RUN on SIMULATOR!!NEW THEORY!!

What happens IF one NEVER takes a card that would BUST themselves out?

Today I was playing two hands(circles) and had 100 bucks in each circle. Dealer gave me 12 on BOTH hands with a dealer TEN card showing.I said out loud"damn I'm screwed!) Dealer said "not really, ONLY if I have a PAT HAND.

I was kinda thinking I should stay--- because player twelves USUALLY DO bust themselves out..Well I said shit- I'll play BASIC (CASINO TAKE MONEY) STRATEGY...
Well I took a hit on the first hand got a ten card- BUSTED.lost 100.Then on second hand asked for a card got a ten card BUSTED!!..Lost another hundred..the dealer had ONLY A 10 and a six card underneath. Dealer
would have busted if I would have STAYED at least ONE OR BOTH HANDS..

I think basic strategy was MADE BY THE CASINOS FOR THE ADVANTAGE
OF THE CASINOS..Some- one with a simulator should run it thru and see
what would happen to a bankroll if you stayed pat on EVERY SINGLE hand that
COULD be Busted out by taking an unnecessary card...Double downs are normal because you never bust out on a double-down anyway...
Joel

some times it does see as if basic strategy was tailor made for the casinos but it really wasn't. it was developed independent of any casino. basic strategy is your best playing strategy. what it does is lets you lose less than any other strategy. find below an excerpt copied from Wizard of Odds site:

<begin excerpt>
Bad Strategies

Three popular bad strategies encountered at the blackjack table are never bust, mimic the dealer, and always assume the dealer has a ten in the hole. All three of these are very bad strategies. Following are my specific comments on each of them, including the house edge under Atlantic City rules (dealer stands on soft 17, split up to 4 hands, double after split, double any two cards) of 0.43%.

Never bust: For my analysis of this strategy I assumed the player would never hit a hard 12 or more and based all other decisions on maximizing expected value under this assumption. This results in a house edge of 3.91%.

Mimic the dealer: For my analysis of this strategy I assumed the player would always hit 16 or less and stand on 17 or more. The player as well as dealer stood on soft 17. The player never doubled or split, since the dealer is not allowed to do so. This results in a house edge of 5.48%.

Assume ten in the hole: For this strategy I first figured out the optimal basic strategy under this assumption. If the dealer had an ace up I reverted to the proper basic strategy assumption of assuming the dealer did not have a ten. Then I went back and used this strategy under regular playing conditions. This results in a house edge of 10.03%.
<end excerpt>

best regards,
mr fr0g

I remember some of Joel099's other posts and I think he should be crowned the king of voodoo betting strategies.

You are a moron. Your odds of pulling a ten are about 1 in three when taking a hit.

While I'm sympathetic to the feeling (I rue hitting 12 vs. a 2) it's still a good play.

I believe the first guys to simulate the "never bust" strategy were the same mathematicians who invented basic strategy?

"Never bust" lost.

Why run a simulation? Go out and try it for a few sessions and let us know how it works out!

Well sure, when I hit 12 I bust 90% of the time. Or at least it seems like it. Doesn't mean basic strategy is wrong, though.

At least he posted in the correct forum!

Thats a bit strong.If the guy is a newbie,he comes onto a site where he can get halp,asks for help and is told he's a moron for asking for help.
He didn't claim never taking a potential bust card was a good idea,only that someone run a sim and post the results.
Isn't one of this sites reasons for existance to help educate new players?

i honestly thing that some casino employee's post in this forum to try and mess up the weaker players among us. i've heard some pretty crazy advice on this forum that is clearly wrong (like joel's). I don't think ploppies would be posting this stuff:
1 they don't research blackjack
2. they no they aren't experts (they just play for fun)

my only conclusion is that theres angry casino ppl who are trying to throw us off our game by posting random misleading advice.

His question is stupid. When I was twelve years old I could of told you it was a bad strategy to never hit a hand if it meant the possibility of busting. Sorry I didnt explain myself further, and i resorted to immature name calling. Also to say that BS was invented by the casinos to take more of our money? That is just dumb most of basic strategy is just common sense. He is betting $100 a hand without a clue of whats going on. He deserves ridicule :whip: Perhaps he should have phrased his question differently, but as it stands it is one of the dumbest questions I've seen on this board! :laugh: If he just wanted to know what the percentage difference is if he stood on every stiff that is one thing, but he seemed to be implying it would be better stand 12vs. 10 and BS was made up by casinos.

I wouldn't say he is dumb for asking the question, but he is definitely dumb for betting black BEFORE asking it!

Agreed. ' Nuff said!

Even I didnt trust basic stat before I bet.

I wrote my own simulator and calculator and ... it agrees with basic strat.



Anyway this topic is so stupid its not funny.

Its like saying 'i saw the dealer bust once so im never going to hit a hard hand, cause he will probably bust'

HousEdge = 7% zg

Actually using a TD strategy standing on all upcards for totals of 12-21 but still splitting/doubling as appropriate and using correct strategy for soft hands the ev is:

TD EV -3.8414559418094%