting Cards is easy. Winning money is hard."

Don S. Now I'm really confused. If your winrate is $30 with a TC set at 0. Then your winrate drops to $28.20 by always standing. Is that not a 6% decline?

So I've followed your advice regarding SCORE. I've purchased Norms products and ran sims on CV Data. Not one index generation ever suggested to stand on 16 v 10.

So am I to take the advice of this person because he who writes in blue always says what is true?

Somehow ignoring the advice of a hall of famer and computer generations designed to beat the game doesn't seem very practical.

So is SCORE really all that important? Or is it superceded by the bolder the blue ink the better? Hell, I thought listening to you and buying Norm's products was Don S avenue on my road to success. Silly me. I mean we are not talking thresholds here. This is a 10% difference in SCORE.