Surrendering based on EV

#1
I thought I'd pose a question that's probably common knowledge among Blackjack/math gurus. I'm inclined to go with the idea but I don't want to get ahead of myself if the idea is faulty. Is it mathematically best to surrender a hand if the best playing decision for that hand (ie - Stand, Hit, Double, Split) has an Expected Value of less than -0.50?
 

assume_R

Well-Known Member
#2
A said:
I thought I'd pose a question that's probably common knowledge among Blackjack/math gurus. I'm inclined to go with the idea but I don't want to get ahead of myself if the idea is faulty. Is it mathematically best to surrender a hand if the best playing decision for that hand (ie - Stand, Hit, Double, Split) has an Expected Value of less than -0.50?
Yes, indeed. Sometimes if it's a close call (such as an EV of -0.495 at a given count), I will surrender to reduce variance. These will be reflected in what are known as "Risk Averse Index Plays". But once you start heading back towards the -0.48 or better range, surrender becomes less viable.
 

Gamblor

Well-Known Member
#3
Beyond mathematics, might be a good idea to throw in a wrong (but close) surrender play for cover, when appropriate.

Although generally, some casinos I know think of surrendering as an "expert" move.
 

metronome

Well-Known Member
#4
Gamblor said:
Beyond mathematics, might be a good idea to throw in a wrong (but close) surrender play for cover, when appropriate.

Although generally, some casinos I know think of surrendering as an "expert" move.
Actually, in my area, surrender gets the ploppies surrendering every damn thing under the sun.
 

Gamblor

Well-Known Member
#5
metronome said:
Actually, in my area, surrender gets the ploppies surrendering every damn thing under the sun.
Yeah, in one casino I play, all sorts of crazy surrenders, in another nearby one, few surrender, so its strange. To be frank, it has to do with the demographics of the ploppy, noticed asians tend to surrender more often than others. And older more than younger.
 

paddywhack

Well-Known Member
#6
Technically, I think the pit looks at surrender as an "expert" play in most locales.

From what I've seen very few ploppies utilize it, since they don't want to mess with the flow or think it's a terrible rule.

However, you'll get some of them that'll surrender most any stiff hand - talk about adding some serious edge to the house :eek:
 
#7
Thanks for confirming that "surrender at less than -0.50" rule for me. I was inclined to go with it until got closer to doing all the calculations. Then I thought that I'd better get some confirmation before I wasted the effort and just cluttered up my memory with mistakes. I've just about memorized this new 8deck basic strategy and the I18+F4, so I'm temporarily relieved until the compulsive blackjack bug catches hold again. Once I'm quicker at recalling the new play decisions, I'll hand deal to myself to get a more realistic feel of what I can expect, gamewise. Now, I'm playing against a program that cheats a little, but I can get a lot more hands per hour in on it, which is good for my memorization of new playing decisions.

I might still need to find a good EV calculator that calculates EV's at true counts. I first thought that I could use just CDCA and remove some cards from the shoe to arrive at a shoe with the desired TC. But, now, I think it might be easier and more objective to just get a reliable EV/TC calc to do the job for me. The more I thought about manipulating the shoe with CDCA, the more time consuming the task seemed to be. Oh well, I've got plenty of practice to keep me busy before I absolutely need the full indices for HiLo 8deck. Who knows, If the new BS, I18, and F4 work well enough while practicing hand dealt games, I might just stick with those for several months before adding more.

-- I also like the ideas of: 1) using close (-0.48 through -0.50 or less) surrender plays for reducing variance and 2) using those close plays for cover. Thanks again! A,9vs8
 

assume_R

Well-Known Member
#8
A said:
I might still need to find a good EV calculator that calculates EV's at true counts.
I use cvdata. It gives you the EV, frequency, and variance at each TC for a given game and set of conditions. From just this set of data you can calculate your optimal bets, RoR, SCORE, etc., although the newer versions of CVdata actually comes with a utility for calculating that for you.

A said:
Oh well, I've got plenty of practice to keep me busy before I absolutely need the full indices for HiLo 8deck. Who knows, If the new BS, I18, and F4 work well enough while practicing hand dealt games, I might just stick with those for several months before adding more.
Only include index plays if your simulator shows either an increased WinRate or a decreased Variance (or, to use a quantity which takes into acount both, if the SCORE increases). Otherwise, if it won't change your winrate or RoR, why learn a 13v7 index, for example? Even a 14v2 or 13v5 will barely change anything, and you should be wonging out at that point anyway.

Perhaps spend your time practicing a L2 count and looking for better games instead of considering learning the full set of HiLo indices. If you can play a game with 6.5/8 penetration versus a 6/8 penetration that will more than compensate for any index plays over the I18+Fab4. Just my 2 cents.
 
#9
You raise some good points. I'd like to, maybe, switch to a level 2 count later. But, I'm not quite fast enough at the counting to pursue it yet. I can handle the RC fine, but I still need to practice more with the other stuff before I'll be good enough to concentrate on playing and yet act casual at the same time. It feels like I'm almost at the top of the hill on the learning curve. I'm almost there; I just need to get more hours of practice in before it starts to become 2nd nature.

I think the reason that I've gotten into learning more indices is because it's relatively easy (or just faster) for me to memorize the rules. Then, once I have them fixed in my memory, I can use them without concentrating too much with a bunch of distractions around me. That is something to keep in mind though; I might just stick with the I18+F4 in case I switch to an L2 count later, in case the index #'s change much. I was actually thinking about switching at one time, but I was just starting to learn everything and I didn't want to take on too much at one time.

I've also been thinking a lot more about getting CV lately. From what I read, it can save quite a bit of time when coming up with stats. I think I still have a little bit of a skeptic left in me. I haven't played many live games yet; just enough to guage how my progress is coming along (ease of play, comfortability, etc.). And when I first started learning, I kept telling myself that I wasn't going to start spending money on the learning unless the hobby supported itself. Now, I'm sure that it can support itself, I just have to become fast enough at it to make it work. In other words, I'm all that's holding up the process now. I'm going to look into the CV and/or CVData prog a little more. I'm not going to forget about blackjack anytime soon, so I could afford to spend a relatively small amount on a time saver.

That really puts things into perspective - that just a half deck more penetration (6.5/8 vs 6/8) is as good or more than learning a bunch of extra index plays. I think I will just stick with the I18+F4 for now. If I learn any extra ones, they'll be surrender plays that cut losses.
 
Top