8's vs dealer 9 up-card

[rzoop]

Hello all,

First off I'd like to say that I really enjoy reading the forum post. The knowledge and expertise that is shared is very much appreciated. I never would of thought such an easy game to play could be so complex. Anyways, i was playing at a PA casino over the weekend I ended up on the losing end but it was a very good learning experience.This one hand in particular got me wondering so I figured this would be the place to get an answer. I was playing a 6 deck game with approximately 3 decks already played. the unbalanced count was at -16. This woman was dealt a pair of 8's with the dealer up-card being a 9. She starts asking all the players what she should do (I believe she new the correct play she just didn't want to part with her money). I hear three different answers. Split them, hit like a hard 16, and surrender.She ended up splitting them and got a 18 and a 17 the dealer ended up with a 19. My question is, with such a high negative count at that point in the shoe is there that much difference between the three choices? Why not hit it like a hard 16? BTW one of the lessons I learned was that I should have wonged out earlier in the shoe but I got too comfortable at the table and didn't give it a thought.

[stopgambling]

With a more positive shoe , i would split and hope to catch 2 .3 for double and a ten or an ace for a possible win and a push ,that is the reasoning behind it as the index point out. In a negative count it really depends on how low it is . I don't really think that's really important so i don't even remember it. Most likely i would split but not double even if i catch a 2 ,but with 8/3 vs 9 i may double if the shoe is not too negative . These play are not that important in a shoe game .

[moo321]

Splitting loses less than hitting in neutral counts. As the count goes up, surrendering eventually becomes a better option. And if it goes really high, standing is better than hitting if there is no surrender option.

A low count would go against surrender, and increase the EV of both splitting and hitting. I suspect there is not a meaningful low count where we would hit instead of split.

[Bodarc]

You did not say what method you were using or rules of the game, not that it matters much.

With 88 V 9 the correct play using Hi Lo would be -16/3=-5. Index to surrender is >+6 so you'd split.
Using unbalanced count like REKO running count -16 the correct play is to split.

I think you may be making it more complicated than it is. There is a strategy for the count you are using. Stick to your strategy and it isn't complicated.

http://qfit.com/book/ModernBlackjackPage250.htm
http://qfit.com/book/ModernBlackjackPage251.htm

[Nikky_Flash]

with that epic low count , that's actually a good question , that's also why I enjoy this forum , roads are bad , I can't play these days , stay inside , count down decks , and learn learn learn

[Three]

I don't even use a splitting index for this play but have a surrender index. It is pretty high. The correlation of the count to the splitting decision is not good for any count.