Wolverine: T,2 vs 4 strategy question

[Wolverine]

Okay, I?d like to get my mind around a particular play that Cacarulo has determined is correct BS from the card dependent point of view. I am not disputing the correctness of the play at all, I am just trying to make sure I totally understand HOW to use it in casino play. References are to BJA3, hardcover version.

Assumptions: DD, S17, DAS, NRSA, No surrender offered

The Play: T,2 vs 4

Table B6 [p. 483] indicates that this is a HIT. This is a basic strategy play, so if card counting is not occurring then all T,2 vs 4 should be HIT while all other hard twelves should STAND.

Table 10.1 [p. 213] has a list of simulation indices for the Ill-18. The 2-deck index for 12 vs 4 is +1.

My question(s) and how to play this hand are as follows:

1) Off the top of the deck, this hand is dealt to the player. Card dependent basic strategy says to HIT this T,2 vs. 4. Therefore, a HIT is called for.

2) At some point later in the shoe, we are fortunate enough to get this hand again, with a TC of +2. Because the count is greater than the index of +1, it should be played as a STAND.

3) At yet another point later in the shoe, the RC (and therefore the TC) is zero. According to the Ill-18 a hard twelve vs 4 should be a HIT. Correct? So what do we do with the T,2 vs 4? Because the basic strategy for T,2 vs 4 says HIT, but the Ill-18 index says STAND, I'm confused. Which is the right play?

Thanks for you responses and help playing this hand.

[Don Schlesinger]

Since you have BJA3, you might want to reread p. 45! :-)

All done? See how easy that was! :-) See further comments below.

Don

> Okay, I?d like to get my mind around a
> particular play that Cacarulo has determined
> is correct BS from the card dependent point
> of view. I am not disputing the correctness
> of the play at all, I am just trying to make
> sure I totally understand HOW to use it in
> casino play. References are to BJA3,
> hardcover version.

> Assumptions: DD, S17, DAS, NRSA, No
> surrender offered

> The Play: T,2 vs 4

> Table B6 [p. 483] indicates that this is a
> HIT. This is a basic strategy play, so if
> card counting is not occurring then all T,2
> vs 4 should be HIT while all other hard
> twelves should STAND.

Right.

> Table 10.1 [p. 213] has a list of simulation
> indices for the Ill-18. The 2-deck index for
> 12 vs 4 is +1.

Right. But, that is a "blended" index for all 12s. Had we furnished separate indices for each c-d 12, you might have found that the one for T,2 was one or two points higher than all the others.

> My question(s) and how to play this hand are
> as follows:

> 1) Off the top of the deck, this hand is
> dealt to the player. Card dependent basic
> strategy says to HIT this T,2 vs. 4.
> Therefore, a HIT is called for.

Right.

> 2) At some point later in the shoe, we are
> fortunate enough to get this hand again,

You mean "unfortunate enough"! :-)

> with a TC of +2. Because the count is
> greater than the index of +1, it should be
> played as a STAND.

Right -- without more specific information regarding the correct index for a T,2 v. 4. In general, we don't bother learning such indices. I don't know anyone who uses them.

> 3) At yet another point later in the shoe,
> the RC (and therefore the TC) is zero.
> According to the Ill-18 a hard twelve vs 4
> should be a HIT. Correct?

For the game you indicate, yes.

> So what do we do
> with the T,2 vs 4? Because the basic
> strategy for T,2 vs 4 says HIT, but the
> Ill-18 index says STAND, I'm confused. Which
> is the right play?

You are confused. You just said, right above, that the I18 play is a hit. Now, you're saying it's a stand, which is incorrect. You have T,2 v. 4, the TC is 0, you hit. BS agrees with the index is this case, but if it didn't, you would follow the index.

> Thanks for you responses and help playing
> this hand.

You're welcome.

Don

[Wolverine]

See why I'm having trouble--I'm confused!

And yes it is UNFORTUNATE to get this scenario and during my last trip I got this hand ALOT! And I got 10's every #$^$!ing time I hit it! Perhaps it is like everything else, when you look for something, you see it! I was looking to "improve my play" with this and I got some first hand knowledge of 12 vs 4! Lots of it!

Anyway, on with the show:
In the 3rd scenario: RC and TC are zero. The Ill-18 says HIT (the TC is less than +1) and the T,2 vs 4 BS is to HIT. So for T,2 vs 4, hit it. Because the TC is zero, any other Hard 12 vs 4 should also be a HIT (except for right off the top as discussed in scenario #1 in the previous post). Am I now sufficiently unconfused?

Thanks for your help Don.

[Don Schlesinger]

> Anyway, on with the show:
> In the 3rd scenario: RC and TC are zero. The
> Ill-18 says HIT (the TC is less than +1) and
> the T,2 vs 4 BS is to HIT. So for T,2 vs 4,
> hit it.

Right.

> Because the TC is zero, any other
> Hard 12 vs 4 should also be a HIT (except
> for right off the top as discussed in
> scenario #1 in the previous post). Am I now
> sufficiently unconfused?

Yes, you are now officially unconfused. :-)

> Thanks for your help Don.

Any time.

Don