Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Hit/Stand 16v10?

  1. #1


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Hit/Stand 16v10?

    If my game has surrender, I only see the hit/stand choice for a third card or more. So I ALWAYS play hit/stand 16v10 based on the index. Zero cover.

    Is this a safe strategy? Or should I worry.

  2. #2


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Do you.mean "If my game has NO surrender"?

  3. #3


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Ed View Post
    So I ALWAYS play hit/stand 16v10 based on the index. Zero cover. Is this a safe strategy? Or should I worry.
    You should be very afraid. The real question is how do you sleep at night after pulling these shennanigans?

  4. #4


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Nope. I have heard that surveillance looks for players who sometimes hit and sometimes stand 16v10. But with surrender, I always surrender 16v10, if it’s from my initial two cards. So I don’t make the hit/stand choice that often. If I start with 6v10. Hit. Receive a ten. Then I will need to make the hit/stand choice. At this point, do I need to worry that they are watching?

  5. #5


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    If you are counting with a bet spread and in fear of heat, you could always stand on 16 vs. 10. For high counts (with large bets), it is the correct decision anyway. For neutral decks, it is a borderline decision. Only for negative counts (min bets), hitting is better.

  6. #6


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Or if the 16 comprises a 4 or 5 (e.g. 9, 4, 3, a three card hand), standing is better already in Basic Strategy.

  7. #7


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Ed View Post
    Nope. I have heard that surveillance looks for players who sometimes hit and sometimes stand 16v10. But with surrender, I always surrender 16v10, if it’s from my initial two cards. So I don’t make the hit/stand choice that often. If I start with 6v10. Hit. Receive a ten. Then I will need to make the hit/stand choice. At this point, do I need to worry that they are watching?
    I was just joking with you. In my experience just play your best game and play aggressive. Keep your sessions short, don't play between shift changes and don't wear out your over all welcome and you'll be fine no matter what strategies you do. The worst thing you can do to yourself is create imaginary heat. With all the stuff going on in a casino survellance has to monitor, it's highly unlikely surveillance is going to zone in on you based on how you played a single hand.

  8. #8


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    So my question is really, would surveillance watch me for hit/stand decision based on the count, since due to surrender, it doesn’t happen that much?

    Without surrender, 16v10 happens a lot - at least (10/169)(4/13) of the time. I would think it’s worthwhile for them to watch how a player reacts, since it should happen several times in a shoe. With surrender, it won’t happen that much - maybe once or twice. It will take a long time to get a credible sample size.

  9. #9


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    UncleChoo, thanks. That’s what I thought. Good advice.

  10. #10


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Ah, I overlooked the word "third" card in the OP. So the question dealt only with three or more card hard 16s.

  11. #11


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Ed View Post
    So my question is really, would surveillance watch me for hit/stand decision based on the count, since due to surrender, it doesn’t happen that much?

    Without surrender, 16v10 happens a lot - at least (10/169)(4/13) of the time. I would think it’s worthwhile for them to watch how a player reacts, since it should happen several times in a shoe. With surrender, it won’t happen that much - maybe once or twice. It will take a long time to get a credible sample size.
    Your approximation (the 6-deck, two-card frequency is 0.0168) is just for the two-card holding. But, you have to make the decision for multi-card as well, and that happens another 0.0345 of the time. So, if you play 100 hands an hour, without surrender, you'll face the decision just over five times.

    Don

  12. #12


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Ho2-2Decks-Standard Index=0
    Attached Images Attached Images
    http://bjstrat.net/cgi-bin/cdca.cgi

  13. #13


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Ok. So my mistake - multi card 16v10 actually happens about twice as often as initial two card 16v10, so the question is even MORE important…are They watching my 16v10 decision, or should I just play correctly and not worry?

    Personally, I just play correctly and I have not been backed off yet. So I will continue to play aggressively unless the AP group here advises otherwise.

Similar Threads

  1. Why A7 vs A at TC>1 become stand in S17
    By PromVRT in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 09-04-2020, 04:27 AM
  2. 15 Stand on 2 to 6. Otherwise hit.
    By Kage65 in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-29-2019, 09:40 AM
  3. 16v10 at TC=0: Hit or Stand Confusion. Here is Why…
    By Nascent Norm in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 05-20-2018, 07:13 AM
  4. hit or stand
    By moses in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 10-21-2013, 01:53 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.