1. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Originally Posted by miroslav
The holecard is always scanned, so i get the information that the holecard is the red ten with every upcard.
In this case, you could set the HoleCard screen as follows:

Partial HC
Always Peek
HC Seen Percentage 50%
T in the first row
Attach the Hole Carding strategy in the NW/QFIT folder

2. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Originally Posted by DSchles
Did you mean to write if dealer has >17? Because you definitely would double 10 and 11 vs. dealer 17.

Don
Upon double checking, it would appear that what I wrote above is wrong. Although there are more cards that can help your double than not (i.e., you would win your double more than you'd lose it), the benefit from being able to hit more than once outweighs the value of the double. Sorry about that!

Don

3. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Originally Posted by DSchles
Upon double checking, it would appear that what I wrote above is wrong. Although there are more cards that can help your double than not (i.e., you would win your double more than you'd lose it), the benefit from being able to hit more than once outweighs the value of the double. Sorry about that!

Don
Yes, I was also wondering why you should double in this situation and had in mind that the optimal play for 10 and 11 versus 17-20 is to hit. As a general rule, these optimal hole card strategy tables (e.g. from WizardOfOdds) say that doubling is never favorable against a dealer pat hand. The only situation which might be different is when the dealer has soft 17 and the H17 rule applies. I have not seen any HC strategy table addressing the S17 versus H17 issue, so I am not sure if there are any differences. Also, the surrender rule is often not addressed but I read that surrendering stiff hands versus 10,11 and 19,20 is favorable.

4. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Oops, I accidentally deleted my last post on my smartphone. This was not the first time this happens to me. Obviously on my smartphone browser, editing a post and deletig a post is displayed on the same page and not clearly distinguished, so it easily can happen that I want to edit but it is deleted instead.

5. 1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Restored

6. 1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Originally Posted by PinkChip
Yes, I was also wondering why you should double in this situation and had in mind that the optimal play for 10 and 11 versus 17-20 is to hit. As a general rule, these optimal hole card strategy tables (e.g. from WizardOfOdds) say that doubling is never favorable against a dealer pat hand. The only situation which might be different is when the dealer has soft 17 and the H17 rule applies. I have not seen any HC strategy table addressing the S17 versus H17 issue, so I am not sure if there are any differences. Also, the surrender rule is often not addressed but I read that surrendering stiff hands versus 10,11 and 19,20 is favorable.
I think correct hole card strategy is:

Double hard 10-11 vs. soft 17 if dealer hits soft 17
Hit hard 10-11 vs. soft 17 if dealer stands on soft 17

Surrender hard 15-18 vs. dealer 19
Surrender hard 12-19 vs. dealer 20
Surrender anything except player BJ vs. dealer BJ

k_c

7. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Originally Posted by miroslav
I am trying to calculate if there is a player advantage when it is possible to tell when a certain hole card is present at the dealer.
I have noticed a certain online casino studio that has imperfect cards/scanner combination that makes it possible to recognize exactly two type of ten cards.two out of the 52 cards have a imperfection, lets say 10 of hearts and 10 of diamonds.
So whenever one of these two 10's is the holecard there is a tell and it is possible to say with 95% accuracy that it is indeed a ten in the holecard.
Would this information give enough player advantage to make it profitable to play flat betting with no additional card counting.

rules:
dealer has hole card
only checks for blackjack on upcard Ace,
soft 17 dealer stands
double allowed on every two cards
max 1 split
aces max 1 split
double after split allowed
no surrender option

I have tried using the CVData programme to simulate this scenario but I have not been successful to get the holecards scenario correctly into the simulation.
I would appreciate the input of experts in here.
Is anyone capable of running a simulation and getting estimates of player advantage/house edge.
For single deck if dealer up card is ten and nothing else is known, player's EV = ~-17.15% if no surrender allowed.

If it is known that one of dealer's initial 2 cards is ten and the other is also known player's EV = ~-.08% for single deck if that is the extent of what is known.

So it seems there is value of knowing one of dealer's 2 cards is a ten and also the 2nd card, but this alone cannot result in +EV, if no surrender.

If surrender is allowed maybe +EV may be possible:

Player's EV for single deck, up card of ten, LS, nothing else known = ~-17.10%
Player's EV if 2nd card also known, LS = ~+3.04%

Player's EV for single deck, up card of ten, ES, nothing else known = ~-16.55%
Player's EV if 2nd card also known, ES = ~+6.68%

For these values to apply the up card must be ten so that wouldn't help you because you still don't know the hole card. However, if you knew the hole card was ten and also the up card you probably could gain enough to attain +EV for single deck if you are allowed to surrender.

k_c

8. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Thank you!

9. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Originally Posted by k_c
I think correct hole card strategy is:

Double hard 10-11 vs. soft 17 if dealer hits soft 17
Hit hard 10-11 vs. soft 17 if dealer stands on soft 17

Surrender hard 15-18 vs. dealer 19
Surrender hard 12-19 vs. dealer 20
Surrender anything except player BJ vs. dealer BJ

k_c
Due to my simulations done with CVData, your suggestions regarding Double/Hit hard 10-11 vs. soft 17 seem correct,
but the difference in EV is very tiny (just about 0.02 percent, for both S17 and H17 cases). I have not taken a look
at the variance but would suggest that hitting is better due to lower variance, even in the H17 case.

Furthermore, the sim runs indicate that versus dealer 19, not only 15 and above should be surrendered,
but also 13 and 14 at least. Even for 12 the difference is again so small that I would do it, because surrender lowers variance.
On the other hand, I assume that surrendering 17 and above, whilst mathematically advantageous, would look quite suspicious.

10. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Originally Posted by PinkChip
Due to my simulations done with CVData, your suggestions regarding Double/Hit hard 10-11 vs. soft 17 seem correct,
but the difference in EV is very tiny (just about 0.02 percent, for both S17 and H17 cases). I have not taken a look
at the variance but would suggest that hitting is better due to lower variance, even in the H17 case.

Furthermore, the sim runs indicate that versus dealer 19, not only 15 and above should be surrendered,
but also 13 and 14 at least. Even for 12 the difference is again so small that I would do it, because surrender lowers variance.

These are values I get dealt for 14 vs. 19 from top of full single deck:
Code:
```T-4 vs. T-9
hit: -44.78%, surrender: -50.00%

9-5 vs. T-9
hit: -45.73%, surrender: -50.00%

8-6 vs. T-9
hit: -47.44%, surrender: -50.00%

7-7 vs. T-9
hit: -51.25%, surrender: -50.00%

T-4 vs. 8-A
hit: -46.19%, surrender: -50.00%

9-5 vs. 8-A
hit: -47.16%, surrender: -50.00%

8-6 vs. 8-A
hit: -48.88%, surrender: -50.00%

7-7 vs. 8-A
hit: -52.78%, surrender: -50.00%```
These are values I get dealt for 15 vs. 19 from top of full single deck:
Code:
```T-5 vs. T-9
hit: -51.98%, surrender: -50.00%

9-6 vs. T-9
hit: -51.63%, surrender: -50.00%

8-7 vs. T-9
hit: -47.46%, surrender: -50.00%

T-5 vs. 8-A
hit: -53.24%, surrender: -50.00%

9-6 vs. 8-A
hit: -52.97%, surrender: -50.00%

8-7 vs. 8-A
hit: -48.80%, surrender: -50.00%```
On the other hand, I assume that surrendering 17 and above, whilst mathematically advantageous, would look quite suspicious.
I'm sick of losing to your pat hands?

k_c

Page 2 of 3 First 123 Last

#### Posting Permissions

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