CVIndex telling me to never split (8, 8) vs. X or (X, X) vs. 5/6

[Starchild]

I'm having an issue generating indexes, where even though in the full report it shows that splitting (8,8) has a better expected value than not splitting, it still tells me not to split. These are not risk averse indexes, so they should be maxing expected value. While I do want to use risk-averse indexes, I want to figure out the issue here first so that I know I can trust what I get when I compute them.

I also find it weird that there's no index for splitting (X, X) against 5 or 6. The full report for this one though doesn't go to a high enough count to show whether splitting will eventually have a higher expected value. It looks like if it just tracked 1 or 2 counts higher, then splitting would be better.

Here are the rules of the game:

single-deck
dealer hits on soft 17
double only on 9, 10, 11
no double after split
re-split aces
no surrender
Fixed rounds: rounds+players = 6

The counting system is unbalanced zen 2, and I use an initial running count of -1.

I attached the indexes I generated, which were the big 63 plus (8, 8) against X, but without the ones that didn't make sense for this game. I also attached the full report where you can see how the expected value changes at different counts.

Has anyone else had a similar issue?

Indexes:

Indexes.png

Full Report: Full Report-compressed.pdf

Export: